The Waco daily examiner. [volume] (Waco, Tex.) 187?-1888, 1884-07-11
te claimed tha. d State con.

vention could instruct the delegates.at-
large to vote in certain way, but the
district delegates were responsible only
to their districts, and any other doctrine
would be undemocratic. II they passed
the rules proposed by the National Com
mittee there were resolute men who
would tell them why certain candidates
could not be nominated. prolonged
Kissing interspersed with applause, which
continued until Csrris, of Virginia, rose
to point OF order that the
debate was not in order
during temporary organization. The
Chair overruled the point of order and
Grady continued,S saying that while the
newspapers might announce that New
York was a unit, he represented con-
sttuency whose rights he proposed to
make known In the interest of the Demo.
cratic principle of home rule. Mr.. Fell
lows had said that more than two-thirds
of the delegation had instructed the
Chair to cast the vote as unit. He had
not described the influences which had
been at work to secure that two-thirds.
He had not explained why certain men
who came here pledged had changed their
minds, but there were men present who
would state this, and give the reasons as
well.
Grady was Kissed and cheered and Mr.
Doolittle, of Wisconsin, continued the
discussion, supporting the unit rule in a
vigorous speech.
Mr.. Power, of Michigan, moved TO re-
fer the whole matter to the committee on
rules. Motion lost
Mr.. Cochrane, of New York, urged the
Convention not TO lend itself to gagging
the party, but to support strong and
powerful minority OF the party.
Cochrane, who was alternate for j. j.
O'Donohue, made a vigorous address in
favor of Tammany's position, although
he disclaimed speaking for any faction or
in the interest of any candidate The
unit rule, he said in conclusion, was an
outrage and fraud.
General Clancy, of California, said Cal
ifornians looked to the Empire State to
lead them in the struggle, but they de-
sired harmony. He declared 1t would be
an outrage for the Convention to permit
majority of each delegation to deprive
the minority Of representation. lie made
u passionate appeal for harmony and
square deal.
o. w. Powers, of Michigan, followed
in vigorous denuncation of gag law.
Senator Jacobs, of New York, rose
amid cheers, but gave way for Mayor
Carter Harrison, OF Chicago, who said 1t
was not question for the Convention to
settle, but for each delegation to settle
with its constituencies. He pointed out
that if the chairman of delegation an
nounced the vote improperly 1t was open
to challenge.
Senator Jacobs, of New York, bowed
to the will of the majority.
Amid prolonged applause, Mr.. John
Kelly, of New York, rose as Mr.. Jacobs
sat down. He received round after round
of applause. When silence was restored
he began to speak but was Interrupted
by loud cries of "platform." The chair,
however, stated that each delegate ex-
cept by suspension Of the ruleI was ex-
pected to speak from his seat. Mr.. Kelly
proceeded. He assented to the statement
that no objection was raised to the unit
rule in the Saratoga Convention, but
claimed that there were various prece-
dents for allowing individual action of
delegates even when the unit rule had
been adopted by the majority, aud made
strong appeal to the liberality of the
Convention. His entire remarks were in-
audible to nine-tenths of the Convention
and cries OF "can't hear" were heard ON
all sides.
Colonel Fellows was again recognized
at 40 and repeated his former argu-
ments, and declared that the Convention
had no right to dictate to the majority of
the New York delegation. He challenged
Kelly, who had come from the same Con-
gressional district as himself, to declare
how 1t happened that both had contrary
Instructions. Where did these instruc-
tions come from?
Kelly replied that he represented one
Democratic party In New York, while
Fellows represented another.
To this Fellows retorted amid loud
cheers, that there ought to be but one
Democratic party In the State. By this
time, $3.50 p. m, two hours have been
wasted in debate and the Convention is
beginning to get impatient.
Fellows quoted Cochrau's statement
that the reason Tammany did not oppose
the unit rule at Saratoga was because
they thought things were different; that
is, that Tammany would have majority
at Chicago. Fellows statement was re-
pudiated, and he repeated it amid great
applause. When, also, he said that
1t was not necessary for Tammany
to repudiate machine methods,
because the entire country knew
racy In New York was the Spontaneous
| VIA Va thC PCoptSS hC Wos ICWuIueu
with prolonged applause and laughter.
General Bragg, OF Wisconsin, followed
in opposition to the unit rule.
MIR. Kirk, of Louisiana, made an argu-
meutative address In the interest of hur-
mony.
The following is the vote on Grady's
amendment:
Votes cast 795. For the amendment
325; against it 1853.
The Convention is in an uproar The
vote is hailed with delight by Clcveauds
supporters. When Manning reported
New York's vote as unit, COchrane,
who challenged the vote Of New York and
demanded the roli-call, was howlcd down
by the Convention. The vote is regarded
as black eye for Tammany.
The original resolution, as offered by
Smallcy, Of Vermont, was then adopted.
The call of States on permanent Or
ganization was ordered, after which, at
p. m, the Convention adjourned until to.
morrow at III a. IN.