The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1882-08-04

him in the next room. Another witness
stated that at Trinity Mills some
twenty railroad hands voted for
Crawford who, he didn't think, were
entitled to vote, and it was also gwen in
testimony that Spring Chapel precinct
primary was not held on the day named in
the call and that blackberry creek precinct
was not held on the day named in The call,
that it was held in grain field instead of
at the usual place of holding primaries
Another witness said there was great con-
fusion and pulling and hauling at the
fourth ward primary in Dallas city, and
that great many men forced their way up
the steps TO the voting place, some OF
whom, no doubt, ought not to have gone
up. Another witness said that his brother
in-law had told him that some
thirty odd men had been voted
off the Trunk railroad for
Crawford. Another stated that an old
man, a republican, had told him that he
had been promised Sl5 to work for Craw-
ford, but he had only been paid S. of the
money. Another witness stated that the
Wellborn men had held caucus Just be-
fore the convention met, and they had
agreed to demand minority Representa-
ton in the selection OF delegates to the con-
pretsionai convention, and they had agreed
e. urge as precedent the action of the
county convention IN 1880, when Roberts
men demanded minority representation
in the delegation, and on "a refusal they
bolted, but came back to the convention
again when it was agreed they
should have "a minority repre-
sentation according to their strength,
and on this precedent they intended to
make a similar demand and stand by their
demand. They brought forward these
statements through the evidence of five or
six witnesses, and they filed certificate
from republican in Dallas, brother of
MIR. John IL. Cochran, that Il. W. Hurst, a
delegate from the third ward, was consid-
protest against the third ward of Dallas
city, however, and the other side filed
counter certificate from A. b. Norton,
chairman of the national republican coun-
Gil, that L. W. Hurst had never attended
any republican meetings, was never q
member of any of the republican
clubs, had never signed republican club
constitution, nor did his name ever appear
IN the proceedings OF any republican meet
ings, and he did not know him as a repub-
lican. Upon these statements of each
delegation, the undersigned Of your cont
mit,ce on credentials beg leave to report
that in their judgment the Crawford dele
gates are the rlghtiul representatives of
the democracy of Dallas county and
that they alone are entitled to seats in the
convention. A compromise to seat both
delegations we believes would be unjust
to the democracy of Dallas county
aud wo conceive that it is calculated to
encourage bolts in conventions and to offer
II premium to boilers. We conceive also,
that to seat both delegations will only
widen the breach in the party in Dallas
county aud lead, in all probability, to the
n m
There can be no question, from the testi-
mony, that twenty-five voting precincts re-
NAMED in the convention in full and four
others represented in part, which is u
very large majority of the whole num-
Der, thirty-four voting precincts in Dallas
county. There were fifty -threedelegates in
this said convention, large majority of
the eighty.four the convention was en-
titled to, and there were sixty -one votes
| cast in this said convention, n large ma
jority of the eighty.iour votes the
question arises, then, who was in
authority in that convention, the
chairman of the executive committe or the
| convention BY what authority could the
chairman OF the executive committee re-
fuse longer to remain in the. room where he
had called the convention to order and de.
clared it open for business, and call upon
democrats TO follow him to another room to
organize convention? Who was supreme,
he or the convention2 If twcnty-nine or
Thirty democrats lett the convention, were
| liftythree others bound by any rule, or
law, or precedent to follow them? We un-
derstand that the Johnson county conven.
ton organized without the aid of the chair
man of the executive committee at all, and
are the delegates from johnson county ia
| this convention without authority If the
chairman of the executive committee of
a county is supreme, and his ipsedixit
must prevail, and no convention is of bind
ing force or authority that has not his
sanction, and approval, and that is
not hedged about with the
iormality Of his direction, then johnson
county is not legally represented in this
convention, and We assume that no dele
gate will take this position. We re- pect-
fully submit again that in our Judgment,
that Messrs. ii. Barksdale, James Cravens.
d. l.. Stewart, J. b. Gano, w. G. Storrett,
Mart. Cole, G. w, Gano, Challes l.. Mar
tin, w. l.. Hall, Il. Il. Cowart, II S. Kim
brough, II. Duncan, o. =, S. Fee and W.
I. Strange are entitled to seats in the con-
venton, as delegates from Dallas county.
Respectfully submitted.
| HYDE JENNINGS, of Tarans,
w. III. LoCRET, of Bosque.