The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1892-02-26

worthy OF tho Nation" Chicago's promise
20 ask no more money is not worth tho
paper 1t Ia written upon. or the breath In
which It is uttered.
Each individual vote for such An appropri-
alton would be an individual breach OF trust.
and sufficient reason for condemning the
Congressman responsible for the vote to
perpetual retirement to private life. And
the plundered taxpayers will be apt to sec
that the punishment Is administered.
Democratic Candidates for the Presi-
dency.
It IL one Of the few unwritten laws OF the
Democratic party, which. everywhere &C.
knoWledged. has passed into one Of Its ira.
ditlons, that ND Democratic aspFant Is
eligible for the Presidential nomination Of
the party unless backed and sustained by
the delegation from the State where he
lives. Failure to secure this. to whatever
cause attributable. has always been deemed
fatal to the mans chances Of nomination.
The reason for this rigid and sometimes
harsh rule relates, in the first instance. to
the fact that every eligible Presidential as
plrant worthy Of Democratic support. is
supposed to be strongest where he Is best
known. that Is. at home. The fact that he
IL weak among those best able to Judge OF
his record and qualifications. Is proof enough
that when these are subjected to the scru-
tiny Of the whole country. as they must be
in protracted and hard-fought contest OF
four or i've months, this weakness will be-
come universally evident. and the results of
II disastrous to the party's prospects.
In the second place. 1t Is the usage Of
Democratic National Conventions to nomi-
nate Presidential candidate with special
reference to his ability to carry his own
State. and for that reason candidates are
usually chosen from the doubtful States.
New York and Pennsylvania have uniformly
furnished the Democracy with Presidential
candidates. with but one exception. for
thirty-six years. and the exception Of that
occasion was chosen from Illinois. which was
at the time the most closely contested State
In the West Local pride In favorite son Ia
strong element Of support. and. naturally
enough, the Presidential candidate who
cannot secure the votes Of delegates from
his own State in the Convention. is not to
be regarded as possessed Of any great
amount Of power. Indeed, 1t would not be
thought expedient to put him In nomination
against the fsvorite OF some other State.
fortunate In the possession OF a candidate
who would be sure Of Its electoral vote.
Tho record attending the consideration and
tho choice or rejection OF Democratic aspi-
rants. when sustained or objected to by tho
delegates from their own State, is not a
long one. but 1t possesses many points OF
interest.
Togo no further back than the year when
the Democracy was first confronted with
the Republican party as its opponent. in
1859. 1t was the support Of the populous.
important. and decisive State Of Pennsyl-
vania which at the Cincinnati Convention
Of June, 1855. assured the nomination OF
JAMES BUCHANAN. Mr.. BUCHANAN was Penn
sylvanis's favorite son. and he had the solid
backing Of the State. The wisdom Of his
nomination was soon proved. for the Demo-
Gratis owed their success in that national
election to their choice Of a candidate from
this doubtful State. At the previous Presi-
dental election Pennsylvania had given
Democratic majority Of 10000. but 1t had
In tho meanwhile become uncertain. BU-
cHANAN's nomination kept 1t in the Demo-
cratic column. Without its twenty-seven
electoral votes. he would have been two
0uOIU VI UAO IO4uloAtO AuoJOAIUyp ouu Vu6
election would have fallen into the House
OF Representatives.
In 1860 two rival Democratic Conventions
were held. and their respective Presidential
nominees had the support Of the delegates
from their immediate States. STEPHEN A.
DOUGLAS. who was the choice OF the first
Baltimore Convention. was from Illinois.
and JOHN G. BRECKINRIDoE, the choice OF
the second Baltimore Convention. held one
week later, came from the dark and bloody
ground OF blue grass Kentucky. Mr..
BRECKENRIDGE had carried Kentucky as a
candidate for Vice-President at the Presi-
Dental election four years previous. and
Mr.. DOUGLAS had been chosen Senator In
Illinois. Both we're favorite sons.
The National Convention of 1864 at Chi
cago was. like all Democratic Conventions
since. largely governed in Its action by the
New York State delegation. majority OF
whose members. under the unit rule. sup
ported Gen. MCCLELLAN. He was not the
unanimous choice Of the delegation, how
ever. Though resident OF New York at the
time Of his nomination for the Presidency.
he had previously resided In New Jersey,
and received Its electoral votes. carrying
that State by the handsome majority OF
7.SOl. New York went against him by 6.749
In vote OF 10000.
At the Democratic Convention OF 1868, held
In Tsmmany Hall. SANFORD Z. CHURCH was
supported by the Democratic delegation
from New York. HoRATIo SEYMOUR. the
Chairman Of the Convention and the most
popular and representative New York DEM
ocrat. having peremptorily refused the use
OF his name. The Convention met Oh July
4. It was In session until July 0. and on
the twenty-second ballot. after long con-
troversy between the supporters OF HEN
bricks. HANCOCK, CHASE. PESDLETON.
CHURCH. and ENGLISH, Mr.. SEYMOUR was
agreed to as a candidate. his nomination
being approved by the New York delega-
ton and evoking the enthusiasm OF its
members.
The Baltimore Democratic Convention OF
n To Int -