Macon beacon. [volume] (Macon, Miss.) 1859-1995, 1889-08-03

creating. Tlr'jr iariiam ntarY la"
declarations are HoI arrcplsl ~ rrila
ble aulnu"ir! and jt, If references art
WORSE.
would Ike Ia $50 The nv nG cor
r respondents signed IA their piece
when the, write tor The pvrss. IL TIER,
are some Republicans in NoNubcr thai
would like 10 divide the Democratic
party. II. VI HUNTER
MR. EpIIuR:-W We have rctrainct
from expressing an opinion in rrlrr.
cnre TO the late su-ralird County Cen
Vcntiun Tor the simple r"aSun that ",
felt assured, when the public mind had
recovered from the excitement OF thu
moment, that the party Woull visit 4
stern and emphatic rcbukc upon il,
actions. We did not suppose that
there was an Intelligent democrat in
the county who believed in the vaIidi.
" oi lis actions But rs Fox Trap
in your last issue seems not oHl, io be-
licvc but to endorse il. we feel il our
duty To take up the subject, and will
handle il without gloves. We shall
deal rnly with facts and their natural
and necessary consequences. When
we consider the record OF omc of
those, both in and out OF the conrcn.
ton who were Instrumental in inilu.
encing its action. we are forced to The
conclusion that their object was 10 dis
rupt and disbunl the Democratic par
ty of NoXubee County. Among those
interested in the proceeding OF July II,
we find those who have been indcpen.
dent candidates others who took ne.
tive steps to defeat the democratic
party in the past. and one who has
been charged with having been the
Secretary of the Union League"
With this record it is no wonder thai
the Democratic party of Noxubee
County rrpndiates the action of the
so-callcd convention.
Now, Mr.. Editor, let us inquire as to
The validity of its actions; admitting
the gcnuincncss of their democracy.
In the first place, how and by what
authority was the primary system cs-
tablished. After free discussion thru'
the public press, a plan was iormulai-
ed by some of our leading citizens and
the executive committee and submit
ted TO the several clubs tor ratification.
Tho clubs, acting separately and for
themselves, did. in 1883. adopt the sys-
TEN which has been in use since then.
There vas but one or two clubs that
preferred The old style convention sys-
tenn, These two we believe. were
Summrrvillc and Lynn Creek, The
authority by which the primary sys-
TEN was established was the pcopc
and there is no higher authority and
there is no law in politics bv which
the plan can be changed or modified,
except that which created it. The
people of t c county instituted this
method, and the people alone have
the power to change it. Admitting
that the Executive Com. in their call
for the primary contemplated the pos
sible necessity tor an O. +. g., yet they
possessed no authority whatever to or
der one. Therefore the twcniy-seyen
delegates who tried to convert the pri-
mary convention into o. +. &. had no
more authority to do il than any 9th.
cr twcnty-scVCn citizens of the co,ln
~. Under the established rule GOV
crnlng, when such was the nominal.
ing power, it required Il two third vote
to make Il nomination. This was the
established rule and must obtain until
regularly changed. In the last conycn
ton of this character held in this corn.
~ in 1881. n motion was made, we be.
licve by Mr.. Lewis. to the effect that Il
majority vote should nominate, So
Objectionable was this plan to the ION
v%cn'ion, that the motion did not re
ceivc a second consequently, under
parliamentary rules, could not be sub.
mlltcd to the convention. The TWEEN
~tv-scycn delegates however. on the Il
nit, proceeded to nominate candidates
tor sheriff and representatives without
so much AS proposing TO change the
established rule. So that it will be
seen from this that Messrs, MURRAY
and ONeill are not the nominees OF
the democratic party.
The cause of the trouble in the par.
t. now is, because me look at it
merely as a personal issue, as between
Murray and Dorroh and O'Neill and
Rives. But this is not the question
and should MOI be regarded in this
light. The question is simply one of
party organization on one side and its
disruption on The other.
We do not believe that TIE intclli.
gcncc and manhood Of the democracy
of this county will submit to such die
tation. 10 borrow an expression from
thc last BEACoN--"The act was arbi-
trary and revolutionary and dislruc.
tive of the spirit of harmony and mu.
tual confidence"
Unfortunately for all parties, too
many men attach themselves to them
for no other purpose than to secure
the loavcs and fishes. The only dis.
linction they recognize is the party in
power, and whenever the party refus.
rs 10 consider favorably their claims,
they arc ready TO burst it up and re-
pudiate it. They imagine they possess
superior ability and superior claims
upon the the party. Whenever the
decline, through the regular
channel, TO acknowledge their claims,
they at once dcnounce the people as a
set OF fools. and the party as corrup,
and ungratcful, and conceive their
highest dnty to be 10 disband il.
Let us take tho history of the Dem.
ocratic party since 1875, In 1877 there
was no opposition in the democratic
ranks to the regular ticket. In 1879
the convention being unable to nomi-
nate all the candidates who were aspi.
rants, opposition arose and an effort
was made TO defeat a part, if moi the
whole of the ticket. aud that, too, by
self called democrats.
In 1881, the convention. refusing TO
admit certain delegates from Prairie
and at the same time failing TO
nominate certain candidates who were
before them, n regular mOngrcl ticket
was the consequence, composed of dis.
democrats, defeated candi.
dates, republicans and negroes. In
1888, the ticket, with the exception of
Sheriff, was nominated by the people,
consequently there was no discussion
pcrccptiblc in the party. Mr.. Brewer,
not satisfied with the result
of of 1881, announced himself tho in
dependent democratic candidate for