The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1884-07-10

convention. lie continued by NhNlnq INA
ns nr thr tnaihOd by which the vote NJ deieRa
tinns shoui,llr governed New York alone
iIpsl the nVnt iO command " ~ Tue Ninlr con
,cniion, oynry momher RON lhnl hlhl. W
this ruuNrntlpn Nuicd ior lhr .nlofrcurnl ~
/ the uuit rule, iLld The delegation ltsrlI hhh ne
rlurrd by niOTp than ivo-thiris mtJnrily ihn'
I ~ Chairman should express fhr VIII ar tin
STATE 10y cushing IT. scNcniy.iwo votes az one
! lie fsidc them Isinse before they
SrWuei Down RrTHLgssIN
the q .pressud viii at the Sovereign stat" Oi
New Cork ~ given inn resolution which h
Mrnyio, Of In.iIanp. offered ~ nm amend
msnt tAut thps,iaIss hall mt change its vote
until The result af the ballet has been an
nouncc,G
hts unicu au,,nt. li,f a. aimed that the dele
Gates IRON New York had been misrepre-
,entcd In uils mdt.r. There was great dan
lIticai machnery. The hones, aad,trulhfui
opinion oI New York might not have
H. proper force haro.
TWE NEgspArgas MIGHT RI BOUGHT
Ia print In their csluWns that sevrnty.two
solid votes rrnm New York would bc east for
one candidate, hut There IL no power 70 make
that so. There wei, TesoNtte men IN me New
York delegation, who won ld not only give
thci TrnsouS Why on" oand idntc saouiu not
get the nomination, bnt would have their
right Ia give their vo,ss To mat candidate
who they thought would bc elected
Harris, of Virginia, made the point OF
order, that the discussion was not In order
pcndlng the Temporary organ lHntion Oi tue
rnny ycrtion, but the pUrt Of order was ruled
Grady continued hla speech. He said
that when the New York dclcgi tion lcIs that
State II was understood that their votes
would be- decidedly one way, brtt by political
combinations the peoples VIII was sought fo
bc iuicrlrrrcd Win, aud ~ they made this
the only protest they could make, max e they ne, made
Try. and that New York might take Its place
In column and he hoped this convention
would adopt the old pcmocraiic method,
'I.ct every man speak his sentiments and
vote his sCntimcn}S;" and then whatever
sentiment prevails all wohld give them u
hearty SUPPORT Cheers. 81, xo,.
York had ;sd"ptcd arrsolution 10 favor the
unit vote and he had not opposed it,bccause he
believed the choice Of the ninyorty would 9
what IL was not to-'ihy. lliiughterl. The
fact Still remains that whatever was done In
tive New lorl; STATE convention
COuLp Nor CnSrHOL
inN lci Ion Of tht' National Democratic narty.
There was no power ia tive convention that
could make u reporting SECRETARY place II line
in she minutc-o OF The convention and lalsiIy
It's proceedings. Ii the Chairman of the dcl-
rgutOn announced tvoniy-iour of hs col
leagues rs voting for u ccStutin canuidht" Tor
whom they have already announced AN IN
tentiOn not 10 Hoac ana thr secretary 50 re-
ported them. he aud his colleagues would bc
reportcd its voting in a form which their lips
denied, and that would hc nn outrage on free
speech. 4
". .
the question wasn fundamental one: that
TIA" question was. has Il State the right 10
speak Toy itself or not in the election OF Pres
idents of the United Stai"s. The state al
ways has SPOKEN as "a unit; Il could do SO In
NJ other way. IN naming - itiHn lo' he
elected President uf the tHitcd States should
nc not hc chosen ia the same way? That Is
my voice. Tho several States ms units Of the
democratic party To defend The constitution
and rights of states as well a. This convention
Should hC
,,N' -
with the powers UI q State over It's delegates.
BY the Federal constitution II was provided
that votes for President should be 10y states
ana that the voice ot the States should bc
oheycd by its electors The same attempt
thai was made now was made in the Repub-
lean convention in 1870 in favor OF Gen.
Grant. but had been defeated.
Gen. Ciunr, of California, said his dcleEa-
tiOn came all the way froil California 10 vote
for the great political rGioriner Of the age,
samuel J. Tildrn. Speaking of the question
nj issue, he said the delegates from New
York had been elected by districts and at
large. II would he an outrage upon the mi
norty to not permit them To vote according
10 the wishes of their constituents. In the
name of Justice, decCncy and fair dealing, he
called upon the convention to permit the dis
trict Delegates to vote In accordance with the
~ shes Dt nose who chose them.
Powers, of Michigan, advocated the amend
mont offered by Grady. why" he asked.
"shonld n man be presented as ~ reform can
didatc and an attempt be made to nominate
him by machine methodist" Applause
Hurrison of Illinois argued that If the State
of New York had instructed its delegates to-
vote as II unit, and II they failed SO TO vote.
they would be disohcying their state. But
this convention had nothing to do with that
[Agplause He would probably be found
voting differently from Mr. Grady on thI
question of candidates, hut he wanted Il frees
vote now.
Jacobs, of New York. s.'ld that he was on,'
of the minority, and would exercise his privil~
rgr of voting against the choice of the ma =.
jority. but nS II Democrat, and as man l0yaE
to his constituents, he would be obedient tn
the orders of the convention and bow to th's
will of the majority. lApplausc.l
Grady asked him If at the Saratoga con-
vention there had been word OF discussioir
ms 10 the unit rule.
jacobs replied that there had not been, but
it was because everybody had agreed TO II in
advance.
dy'S amendment.
There We're, he said, sixty-two counties in
the state of New York. of which but ten or
twelve were Den ratio. According to the.
argument of Mr.. Fellows. lne great Dem1, ,',
elect II Democratic President If an opportu-
nifty were given TO them, would be dis
frnnchsed That was 1Ge pr1meIple t% Wn,S, iSc
sens, of libcrality OF the convention IN favor
OF Mr.. Grady's proposition.
Fellows, OF New York, again spoke against
the GRADY amendment.
There had been. lie said, an extraordinary
misconccption of the issue involved. II did
not look TO st itiing the voice or rcprcSSlnS tnt
sentiment OF amy delegates. The question
ri",h, tm snr how thc viii OF her majority
shinm,d bc inJicnted. she would not permit
h"r rs'yentv-t,to separate units to speak
,,, 90. ,,,o ~, Question before the convention.
r Sh. '''tS rSccn"niIed The Democratic method
nf ,scrrfniniur whr, her will was.
hut when thc will of the majority
,,'n "u' n'r,,;nc VIZ She had n ripht to
,'rn,,.rihn tha form I'm which that will should
he oYnrossrd lie nsked EplIy how II was
th,t thcy. TOO. had Obtained the credentials
Keiiy reulied thai Mr. Fellows represented
oi,r l., mpcratic party in the City OF New
ynr,, and he Kelly, another.
EclIows suggested that they represented