The Marietta journal. [volume] (Marietta, Ga.) 1866-1909, 1882-09-28
Attention, Voters of the 35th Senatorial
District

MARIETTA, Ga Odd September, 1882.
There was a 'enocratie convention held
IN Atlanta on the Seventh instant to nominate
, u candidate for senator from the thirty-fifth
senatorial district. A. G. Mcintosh, l.. II.
Tanner, X. Love AND George Il. Gober wsre
ths delegates from Cobb county. As there
seems to be Misunderstanding as to what
was done at the convention, she delegation
from Cobb think il best TO state the facts:
Our delegation were instructed to vote for
Clayton's choice, If suitable luau was present
ed by Clayton When the convention assem-
bled Mr. Love was absent but Il was agreed,
without objection. that the chairman Of our
delegation should cast his vote. Clayton coun
~ presented j. Il. Spenoa and FultOn county
s. b. Hoyt for nomination. There was a de
cided feeling in the mind of each member Of
our delegation that Mr.. Spence was not suit
able man yet in Difference 10 Clayton we voted
for him, For quite number Of ballots the
/, vote stood Fulton. 6 for Hoyt Cobb, for
Spence, and Clayton ? for Spence, and so stood
for the fra. day.
On assembling 90 the second day, Mr.
McCandless, delegate from Fulton county,
stated thai Fulton would not vote for MIR.
! Spense, because he was not fitted for the place
but il Clayton Would present a suitable man
he would vote for him. Cobb presented the
name of ID. =. turgerson. Of Clayton county.
aud voted for him thirty nine ballots, Clayton
declined TO vote for him but continued to vote
Tor Mr. Spence. Being satisfied that Clayton
! intended to stick TO Spence, we went back to
him. When the convention met on the second
day Mr.. Tanner was absent, and during the
morning session Judge Mcintosh and Mr. Go
her cast the vote of Cobb The ballots stood
6 for Spence and q for Hoyt as before Soon
after the convention met after dinner Judge
Mcintosh left for home, leaving Mr. Gober the
only one of the original delegates from Cobb
Not wishing TO take all the responsibility, Mr..
Gober had telegraphed Mr.. Tanner asking
him to telegraph somebody TO act as his (Mr.
Tanners) proxy. Mr.. Tanner telegrsphed
Mr.. NJ q. Whitlock to act az his proxy.
When the convention met after dinner. Mr.,
Whilock presented his proxy and was enroll
ed aud took his seat IA delegate. nobody
making any objection. Cobb continued to vote
TOR Spence, before and on the 239th ballot
Mr.. Whtlock voted for s. b. Hoyt thus nom
mating him. Mr.. GobeT then moved to make
it unanimous. Mr.. DOYLE, the chairman of
the Clayton delegation, was also chairman of
this committee. The committee brought Judge
Huyt before the convention, and the chairman
of the convention Informed him that he was
unanimously nominated. The Clayton dele
CATION WAS present and heard Judge Hoyt told
il. Judge Hoyt accepted the nomination.
We submit the following questions
First-Did we have the right 10 decide, each
for himself who was a suitable candidate
Second-Were not two days aud 239 ballots
u reasonable time to wait for Clayton ID pre-.
sent suitable man
Third-Were we not sent TO the convention
TO nominate
Fourth-After failing to get suitable man
from Clayton, was it not our duty to take the
most suitable man we could get outside of
ClaytonY
We think every sensible man must answer
yes to these questions Any other answer
would make il useless to hold conventions.
If So then our delegation is fully justified in
voting to nominate Judge Hoyt. We were all
entirely satisfied with the result, and had no
reason to doubt that the Clayton delegation
would abide by the nomination. We are sat
isRed that in nominating Judge Hoyt we have
presented gentleman better suited to the po
sition than Mr.. Spence.
We regret that Mr.. Furgerson, after we had
submitted his name to the convention. should
declare msef a candidate, more especially
after his owl county declined to vote for him.
We think Clayton is dealing pretty hard
with Judge Hoyt to refuse biu her support,
after her duly constituted Representatives had
induced him to believe that be was the unani-
nous choice of the party convention.
In conclusion, we must say that we do not
believe there WAS any fight intended on Clay
ton. The whole trouble was in finding suit
able man. Her delegates talked Il great deal
about other men but never really presented or
voted for but one,.t wit. j. r. Spence We do
not believe that there ever was convention of
the democratic party that was more perfectly
fair, and free from ali faint of fraud, trick or
deception than was this convention.
NJ. G. WHITLOCK,
l.. II. TANNER,
GEORGE G0BER,
Delegates from Cobb county.