The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1883-01-25

any innovation. 81, s.5sss. ,.ts..s3. Mia
Mr. Mason CIV Va) made some remarks in
the same vein, favoring. Senator Logan's sub
stitute. f,sasl,5l ,..ii.s.sa 81 i.tr.,t4f,
/ Mr. Runnels, Of Iowa, suggested the unfair
ness and impolicy Of giving 70 the State o.
Kentucky the same power and influence in 8
National Republican Convention as to the
State of Michigan or Iowasa.t He thought
that the general sentiment Of the Republicans
of the country, as expressed through the press
was in favor Of some plan that would recog-
nize the fact that States which were largely
| Republican should have q greater influence
than Democratic States in determining the
candidates and policy of the Republican par
ty. He, therefore, favored the plan of mixed
representation, and was strongly inclined tt
vote for Mr. Martins plan. .. fsitto,.
Mr. Lodge, of Massachusetts, argued in. ia
yor of the plan OF additional representation
for Republican States and districts. The Ma
tional Convention did not represent the peopl,
of the country, but represented the Repnbli
can party, ,t.f eii re,. %
| Mr. Hewlett, of Kentucky, said that any
thing which had a tendency TO discourage the
Republicans of Kentucky and of such States
ought to be avoided. +,
Mr. Filley, of Missouri, agreed with MI
Washburn that it was not time to go into
innovations. He thought it better to stand
by the old landmarks. Still, the Republicans
of MISSOURI were entirely willing to give to
the Republican States that cast Republican
votes, the absolute control of the nominations
The question was how to get..at it. %.
Mr. Valentine, of Nebraska, expressed the
opinion that the Chicago Republican Con-
vention had not given to this committee any
| authority to change the basis of representa-
ton. ..ft..rrr -138
After some further discussion the amend
ments to the Logan substitute were with
drawn al UsHes- -s
Mr.. Frye, ofMaine, replied to the objections
against the large size. Large conventions pre-
vailed all over New England. He would
rather address convention Of $500 men, as
sembled to nominate candidate forpresident
than address the House of Representatives.
There was safety in large conventions The
sorrows of Pennsylvania had come from her
small conventions. Where a great state of
four millions of people nominated its COVER
| nors by conventions of $50 men, there was
sure to be trouble. II Pennsy lyania had con-
yention Of 2 500 men. nobody would own that
convention or complain that it was owned.
Mr. Strobach, of Alabama, favored the Logan
| substitute. 1t would not be wise (as Mr. Lin
coin had said) TO swap horses in crossing the
stream. If they tried it in this crisis they
| might find that the stream which they were
crossing was the Styx. af
| Mr. Pierce, of Rhode Island, also favored the
Logan substitute. He believed that within the
next two years the local troubles which had
operated against the Republicans in the late
elections would have passed away. If Repub-
licans stood right together they had as fair
ility of carrying the next presidential
election as they had had for the last eight
years. 4 tHs' 9t54 fsaod
After further discussion, Mr. Martin, of Kan
sas, offered aresolution that there shall be ad-
ditlonal represen tation in the next national
Republican convention, based either on the
Republican vote for president or on the Re.
publican members of Congress. oaa
\ Mr. Chandler made a speech, in which he
said that the question of defeat or success in
the next presidential election depended on
\ whether the national Republican convention
\ would assemble under the old rotten borough
N system or whether that system should be re-
4 formed. The trouble of allowing Democratic
( localities to influence Republican nominations
II had long been recognized and been growing
i There was no intention of reducing the repre-.
4 sentation of Southern Republicans. He hoped
4 that the question wonld be fully discussed.
4 Mr. Logan thou ght that his own proposition
4 was a reasonable one, and did not think that
4 the propositions to which it was substitute
H was reasonable If this committee were op.
posed to the old system it could say so.
4 Mr. Frye, of Maine, opposed the Logan sub
stitute, being entirely satisfied that the old
system was wrong, unjust and outrageous
There was not state in the Union thai
elected its conventions on that principle
| 4 Mr. Logan asked whether it would not bt
i better to exclude Democratic states entirel1
from the Republican convention than to in
crosse the Republican representation in Re
publican states and districts. They had a,
much right to do one as the other ii2'it
MIR Chandler replied to Mr. Logan, and ar
\ guted to show the fairness and propriety of the
proposed change. 81 999as ftl1.49f3ii14
Mr. Logan asserted that the objection to thu
proposed change was that it DISTINGUISHED the
Rep ubticans of states and districts where Re
| publicans were in the minority. That was no
fair, or polite or just. IfKentucky had 100,
600 Republican votes and Maine had 100000
Republican votes, Kentucky would have, un
der the proposed plan, tour delegates in the
National Republican Convention and Main,
4 would have twenty That was unjust, ant
that was why he was against it, lsi@ "oH
4 Mr. Valen tine, of Nebraska, suggested
whether it would not be better to wipe out tn,
senatorial representation entirely and confin,
it to the congressional districts, allowing on
delegate for each district, and an additions
delegate tor every 1000 votes given in the dis
trict for James A. Garfield. " ~" @
g.-ga. a r..
Mr.. Logan offered to withdraw his substi
tute, but Mr. Washburn, Of Minnesota, 40
pealed to him not to do SO ,as he thought Their
" as more danger in making change than ii
going on under the old plan.
Mr.. Logan stated, however, that his motiv
was to allow those in favor of change to Sc
| whether they could present anything whic
would meet the approval Of the committee
If no such plan were presented, then he woul
renew his substitute.
Mr.. Lacy (Mich.) offered the following resc
luton: Reso1ged, That the number of delegate
to the National Convention of 1884 be in
J creased; and thatsaid increase be so distribute
as to be based upon Republican votes for pre-
: ident in 1880, or SO as to increase the repr,
sentation of states or districts showing Repul
lican pluralities in the presidential election
N 1880, without decreasing the ratio of delegate
assigned to any state or district under the la
call.
/ Mr.. New und.) opposed any change, and r.
| ihewed Senator Logan motion as a substitu
for it (retaining the existing plan of repI
sentation)
| Il A member proposed that the vote should
tront to which ~, nv, n :, - -,