The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1884-07-09

PdSs without protest from nt
rSs ISeS' soine OF the members of that body.
me Speaker then read the instructions 10
ACT as unit, passed by the Saratogn
convention. He continued by saving that
as iAr the method by which the vote of delepa-
tons should be governed, New York alone.
had the right 10 command 1t in tho state con-
Nention, every member from that State i'm
this convention voted for the enforcement of
the unit rule, and the delegation itselfhad de-
StiaISu tr req oy more than two-thirds majority that
W. CHAIRMAN should express the will of the
state by casting its SeVenty-twO votes rs one.
lie Dade them pause before they
STRUCK DOWN RUTHLEssLY
tLne expressed will of the Sovereign State of
New u ork as given in resolution which he
had read.
Menzie, of Indiana, offered rs an amend
mont that the state shall not change its vote
until the result of the ballot has been an
nounced.
Grady, ofNew York, spoke in support of
hls amendment. He claimed that the dele
gates from New York had been misrepre-
seated in this matter. There was great. dan
ger through the power and influence OF po-
htical machinery. The honest and truthful
opinion of New York might not have
It's proper force here.
THE NEWSPAPERS MIGHTBE BOUGHT
10 print in their columns that seventytwo
solid votes from New York would be cast for
one candidate, but there is no power to make
that so There were rcsolute men I'm the New
ork delegation, who would not only give
get the nomination, but would have their
right To give their votes to that candidate
who they thought would be elected
Harris, OF virginia, made the point OF
oruer, tnat the discussion was not In order
pending the temporary organization OF the
convention, but the point OF order yas ruled
outby the Chairman.
Grady continued his speech. He said
Lhat when the New York delegation left that
state IL was understood that their votes
would be decidedly one way, but by political
combinations the peoples Will was sought TO
he interlerrcd with, and as they made this
me only protest they could make, they made
Tor II the honor of the party and of the coun-
try, and that New York might take its place
in column and he hoped this convention
would adopt the old Democratic method.
Let every man speak his sentiments and
vote his sentiments;" and then whatever
sentiment prevails all would give them n
henrty support Cheers
He admitted the State convention OF New
1ork had adopted aresolution to favor the
unit vote and he had not opposed II .becnuse he
believed the choice of the majority would he
what u was not to-day. laughterl. The
TACT still remains that whatever was done i'm
the New York State convention
COULD NOT CONTROL.
the action of the National Democratic marty
Ihere was no power In the convention that
could make Il reporting secretary place n line
IN the minutes OF the convention and falsiTy
lts proceedings. II the Chairman of the del
leagues aS voting for certain candidate for
whom they have already announced an in
tention not to vote and the Secretary so re-
ported them, he and his colleagues would be
r'porteu as voting In form which their lips
denled, and that would be an outrage on free
speech.
Hon. J. Il. Doollttlc, of Wisconsin. snid
me question was u fundamental one; that
me question was, hns n State the right 10
speak for Itself or not In the election of Pros.
dents of the United States. The State al
ways mas spoken rs unit; IL could do sn IN
no other way. In naming man 10 he
r'ecteu PRESIDENT OF the United States should
ne not be chosen In the same way? That *
my voice. The several States aS units of the
Democratic party 10 defend the constitution
ana rights OF States us well us this convention
should be
SLOW no INTERFERE
Win the powers ofa State over Its delegates
ltS the Federal constitution II was provided
that votes for President should be BY States
ANA that the voice of the States should be
uOeSed by its electors. The same attempt
lhat was made now was made In the Repub-
ilcan convention in 1880 In favor of Cen
Grant. but had been defeated.
Gen. Clunie, Of California, said his dclega-
ton came all the way from California 10 vote
for the great political reformer OF the age.
samuel j. Tilden. Speaking of the question
nt issue, he said the delegates from New
York had been elected by districts and at
large. IL would be an outrage upon the mi
]
10 the wishes OF their constituents In the
nRnc ofIustice, deeency and fur dealing, he
called upon the convcntionto permit the dis
trict delegates 70 vote In accordance with the
wishes of those who chose them.
Powers, Of Michigan, advocated the amend
mcnt offered by Grady. why" he asked.
SHOULD man be presented as a reform can,
lidato ana an attempt be made 10 nominate
MIN by machine methods9" Applause
Harrison, of Illinois, argued that the State
OF New York had instructed it's delegates To
vote as q unit, and II they failed so to vote,
they would be dlsobeylng their State But
mus convention had nothing to do with that.
Agplause.l lie would probably be found
voting differently from Mr.. Grady on the
question OF candidates, but he wanted a free
vote now.
Jacobs, OF New York, said that he WINS one
OF the minority, and would exercise his priyIl-
eye OF voting against the choice of the ma
gority, hut asa Democrat, and as II man Ioynl
70 his constituents, he would be obedlent to
Ine S, orlers olthe convention and bow TO the
WIN OF the majority, Applause.
Grady asked him If ut the Saratoga con-
Nentloh there had been word OF discussion
~ To the unit rule.
jacobs replied that thore had not been, but
u wus because everybody had agreed 10 Il In
advance.
John Kelly, of New York, advocated Gra-
dy's amendment.
There were. he said, sixty-two counties In
the state Of New York, OF which but ten or
twelve were n0mOcrRtc. According to the
argument OF Mr.. Fellows, the great Demo-
cratic counties Of New York, which would
elect Democratic President if an opportu-
nifty were given to them, would be dis
tranchiscd, That was the principle which
wAs now presented. He appealed to the
sense of llbrrality orthe convent ON In favor
of Mr. GrodyS proposition.
Fellows, OF New York, again spoke against
the Grady amendment.
There had been, he said, an extraordinary
nlsconccption OF the Issue involved. II did
not look 10 sitting the voice or reprcsSlng the
sentiment of any delegates. The question
was whether the'Statc Of New York Ind n
right 10 say how the will of her malorIty
should be indicated. She would not permit
her stventy-lwo separate units To speak
SENENTY-TWO SEPARATE DESIRES
on any one question before the convention.
She recognized the Democratic method
.Ut NScrrIaining what her will was,
but when the will of the majority
was asccertained she had u right to
0e expressed. He Nsked Kelly how IL was
that they, too, had obtained the credentials
which permitted them To be here at ali.
Kelly replied that Mr., Fellows represented
Que Democratic party In the City OF New
YORK ana he kelly another.
Fellows suggested thnt they represented
only different organizations In the Demo-
cratic party,
Kelly said that the gentleman's purnose
now was TO ignore him, kelly and not 10
allow him vote in The convention, II was
against that he QNelly) protested. fCheers, i
a. Fellows proceeded With his argument. All
uiat THE Inajorlty.of thu New York delegates
desired 10 do, was TO express her sentlment In
q certain prescribed form, The convention
should not take AWAY that right. II was n
right dear To the State Of New York. II ahe
WINS stripped OF that right she would feel de.
Hrnded aud dishonOred. He declared, lronl-
cally, that Mr.. Kelly aud himself were In ten-.
der sympathy with each other and hecOn-
i,s. Lessed lhat he had brighter hopes yet before
MN OF better methods and purcr forms when
nc tound nom the lips of Mr. Kelly and Mr..
uraqy such eloquent denunciatlon OF machine
methods. Laughter ana applauscl.
thing which they did was the
spontaneous outcropplng of popular will,
llnughterl, and that the hand Of arbitrary
power never controlled their political
nlethods, In conclusion he asked whether
tho National convention would strlp New
York OF her power In this matter. lCries OF
~ 49,,