The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1884-07-18

York the crown Of her sovereignty and say
that her loyal subjects should not obey her
mandates New York had instructed her
seventy-two votes to speak as the voice of one
man. The seventy-two delegates here would
not violate their Instructions. But, moreover,
this question had been put TO vote in the dele
cation, and over two-thirds had voted in favor
Of the unit rule We bade the delegates
from other States pause before they struck
down the sovereign will Of the New York
Democrats expressed in the convention at
Saratoga. They expected New York to head
the Democratic column in November. He
therefore appealed to those States who were
interested in carrying New York to be careful
how they proceeded. He doubted whether this
convention had the power to reverse the action
of the Saratoga convention. He read the reso-
luton OF instruction of the Saratoga conven-
tion, requiring the delegation to act as q unit
under the direction OF d majority. The other
States had no right to dictate what the willof
New York was. Mr.. Grady sat in that con-
vention and every man in it voted for these res
olutions. He did not object to any member
expressing publicly the reasons that impelled
him to differ from the majority, but he insis-
ted that New York should vote as one man.
Mr., G.. V. Menzies, of Indiana, offered an
amendment to the amendment, to the effect
that no State should change its vote until the
other States had voted and the result had been
announced.
Senator Grady resumed the floor He said
that the New York delegate who preceded him
had challenged the convention to strike down
the sovereign will of the New York Democra-
cy expressed in convention assembled. He
denied that it was the sovereign will of the
New York Democracy. 1t was the sovereign
will Of the New York State machine This,
he said. had no authority TO prescribe any rule
for the guidance of district delegates. He
GRADY was district delegate and recog
nized no authority on the part of any machine
to dictate how he should vote. The unit rule
was undemocratic and should be done away
with. Senator Grady was greeted with Kisses,
necessitating the president to rap for order.
Judge Doolittle of Wisconsin, addressed
the convention in favor Of enforcing the in
structions of the New York convention.
Mr.. Powers, of Michigan, moved that the
amendments be referred to the committee on
rules. The motion was lost.
Mr.. Cochran, of New York, spoke in favor
Of the resolution. He asked whether the New
York Democracy had instructed its delegates
for any candidates. No, it had not. Nor did
the New York Democracy say that the New
York delegates should vote as n unit. The
edict was given out by machine, not by the
Democracy of New York. Free speech and
free deliberations were thrown out of the win
dow. He did not believe that the convention
would instruct the recording secretary to re-
cord living lie.
General Clunie, Of California, said it was an
the convention to deprive the minority of its
vote.
o. w. Powers, of Michigan, asked why
should the convention attempt to stiie the
voice of the delegates because they happened
to be in the minorityl
Carter Harrison, of Illinois, said if the
State of New York had instructed its dele
gates to vote as unit, and if they failed to
so vote they would be disobeying their State,
but this convention had nothing to do with
that. (Applausel.
one of the minority, and would exercise his
privilege of voting against the choice of the
majority, but Us a Democrat and as man
loyal to his constituents he would be obedient
to the orders of the State convention and bow
to the will of the majority. (Applause).
Mr.. Grady asked him il, at the Saratoga
convention, there had been a word of dis
cussion as to the unit rule
Mr. Jacobs replied that there had not been,
but it was because everybody had agreed to it
in advance.
John Kelly, of New York, said that in the
amendment before the convention was the
foundation of Democracy. 1t was question
whether majority of men could control the
votes of a minority. He did not regard any
instructions of any State binding upon ma
tional body This was higher power than
State convention, and he appealed to it to say
whether the views of good Democrats could
be stifled and their voices drowned, or
whether they were to have vote like other
delegates.
There were sixty-two counties in the State
of New York, of which but ten or twelve
were Democratic. According to tho argu-
ment of Mr.. Fellows, the great Democratic
counties of New York (Which would elect a
Democratic president if an opportunity were
given to them would be disfranchised. That
was the principle which was presented and
he appealed to the sense and liberality of the
convention in favor of Mr.. Grady's PROPOSE
ton. There was : precedent for Mr., Gradys
motion, and he hoped that this convention
would take it into consideration.
Colonel Fellows again took the floor and re-
sponded to MIR. Kelly, There was extra9rdl- II
nary misconception of the issue involved, he
said. The question of sitting the voice Of the
minority was not even remotely involved.
The real question was whether the State of
New York had the right to say how the will
of her majority should be indicated on the
floor. [Applause.l She had always main-
tanned, as She does to-day, that seventy-two
units should not speak seventy-two conflicting
statements as to her desires in a national con-
vention, but that they should speak as single
unit. She prescribed in her State convention
the method of ascertaining her will. She had
no desire to prevent any one OF minority or
her delegation telling the convention why he
differed with the majority. She only said
that when the will of majority had been
fairly ascertained it should be EXPIRE sed in
certain way, ana she claimed III as ner rlSnu 10
prescribe the way. [Applause.] 1t so hap
pened that Mr. Kelly and himself We're dele
gates from the same congressional district in
New York. Could Mr.. Kelly tell him by
what Democrats he had been elected whose
voice was entitled to more recognition than
others in the same district.
Mr., Kelly arose to explain, and an amusing
colloquy between him and Colonel Fellows
onsued.
THE UNIT RULE SUSTAINED.
At the conclusion of Mr.. Fellows speech
there were roars all Owe the hall for the ques-
tion. The Chair finally recognized General
Bragg, of Wisconsin He argued that the del
egates did not come here as representatives
of congressional districts except in such cases
as the State may direct and permit. The
States, not the districts were entitled to repre-
sentation Mr.. Burke, of Louisiana, also
claimed that the States themselves had the
right to determine the question whether the
votes should be cast as n unit. He then moved
to lay the motion on the table, but subse-
quently withdrew it and moved the previous
! question. Mr.. Menzies then withdrew his
amendment to the original amendment. The
question was then put, but there being an un-
certainty as to the result the roll OF States
was called for and ordered upon the adoption
of the amendment to the original resolution.
After some further discussion the secretary
announced the result of the vote as follows:
Total number OF votes cast, I95; yeas, 332.