The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1884-05-08
The Unit Rule.

VentI0saS OIL the hepuDllcan party VI IL
ginia, instructing their delegates to the
Chicago Convention of June Sd, to vote as
a unit, has caused some discussion OF the
unit rule by our Virginia contemporaries.
The Dispatch, in an article on the subject
one day last week, cited the cases OF New
York, Pennsylvania and Illinois, and the
action Of the Chicago Convention of 1880
in reference to them, in order to explain
the impracticability of the instructions OF
the District Conventions on the 23d ult.-
The illustration, however, does not Illus
trate. for the cases are not parallel. The
State Conventions Of New York, Pennsyl-
vania and Illinois, after the district dele
gates and delegates-at-la had been
chosen, instructed them by resolution to
vote as a unit for Gen. Grant. Many of
the delegates from the districts were not
in favor of Gen. Grants nomination, and
claimed the right to reflect in their votes,
the sentiments of the constituencies they
and appealed to the National
Convention to determine whether or not
they could not be relieved from the re-
striction contained in the resolutions OF
the respective State Conventions. The
discussion which followed was animated
and threatening, and the conclusion finally
reached that the district delegates had the
right to speak for their constituencies and
cast their votes in accordance with what
they assumed the people whom they imme-
diatey represented desired. Not only did
the National Convention annul the action
of theState Conventions instructingIfor the
unit rule, but it instructed the National
Committee of the Republican party to pre-
pare and adopt plan to secure district
representation in all future National Con-
ventions. The order was obeyed by the
Committee and a plan adopted providing
for separate District Conventions, each to
appoint two delegates to the National
Convention, prior to the meeting of the
State Convention to appoint delegates-at-
large. In the case of failure to hold such
district conventions, it was further
that delegates from any
such defalllting district to the State
Convention, should meet in separate dis
trict conventions and elect two delegat es
and two alternates each to the National
Convention, such selections not to be sub
ject to the approval Of the State Conven-
ton. Whether the district delegates were
appointed by District Conventions pre-
vious to the meeting of the State Conven-
tion, or by subdivisions of the delegates
to the State Convention, into District Con-
ventions, the action was to be independent
and final.
1t was under this plan that the delegates
to the late State Convention, sub-divided
into District Conventions and elected del
agates. The'District Conventions, under
this arrangement, were not amenable to
the State Convention, bnt were supreme,
under the authority of the National Con-
vention. Before the delegates were Sc
lected, a resolution was adopted instruct
ing the delegates who might be chosen to
vote in the National Conve ution as a unit.
Whether this could be rega 'ded as secur-
ing district representation in the sense that
the National Convention of $50 intended,
is open to discussion. 1t certainly pre-
sents a different case to that of New
\ DIRK, Pennsylvania and Illinois in $780,
1t may be claimed that the District Con-
ventions had full authority to give such
instructions to their delegates as they
might determine-to order them tor vote as
a unit or to vote as the individual choice
Of each delegate might indicate, and yet
preserve district representation, in the spir-
it designed by the National Convention. Or
it may be contended that the purpose of
the National Convention was to destroy
the unit vote of the State and leave each
delegate to record his vote as his judg-
ment might dictate, after viewing the Fl ED
and the influences In active motion al he
National Convention. ae@ ~ stg
There is one consideration, growing
out OF the manner of the instructions of
the District Conventions that cannot be
overlooked. The resolution Of instrJc-
ton was adopted in each District Conven-
ton in advance of the appointment of the
delegates, and the acceptance of the posi-
ton by the delegate obligated him to carry
into effect purpose of the resolution. His
acceptance was voluntary act, and in do
Ing so he accepted the conditions attached
by the District Convention. To disregard
this order, then, under any circumstances,
might be construed, and reasonably so, as
an act of bad faith.
We assume, however, that there will be
no serious difficulty arising in the Vir-
ginia delegation growing out of the unit
vote. The delegates will meet and COM
pare opinions. They will weigh the
chances and the availability of each Of the
candidates who will be presented to the
Convention and by mutual concessions, az
rive at a fair and just conclusion, where all
can unite without doing violence to their
Individual convictions or the sentiment of
the constituency represented. No candi-
date will be presented who is not entitled
to the confidence and support of the Re-
publicans of the country, and whether the
successful candidate shall be the prefer
ence of one delegate or another will
make very little difference in the final re-
suit. We have that confidence in the as
sembled wisdom Of the Republican party,
which assures us that it's choice will be
confirmed by the people at the ballot box,
whether the nomination shall be effected
by the twenty-four votes of Virginia or the
vote Of some other State.
We have referred to the subject of the
unit vote again to show the difference be-
tween the cases presented from New
York, Pennsylvania and Illinois in 1880
and that of Virginiain 1884. The one was
a resolution of State Convention in
STRUGGLING for the unit rule, without refer
ence to the choice Of the districts and af-
ter the delegates had been appointed. The
other is resolution from each district in
structing for the unit rule, in advance of
its delegates being selected, and mag be
construed as securing district representa-
tson, in the sense that the National Con-
vention intended by its order in 1880. We
assume that the vote of Virginia will bel
cast as a unit, and that the choice of this