Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-08-24
Observation-Disclosures %, 1886.
The Two-Thirds Rule.

tits known to our readers that in con"
sequence ofthe adoption Of the two-thirds
rule the Convention which recently as
sembled in Ale1sndris to nominate can
didats for Congress in the Eighth dis
trict was compelled to adjourn, or, at
any rate, did adjourn, without making
. nomination. II adjourned over to the
25th instant. This failure to nominate
has called forth from the Warrenton
True Inder an article against
the two-thirds rule. We do not
desire to interfere in any manner
Whatever with the proceedings Of the
future Congressional Convention for
the Eighth district, nor to oe understood
as having now, or having had at the
time the Convention was in session, a
favorite amongst the distinguished gen.
tlemen whose names were brought be-
fore that body; but merely to say q
word or two on the general subject Of
the policy Of adopting such a rule in
such conventions.
Democratic National Conventions
have for more than forty years worked
under the two-thirds rule in making
nominations for President and Vice.
President. The reason OF the rule was
the fact that the South, minority Sec
tion, was also slave-holding section,
and Unable 10 protect herself from the
nomination of candidates indifferent or
even hostile to her peculiar institution.
We had never heard any other good
reason advanced for the adoption of the
rule until after slavery had been abol-
ished, and the reason above named had
ceased to be a reason at all. But in
1876, ut st. Louis, it was urged by
some at least of the friends Of Mr.. TIL
DEN's nomination that his claims ought
not under the circumstances to be sub
jected to the test Of the two-thirds
rule, since there was no longer any per-
sons needing protection for their slave
property. Csssante rotione, cessatipsa
ct Ter, was their plea. On the other
hand, it was argued that inAsmuch as
representation in the Convention was
based, not upon the number of Demo-
cratic votes in the several States, but
upon population, Vermont having as
much weight as West Virginia, though
the former never voted the Democratic
ticket and the latter always did-in
other words, States hopelessly Republic
can having in many instances much
greater strength in the Convention than
other States reliably Democratic, as
Pennsylvania and Virginia, for exam.
ples,-the two-thirds rule was needed
TO prevent the Republican States from
making nominations for President and
Vice President that would not be accept
able to the Democratic States.
Whatever may have been the reasons
inducing the action Of the st. Louis
Convention, the two-thirds rule was OBJ
served by it. But that Convention also
adopted q resolution calling upon the
Democratic State Conventions Of 1880
to express their opinions as to the poll
cy Of doing away with the two-thirds
rule. This resolution came to naught.
And so in 1880 and 1884 the two-thirds
rule was still enforced. 1t stands as
part Of the unwritten law Of the DEM
ocratic party. No opposition national
Convention has ever adopted it, we be-
Iieve.
1t would seem, therefore, that there
may be reasons why the two-thirds rule
should be adopted in any district con-
ysntion made up Of delegates as well
from counties hopelessly Republican as
from counties reliably Democratic. In
the Eighth district, however, the Con-
gressional Convention is based upon the
Democratic vote, aud there are but four
counties which did not give Mr.. BAR
-FOUR Q majority in lsS4--to wit,
Louisa, Alexandra county, Stafford,
and King George. His majority in the
district was over three thousand. IL
would seem that there is no district in
the State which has less reason for re-
sorting to the two-thirds rule. AS to
this, however, the Convention itself Is
the sole judge.