Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1886-09-02
TIE STATE DEMOCRACY.
THE BATTLE OF THE CREDEN-
TIALs-PRINCIPLE WINS.
Nominations for Supreme Justices
Temple and Sullivan Chosen
-SpeculatiOns.

SAN FRANCISCO, September l, 1886.
l mentioned in yesterdays recital of the
scenes in and about the Democratic State
Convention, that the contesting delegations
from Sacramento scattered broadcast
through the Convention hall printed ap-
peals to the delegates. Since the second
great opening fight of the Convention was
over the admission OF the Sacramento dele
gates, for the information of readers of the
RECORD UNION pretty nearly full tran
scripts of these rival circulars include in
this report.
BOTH SIDES OF THE CASE.
Each circular recounted the proceed
ings of committee meetings prior TO
and including the one at which the big
ten - named delegates to the State Conven-
ton and from which the little six"
bolted, and set up housekeeping for
themselves. Both circulars set forth a
declaration of principles, basing their
action thereon, which they claimed were
! those of the purest Democracy and those
advocated by such Democrats as Jefferson
and Jackson. The big ten in their
statement say:
On the DIST OF August the committee again
met, being fully represented By sixteen mem
! beIs-the entire committee The committeeman
| from the country there represented that they
| had since the last meeting consulted with their
| constituents and they were opposed TO two Con-
| yeutions that they were busy now, and that
| they would have ample leisure in September TO
| attend the County Convention for nomination of
| county officers, ana advised their committeeman
TO elect delegates direct to the State Convention.
That that was the wish OF a majority of the
| prominent Democrats there was no doubt from
q general interchange of opinions uDon the
| subject.
The committee acting under the call of the
| Democratic state Central Committee suthoriZ-
| ing County Committees TO appoint delegates, by
a vote of 10 to resolved to elect the delegates
to the State Convention, and did so, selecting
fourteen OF the representative Democrats of the
county.
After the committee adjourned, the six Mem
bers who voted against the proposition pro-
ceeded on their own hook, to call a County
! Convention, not only for the purpose of select
| ing delegates to the State Convention, but for
nominating county ticket and selecting Cen
| trail Committee
These six, on the sd of August, called a
| primary for the 2ith of August and held this
| Convention the next day. And on Thursday,
the 18th, their leading spirits departed for san
Francisco to lobby for their delegates.
If they were actuated in a spirit of fairness,
| why this indecent Taste? II they were moved
from exalted and patriotic motives. why not
| have given the people IN the country chance
| to consider whether they wanted to act with
| them or not? Why not have held their pri-
/ mary two or three days later than this Conven-
| ton? They had a full week to act in. The rea-
son is apparent that the clique who backs the
| minority, and who directs their actions, were
afraid to trust their cause to even primary, for
! which they boast so much love and devotion.
| They were afraid they might not be able to Sc
| cure what they wished, and which they could
not accomplish in the County Committee, and,
| above ALL that they would lose three days
valuable time in San Francisco to get in their
work.
The result was that in their primary there
were not $50 votes polled in the entire county
that three-tourths of the county was not repre-
scented in their so-called Convention, and large
lumber of gentlemen who were chosen dele
gates in the city refused TO attend and while
their call provided for 156 delegates, far below
one-halt of that number were in attendance.
The gentlemen who were selected by the com
mittee are in the interest of no candidate or set
of candidates, nor are they welded to any
measure, but were appointed solely with the
| view that they might best represent the inter
ests of the Democracy in your assembly.
The little six presented long brief,
ringing in sll the tunes " in Democratic
decisions from the earliest days down to
and including those of the Stockton Con-
vention. They said in the document:
The Convention that elected the County Cen
trail Committee, in Sacramento City August 80,
! 1881, upon the motion of Dr. w. >. Manlove,
passed u resolution instructing and directing
the County Central Committee then elected to
call primary elections. under Inc primary
election laws of this State, for the election of
| delegates to all Conventions. said resolution is
in language as follows:
''RegoyrSd That the County Central Commit
tee elected by this Convention is instructed and
! directed theJ whenever it calls County Con-
! YentiOa for any purpose, IL must appoTtlon the
| representation to such Convention by giving TO
| each precinct a number of delegates in pro-
portion to the vote cast in such precinct for the
! Democratic nominee for President, and that
said delegates shall be elected by primaries, to
FrffsF ggn nea n Low
of this State providing for primary elections"
Sand resolution was directed to be, and was.
upon the motion of Matt +. Johnson, spread at
| large upon the minutes OF the first meeting OF
said Central Committee, and Immediately upon
lis organization, and now remains upon the
minutes OF said Central Committee.
After stating the fact of the filing of va
cancy caused by death, and another caused
By resignation the document reads:
The committee then called a County Conven-
ton TO nominate a county ticket, etc. for Sep
TENDER Is, 1856, and adjourned to meet August
p, 1896
August 81, 1885, the committee met, all the
| members present
that the object was TO select fourteen delegates
10 the State Convention 10 represent Sacramento
county.
Convention to select delegates TO the state Con-
vention be chosen by primaries.
1t was decided as follows Ayes-Thompso1:,
Beveridge, Meyers, Touhey, Black. Payne.
Noes - Mclaughlin, Johnson, Nash, Rooney,
| Knott. Manlove, Bates, Broder, Ross, Short-l0.
Mr.. Short moved that the committee proceed
to elect delegates to the state Convention direct.
On roll Gail, it passed as follows Ayes-Mc-
! Laughlin. johnson, Nash. Rooney, Knott, Man.
love, Bates Broder, Ross, Short-l0. Noes
Thompson, Beverage, Meyers, Iouhey, Black,
| Payne-6.
Fourteen delegates were then named by the
the ten members of the affirmative on the last
above-named motion, against the earnest protest
of the six remaining members OF the committee.
In the discussion of the question as to appoint
ing delegates to the State Convention, the mi
nOrity members of the committee called the
attention of the majority to that plank in the
platform of the Stockton Convention that reads
as follows: That we condemn the practice of
election by County Central Committees of dele
gates to Conventions as contrary to the princi-
pies of Democracy"
We further called the attention and consider
alton of a majority of the committee 10 the res
olution and instruction of the County Conven-
ton convened at sacramento, August 80, 1881, IN
struct1ng and directing this committee 20 call
prim aries for all Conventions; to the fact that
the present Chairman of this Central Committee
was the author of that resolution; to the fact
that Mr.. Johnson. now actively opposing it, was
commissioned and did present that resolution to
this committee Immediately upon its crganiza-
ton, aud mad the same sp. cad at large upon the
minutes OF this committee, where it now to-day
confronts US and admoui, hes US of our trust in
this matter. That the action taken is an usuT-
patton Of power, denying fright reserved by
express resolution to the people. 1hat the pso-
pie contemplating this action in convention as
selnbled, inhibited us from exercising this pow
err and bound us by not only moral obligations,
but express contract, that we should no. deprive
them OF this right. In addition to the protest
and absolute unconditional refusal OF the SIX
committeeman voting in the Negative on said
motion to have any participation in selecting
said delegates to the State Convention, 4. e..
Blessing, u member of the State Central Com
mittee. appeared before the committee and earn
estly protested against this act i'll this matter.
and called their at ention 10 the platform of the
Stockton Convention bearing on this subject.
and further called their attention to the TesOlu-
bled in Sacramento, August 50, 1854, and whose
creature they are, and protested most earnestly
against the election of delegates to the State
Convention by the committee. That it was IN
democratic and wrong in principe independent
of the express instructions of their creator and
the law of the party, as made b. the people as
selnbled in convention. That he hoped for the
sake OF harmony. for the maintenance of party
law, and in recognition of the right of the rank
and file of the party to have a voice in its pro-
ceedingS and council, that the committee would
not defy its instructions, and engender and per
haps necessitate disSension, and force the peo-
pie TO rebuke them.
These, with other earnest appeals and protests
against their proceedings, were OF no avail, and
delegates were appointed by the ten, as already
stated.
We remained in session after the adjournment
Of the committee; elected a Chairman and pro-
ceeded to consider the situation, ana by our ad-
vice and support our Secretary, David r. Bever-
! idpe refused 10 become party to the proceed