Blount County democrat. [volume] (Maryville, Tenn.) 1879-1883, 1882-08-05
AN INCONSISTENCY.

uh'' I'blilVNlNNo w ohl'I'pi tIlC dtllOll
Of the June convention is based upon
the alleged representative character
Of that body. This is an argument
which does not now appeal TO the
best Judgment, but TO a sentiment
which obtained when Democratic
conventions were jealous of Demo
cratic doctrines and dared not depart
from the true landmarks. The SEN
timent is proper one when it
springs from a confidence which has
not been betrayed, but, although it
still fingers in the minds of many, it
has at this time no such firm founda-
ton. The argument, however, will
be persistcntiy made for all it is
worth.
Waving for the noncc q discussion
Of the peculiar methods adopted in
many Of The counties to deprive the
State credit minoritics of representa-
ton, let us see how this argument
works.
1t is a palpable truth that The con-
vCntion in lis dcliyCranCes did not re-
fleet the views OF the Democrats of
the State, high-taX or low-taX, Even
the Wish-a-Wash aid the Flanigans
were not thrilled with ecstacy over a
platform which sacrificed evcrybody's
OniuiOns for The sake of inlapmOui-
Gus harmony.
But our friends claim that the con-
rentiOn being representative, as
shown by the report of the Commit
tee on Credentials, all Democrats are
therefore bound TO endorse its action,
however unobjectiOnablc or prepos-
terous that action may be. Did it
ever occur TO the men who make this
argument that il applies FORTIoRI
to the action Of the Legislature which
they seek TO overthrow =? Oh, but the
debt settlement made by the Leglsla-
ture is not i'm accordance with the
views of the people! But is not the
LegiSluturS representative body,
properly empowered by the C0nstitu-
tion? Are not the members regular
ly elected and accredited? If Dem
ocrats are bound TO subscribe to an
absurd and ruinous policy simply
because the delegates to the convcn-
ton were not armed with credentials,
are not the citizens Of the State, by
the same argument under much
greater obligations to respect law
enacted by the Legislature, especially
when that law is approved by ma
jOrity OF the people? If it is held
that contract made by representa-
tive Legislature can be violated with
impunity, cannot Democrats repudi-
ate the folly of a convention which
lost its head in Whirl of excitement? !?
Is law, a solemn contract made by
the State with her creditors, less TO
be regarded Than the dictum of a
party convention hecdlcssly led into
CrrCr? The claim TO party support
on the mere ground Of numerical
representation, while disrcgarding
every right consideration, is unsub-
stantial. Suppose the convention had
ongrafied in its platform a resolution
favoring the building Of a bridge to
the moon--a no less impossible pro-
vision than some resolutions really
adoptcd-Would the convention still
be regarded as representative and its
action binding upon Democrats? In
truth the convention was not repre-
sentative in a rightful sense. 1t may
have represented some Democrats
who preferred men above measures,
or who esteemed place above party,
but it did not represent the brain and
heart and common sense of Dam0c-
raCy. We believe and know that
majority of the delegates were moved
by an honest desire to harmOnizc and
reunite thc party, but under the pecu-
liar circumstances, when rash eXpcdi-
cncy ruled the hour, and unwise and
lndlscriminato counsel made cOnfu-
sion worse conGoHnded, they were in
duced to take action which prccludcs
the very end they had in view. Many
OF them have admitted that they do
not now approve of what was done.
NO convention is representative that
docs not reflect the views of the party.
II democracy is bound by the June
Convention, il is bound by the policy
ii adopted and not by the men who
composed it, The argument on the
ground Of numerical representation
confutcs itself--NashvillC American.