National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1880-06-05

right to override or ignore his selection by
his district because of his failure 10
approve the condition that he should obey the
that the state delegation should
vote as unit for Graut. In the case of Smith
and Warner in Alabama the facts were sub.
tho same rs in the c,se of
Rapier; they were duly chosen by
thcir respective districts, and the state con-
vention undertook TO revoke their appoint
ment because they failed TO accept the unit
rule. The committee recommend their admis-
sion. In Illinois the committee recommend
the admission of the contestants to tho seats Of
the sitting members from the first, third,
fourth, fifth, sixth, niuth, tcnth, thirteenth
and seventeenth congressional districts Tho
well.known facts wore succinctly stated. The
committee also report against tho contestants
in the second Illinois district, aud do not sus-
tain tho objections to the four delogates-at.
largo in tho Same state. They further report
In favor of tho sitting members from tho ninth
and nineteenth districts Of Pennsylvania, and
tho third district of West Virginia.
Tho committee suggest that tho final do
cision of many OF those contests depends upon
the adoption by tho convention of the prnci-
pie of congressional district representation.
This tho comnlittee believe to DO sound. Ap.
plause.l
the right of individual district representations
at tho convention of 1876 under precisely SINH
lar circumstances and similar call for a ma
tional con vention. They cite tho form of tho
call of the convention In 1853 as evidence that
IL was the principle of the republican party to
establish tho principle of district representa-
tion. This was sustained also by all the pre-
cedcnis in the party down to date In no case
has the fair action Of district in selecting its
representatives bcen ovorried or changed by
any state or national convention. Applause.
Tho committee do not believe that
this right of congressional representation
should now be invaded for the first
time by the action of the national
convention. If state convention can by n
bare majority override the will of the people
fairly expressed in the selection of district
delegates, 1t might as well appoint at once all
the delegates. LGrost applausal Nominations
made through such misrepresentation will
not be likely 10 be ratified by The people 1t was
the duty of the convention to disapprovc EN-.
phatically all attempts to override the high
moral customs OF the party. Applause The
committee sustain tho sitting delegates from
Utah as regularly and fairly chosen.
They reported in favor of Scars and Day for
the second district of Kansas, and Anderson
and Steele from tho third district, and that tho
present sitting members shall retain their
seats and cast only six votes.
MINORITY REPORT.
Mr., Clayton, of Arkansas, presented the mi
nority report. 1t differs with the report of
the majority as to the application of tho prin-
ciple OF district representation. The recon-
mcndation of the majority, if adopted, would
work as an ez post facto rnlc, reversing tho
long established usage of tho party in many
states. [Applause.l They urge that there Is
vacancy in the district claimed by Rapier
and that the sitting members are entitled to
the seats which tho majority report awards to
Smith and Warner. The minority say that as
Rapier refused to accept the pledge exacted
by the state convention he Is hero without
credentials, also that lie was not elected by
his district, but only nominated, and that ex-
cept through tho action OF the state conven-
tion ratifying his nomination, he had no au.
thOnty whatever.
1t did not appear that thore had becn any
district conventions in Alabama at which the
Alabama contestants had been chosen Their
authority here could rest only on action in the
state convention. If tho principle of district
representation is the sound one then more
than half of tho delegates sitting in this con
vcntion are here without right, and if the
rule is rigidly applied the body would find
itself without quorum. Applause.
The report Of tho minority in the matter of
tho Illinois contest gives long history of the
case. 1t starts out with denial of the charge
l0aue against bno StdtS convention or having
entered into gigantic conspiracy to defraud
the electors. Not syllable of evidence of such
conspiracy had been laid before the committee,
and an examination of the record com.
pletely aud decisively refuted such charge
Speaking of the state convention, the minority
says I'm bodies OF this character the minor
ity or the majority must rule. There can be
no division of the rule, and the majority of
the republicans of the state of Illinois assem-
aI N tn ba
call proceeding from the legitimate official
source, declared their preference for Ulysses
S. Grant, and instructed the delegates to the
convention to vote as uuit for him. Is this
convention to say that the majority of the
convention OF the state of Illinois possesses ne
such powersp viii this convention under
take to say, and will the country justify it in
saying, that the majority of the people in so
great Il state shall not be permitted to express
their preferences on questions of this charac-
ter, and that If they have clear and distinct
preferences they shall be utterly helpless
in tho selection of tho methods by
which that preference Is to DO made
| eifectual? II is absurd upon the face of it to
say that Illinois or any state has right 10 in
struct its delegates to vote for particular eau
ddate, and yet has not tho power to make
such instructions eifectual and binding. II s
! absurd to say that a great state possessing this
power of giving expression TO its will and the
| will of its majority possesses no means for
| preventing tho defeat of that will by violated
| instructions, by broken pledges, or by COR
rupted faith The republicans OF the state of
| Illinois, and indeed Of every other state in
this union, will ere long be alive to tho danger
! which enyirons the rights of tho majority,
will ere long see that the enforcement OF those
| rights cannot depend alone on mere declara-
| tiOn Of what that mGjoriCy's will is but must
bo clothed with the power OF executing and
asserting it, aud II this will thus expressed is
in danger of being defeated by fraud, by
trickory or corruption the state thus impor,
lied has the right to place, as the exponants
of its will, men in its position who cannot
be corrupted, and whom no agencies OF
political treaGhory or fraud can roach. This
was precisely what the majority of the ro-
publicans of the state Of Illinois, in state con-
| ventiun assembled undertook TO do aud sue
ceeded in doing, Since tho republican party
has had an existence thore has been but one
instance where the republicans of the state
failed toinstruct thoir delegates to II national
convention to vote as a unit. They were in
structol to vote for Lincoln on precisely the
same terms as tho state delegation were in.
structed to vote for Grant. There has fOrlu-
nntely, in the political history Of the state of
| Illinois, as appears, been no instance 10 which
any delegate thus instructed has ever deemed
ii wise or prudent 10 undertake to violate those
instructions. There has been but one in-
stance in which those instructions were
! not given that was in 1876, whom the