St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1891-06-25
THE Two-THmDs RULE

The question is again under discus
sion as to the policy of retaining the
two-thirds rule in the Democratic ma
tional conventions. The matter has
been brought in review repeatedly in
the past, and the repeal strongly urged,
but the arguments and traditions
proved successful barrier to the
change in each case. The rule has
served the purpose of an imperative
minority in several instances. 1t is not
understood that the question is now
raised with any reference to the candi-
dacy next year. There is no anticipa-
ton that its abrogation or retention will
affect the fortunes of any man before
the convention. Possibly 1t is a favor
able time to consider the question, as
being free from personal relations. 1t
should be treated from a polite view
alone, unless it is insisted that it is I'M
democratic not to allow the majority to
rule. 1t has been in operation long
enough to afford data for opinions as to
its practical value, and to indicate how
well it subserveS the purposes that
caused its adoption. 1t should be adj
hered TO or abrogated, as its effects merit.
Its strength is mainly in its long prac-
tice. In fact, it has held its place since
the first national nominating conven-
ton of the party in 1882. The conven-
ton was called to nominate candidate
for vice president chiefly, as it was the
common understanding that Gen. JACK
SON was to have a second term. No
reason appeared for the adoption of the
rule, other than the general one that
candidates nominated with q tWo-thirdS
vote would have greater strength. Four
years later it was adhered to simply ba-
cause the precedent was that way. So
at all succeeding conventions it has
been acrepted as the legacy of the
fathers of the party. 1t did not
have any effect in 1886, as VAN buren,
was nominated on the first ballot. Four
years later he had the convention by
acclamation, but the popular voice was
not rendered quite in that way The
first convention in which the two-thirds
rule cut any figure was in 1914. The
popular candidates were VAN buren,,
CAss and BUCHANAN; but two-thirds
could not be had for either, and a man
PoLK-not before thought of was given
the entire vote finally. On only two
other occasions has the enforcement of
the rule had any material effect upon
the result. In 1852 the aspirants we're
MARCY, CAss, DOUGLAS and b.
CHANAN. The rule prevented the sue
cess of either, and on the sixth ballot
gave the party PIERCE. Possibly he
might have been given a second
term but for the two-thirds rule,
as BUCHANAN WAS not nominated
in 1856 until the seventeenth ballot, but
it was not regarded as having important
effect. In 1850 DOUGLAS had a ma
jorlty. but the minority seeded and
nominated BRECKENRIDGE. The party
was defeated. The result might have
been the same without the rule. but
DOUGLAS would have had the prestige
of regular nomination by the undi-
vided convention. In 1864 MCCLELLAN
was nominated on the first ballot but in
1868 it is probable that SALMON p.
CHASE might have been the nominee
but for the two-thirdS rule. SEYMOUR
was named on the twenty-thlrd ballot.
AT no later convention has it affected
the selection. Out of the fifteen ma
tional conventions, but six can be re-
garded as affected at all in the nomina-
tons for president by this rule. In three
OF these cases the candidates indebted