The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1884-07-09

anu VOG0 1Or us fOntlhAChuo H.
then whatever sentiments prevail
ell would give them a hearty sup
port (cheers,) he bade them pause
Uefore they struck down ruthlessly
the express will of the sovereign
state of New York as given in res
olution which he had read.
Powers, of Michigan. advocated
the amendment offt red By Grady.
Why, he asked, should man be
presented as reform candidate and
an attempt be made to nominate
him by machine methods. (ApN
plause).
Harrison, of Illinois. argued that
if the State of New York had In
structed its del gates az a unit and
If they failed to so vote, they would
be disobeying the Safe. but the
convention had nothing 70
do with that (Applause). He would
probably be found voting differently
from Mr.. Grady on the question OF
candidates, but he wanted a free
vote now.
Jacob, of New York. said that he
WAS of the minority, and would
exerci Q his privilege OF voting
against the choice OF the majority,
but as a Democrat and as man
loyal to d s constituents, he would
be obedient TO the orders OF The
State convention and bow to the will
Of the majority tApplause)
Grady asked him if at the Sar-
atoga convention there had been
word OF discussion as to the unit
rule?
Jacobs replied that there had not
been, but it was because everybody
had agreed to it in advance.
John Kelly, of New York, sdyo-
Gated the Grady amendment. There
were, he said, sixty>two counties in
the STATE Of New York of which
but ten or twelve were Democratic.
According to the argument of
Mr.. VS., the great Democratic
coun les of New York which would
elect a Democratic President il an
opportunity were given to them,
would be disfranchised. That was
the principle which was now pre-
sented, and he appealed to the sense
and liberality of the convention in
favor of Mr.. Grady's proposition.
Fellows, of New York, again spoke
sgainst the Grady amendment.
There mad been, he said, an extra
ordinary mis- conception of the Issue
involved. 1t did not look to sitting
the voice or REFRESHING the senti
ment OF any delegate. The GU stion
was whether the State Of New York
had a right to say how the will of
her majority should be Indicated.
She would not permit her seventy
two separate units to speak seventy
two separate desires on any ques
ton. Before the convention she
recognized the Democratic meihGd
of ascertaining what hsr will wss,
but when the will OF the msj 7rity
was ascertained she had right to
prescribe the form II which ;t,.at
will should be expressed. He aske
Kelly how it Was that hey too had
obteined the credentials which per
mitted them TO be here at all ~
Kelly Tepl'et thst@ Mr., tel'ows
represented oEe Democratic Par y
10 the City Of New York a1d lie
kelly another.
Fellows suggs ste1 Shat they rep
resented only different o.ganiza.
tions in the Democratic party.
Kelly said that the gentleman's
purpose now W to ignore Kelly and
not allow him to vote in the con-
ventiou. 1t was against that. that
they kelly protested. Cheers }
Fellows protested with his argus
mept All that the majority of New
York delegates desired was to do
what their State had instructed
them to do; to present sentiment
in a certain prescribed form The
convention should not take away
that right. 1t was a right dear
to the State OF New York. II che
was stripped Of that right
she. would feel degraded. dishon
0red. He declared Ironically, that
Mr.. Kelly and himself were In
tender sympathy with each other.
He confe ssed that he had q brighter
hope set before him of Better
methods and purer forms when he
found from the lips of Mr.. Kelly
and Mr.. Grady such eloquent denun.
citation of machine methods, (Iaugh-
ter and applaase) They all under,
stood that everything which they
did in New York was the sponta-
neous outcfopping of the popular
will (laughter,) and that the hand OF
arbitrary power never contro led
their political methods. In conclu..
sion he asked whether the National
convention would strip New York
of her power in this matter, (cries
of "No.0 ..s s.s
Bragg, ofsWisconsin, regarded the
question as one whether an attorney
with q delegates powers could
be permitted to violate and
exceed those powers, and whether
the convention, sitting as a judge
on that question, would recognize
such violation and be hound by it.
Burke, of Louisiana, spoke of the
quarrels and controversies ana
claims Of the two Democratic fac
tions of New York, and took the
same view of the question as that
presented by Bragg, of Wisconsin.
"If l. wonid be an outrage" he said,
s.So J.privo ind fviduaI n Iarutno ~