The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1892-03-17
Mr, Murray's Position.

MEssRs. EDITORS: In tho Peoples Id
vocdte of this week the editor criticses
reply of mine to questions from the State
as to the powers of the Convention to as
semble in March in Columbia because
said that the Convention would be "sov-
ereign." In the same card said that
"only Democrats who propose to act with
the party are INVITED to send delegates"
and that upon the acceptability OF the
platform and nominees fthis Convention
will depend the success or failure OF the
movement" The Advocatc says: "fhe
rest are not clear and in fact Mai. Muir
rays statement that "The Convention will
this Convention would be the highest
Democratic authority in the State,'' and
again "we heartily wish this language
had been less ambiguous, coming rs 1t
does from q gentleman (meaning me!
who has in the past loudly proclaimed
the necessity of party loyalty, and de-
nounced in un.neasured terms anything
that smacks OF independentism."
Lest some person may be deceived by
The insinuation of disloy ,lty to the Dem
ocratic party made in this article against
ne would only say that the article Of
Rhicn the 4 dvocdtc complains was sim
oly my opinion IF what that Convention
could do and not what it ought to do. 1t
ls called to devise a platform and suggest
nominees to restore harmony in the DEM
.>cratic party, but it may whom it meets
.efuse to 60 with the thirteen who called
t and decline to nominate, or it might
lake an entirely different course from
my suggested. 1t will, if full, he COM
posed of over three hundred delegates.
and the majority will rule. 1t has no
constitution, and hence there is no limit
On its action. Ifit takes action to which
The minority are unwilling to submit
they can withdraw, but could not change
the action of the Convention. Having
this power and being unlimited by con-
stitution it is sovereign.
Now, as to tho danger Of extreme ac-
ton I have no fear, for it will be con-
servative gathering of Democrats who de-
sire the good and unity Of the party, not
its disruption. AS to my personal views
and intentions defined them clearly and
80 distinctly that man with the least in
telligence cannot mistake ii when, as one
of the thirteen signers of the call for this
Convention over my own signature, with
the others we said, "We pledge ourselves
and those who think and act with US to
abide faithfully the decision of the State
D6uOCIdGlC SOutCaIlOlI, w ihohO s1AA"
fight for good government, the freedom
of legislation, the independence of the ju-
dietary and the liberty OF the people with
in the party lines, but to make 1t earnest
ly, courageously and persistently in
every township of every County of the
State"
Now, did not repeat this in the card
OF which the Advocate complains because
I was not speaking of myself, but giving
my opinion Of parliamentary question
as to the powers of Convention by tele-
graph which prevented any extensive
ampli6caLion.
No man can truthfully, by word or by
implication, array me in opposition to the
great Democratic party. Tho fact that the
editor of the Advocate does not under
stand my position makes very little diff
ference. 1t is not my fault that he cannot
sufficiently entertail two ideas at the same
time, to separate man personal position
in politics from his judgment Of parlia-
mentary law as governing body of men
voluntarily assembling together. AS
Judge Orr once said, II can give a man
the facts, but I cannot give him the brains
to understand them.''
E. B. MURRAY.