The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1888-06-21
THE COMMITTEES REPORT.
Full Text of the Decision in the Con.
tests.


Full Text of the Decision in the Con.
tests.
CHICAGO, June 20.--The following is the
report Of the committee on credentials:
The committee examined nineteen cases of
contests. In the case OF the contest from
the Third congressional district Of Georgia,
tho committee recommends that the
iouowlng named parsops be recog-
nized as delegates: r. r. Wright,
jesse Winberly, P. H. Craig,
and o. A. Gondar, to be each admitted to
seat with power to cast one-half OF one
vote.
From tho Fifth district of Louisiana,
David Young and w. ]. Yell.
. From the Third district Of South Caro-
lima, John X. Talcott and +. l.. Hx, dele
gates, and L.. C. Halsey and Henry Ken
nedy, alternates; from tho Seventh dis
from the Third district of Maryland, Will
lam +. Airey, William johnson, dole
gates; Charles r. Riehl and Isadore D.
Oliver, nlternates. From the Third district
OF Massachusetts,, Frank L. Stevens and
Jonathan Bourne, delegates; Samuel Fes-
senden and John H. Abbott, alternates.
From the District Of Columbia, Andrew
Gleason and Perry Carson as delegates.
| [Cheers1
The committee beg leave to submit the
following report Of the contested cases from
tho state OF Virginia: The committee
afforded to the parties in interest the full
est opportunity within the limits OF Il rea-
sonable time TO present their evidence, and
upon tho testimony adduced feel warranted
TO recommend to this convention that there
be admitted as delegates at large four dele
gates and alternates headed by Hon.
William Malone Lcheersl, and all the dis
trlct delegates except those of the Ninth
congressional district, known as Virginia
delegates, headed by Hon. John
s. WISE. tCheers.l The delegates al
large, in favor of whom wo report,
were chosen by the Tenth congressional
district convention OF the republican party.
The contestants against whom we report
were chosen, according to their own state
ments, by minority of that convention
who retired therefrom for reasons which.
as the committee thinks, are not within its
province to report upon or discuss. The
contests OF the district delegates In Virginia
arose from the fact that two district con-
ventions for all OF the ten congressional
districts, in each case one being held
? within and one without the territorial
limits OF their respective districts,
the question which the committee was
called upon 10 decide was, which Of the two
conventions In this district was held
in accordance with the call Of the national
convention. IL was not denied that here-
tofore in Virginia 1t had been the invarablo
custom to hold the district conventions to
nominate candidates for congress within
the territorial limits of the district The
language OF the national call is a. follows:
Congressional district delegates shall bo
chosen in the same manner as the nomina-
tion or member of congress is made in
the same district" Undoubtedly the unani-
nous acqniesconce In the selection OF these
district delegates appointed without the
districts might cure any defects of COM
pliance with the letter Of the national COM
mittee, but where, as in the case from
| Virginia, the demand has beon made and
insisted upon by any considerable number of
republican voters for the right of local self
government, and conventions have been held
within the district and delegates have been
duly chosen, the committee feels constrained
to recognize such delegates as are chosen I'm
accordance with the letter and spirit of the
national call, and TO reject the claims of the
delegates chosen by the republicans assem-
bled beyond the territorial limits Of the
district. In our decision in these
cases we have been governed by
this rule, and we feel that the good ac
complished by emphatic recognition Of the
rule and its enforcement is of much more
Importance to the republican party than is
the interest Of any particular individual,
ring or faction, and accordingly we make
the following detailed report: That the fol-
blowing named persons are duly elected
| and lawfully chosen delegates and
all the alternate delegates of Virginia at
large: Hon. William Malone loud ap-
plausel 8. Brown Allen, John q. Watts and
A. w. Harris as delegates, and w. w.
Evans, 8. b. Downing, Henry Hudnall and
T. G. Corrigan as alternates. From the
First district: o. d. Foster and
F. d. Loo as delegates; J. Trader
and J. Bristow as alternates. From the
Fourth district: Charles Gee and John NJ.
Langston as delegates Ross Hamilton and
w. H. Ash as alternates. From the Second
district: Harry Libbey and Patrick OCon-
| nor as delegates, Robert Morton and George
| l.. Prior ms alternates. From the Third
district: John $. Wise [applausel and Nor
| gan Treat az delegates, A. b. Clarkson and
Gilbert Boyd as alternates From tho
Fifth district: Winfield Scott and J. Hardin
as delegates, w. f. Simms and j. B. Wright
as alternates. From the Sixth district: d.
F. Houston and George w. jackson as dele
gates, A. NJ. Lawson and ]. s. Sampson as
alternates. From the Eighth district: ID.
| V. Hines and w. L. Brown as delegates, w.
z. Graves and w. w. Eggboon as alter
mates From the Tenth district: J. A.
Frazier and H. w. Williams as delegates,
| w. w. Williams and j. w. c. Bryant as
alternates. In the Ninth district, your
committee are of the opinion
| that there was no convention regu-
larly or lawfully called TO elect dele
| gates 10 the national convention for the
Ninth congressional district of Virginia,
and they therefore recommend this district
DO left without representation. All OF which
| is respectfully submitted and signed by the
chairman and secretary Of the COMMITTEES.
/