The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1892-06-19
THE DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION.

The prospect At Chicago is rendered even
more obscure than the rivalry Of the candi-
dates makes 1t by the rules under which
Democratic conventions act At a Repub-
lican national convention a bare majority
sufices tc nominate. and each delegate votes
as he pleases, without regard TO his fellow
delegates from his own State. Democratic
conventions are bound both by the two
thirds rule and the unit rule. in 1850 an
attempt was made BIZ Mr.. Conkling in the
interest Of General Grant to introduce the
unit rule into the Republican convention.
II had the support Of State action in several
States; but il failed. The convention voting
that State conventions could not bind their
delegates to vote as a unit. On the other
hand. al the Democratic convention held at
Chicago in 1854, the unit rule was insisted
upon 20 spite Of the opposition Of Iammany.
On preliminary motion the chairman OF
tie New York delegation, Daniel Manning,
announced the vote Of New York as =
noes. ~ wheTeupOn a T mmany delegate rose
20 correct him, stating that the vote was
" q noes. 70 ayes and absent" but the
convention held that New York's vote must
be recorded as a unit The effect Was 10
nullify Tammauy's opposition 10 Cleveland.
It Is always in the power Of each conYeu-
ton TO make its own rules, and both the
tWO-tlrds rule and the unit rule may be
abolished by the body which meets on
Tuesday But this is not likely. Party
traditions are not easily brushed out Of the
way. Ii is probable that both rules viii be
retained, and while the tWo-thirds rule viii
tell against Cleveland, as the delegations
from sure Republican States will probably
be against him, the unit rule will in some
cases operate in his favor.
The two-thirds rule cost the United States
the service Of one Of the ablest men who
ever sat in the White House, and imposed
upon tie country in his place parsonage
who does not Ill high rank In history. In
May, 1914, Martin Van Buren, was the
choice O a majority Of the members Of the
Democratic convention al Baltimore, bat be
had written a letter which alienated those
persons who were in favor Of the annexa-
ton OF Texas. 1t became apparent that he
could not obtain 8 tw0-thiTds vote, and
dark hoTse-P0lk Of Tennessee obtained
the nomination. History may repeat itself.
II several ballots show that Cleveland
cannot get tWC-thiTds vote the convention
may fail back on a dark horse whose
strength viii be 10 inverse ratio to his fame.
The situation will remind politicians Of
the convention Of June. 1880, at CincIn-
natl. Under the management of Mr.
Tiiden an anti Tammany delegation had
been elected to the convention from New
York Tammany had elected rival dele
cation, which presented Its claims to the
committee On credentials. They were re-
lected, and Tammany was left out at the
present time the parts are reversed.
Through his snap convention held in Feb
Tuary, three months before the usual time,
Hill succeeded in getting an anti Cleveland
delegation chosen from New York Grace
and the other Cleveland leaders countered
this by holding another convention, which
chose a contestng delegation. These two
delegations will now submit their claims to
the committee on credentials, and the
decision Of that body will indicate the
temper Of the convention. II the delegates
Of the snap convention are admitted and
Grace's delegates rejected, Cleveland will
have an uphill task to secure the nomina-
ton. If on the other hand, the Tammany
delegates should be excluded, as they were
IN 1880, partly through the odium which
attaches 10 Iammany all over the country,
the opposition of Senator Hill will be
minmiZed.