Birmingham age-herald., 1894-08-12

and expressing their will, the representa- tion in party conventions was fixed on the basis of population, and that apportion- | ment gave Bibb county delegates, Blount | r Hale 9, Perry 10 and Jefferson 30, and | this representation has ever since been rec 1 ognized and respected as just and equita- l ble, when the party had beeu called upon l to send delegates to conventions until, by | the action of the executive committee of 1 the Ninth Congressional district, composed l of ten members, party law promulgated by l the state convention, the highest party au- 1 thority, is overruied and the will of the people overTidden.
 The population basis of representation was offered in the state convention of 1892 | by one of the great party leaders, General
 Holtzclaw, from Montsomery, and
 the people's rights, General Pettus of Dallas and Ex- Governor Seay of Hale. It
 was unanimou usy adopted by the conven-
 tion as affording the only fair, equitable | aud uniform basis possible, and as best l adapted to securing harmony and fair deal-
 ing in party conventions. It has yet to be l learned that any congressional committee, l or party authOrity, or any set of men, | other than eight of the ten members ot the
 executive committee Of the Ninth Congress | sional district, have found unfairnesS in,
 or raised objection to the population basis
 Of representation--the will of the people l expressed in state convention, the highest l party authority, in 1892.
 l Let all fair minded men ask by what | standard of jurticn or measure of equity | Jefferson county's representation in the
 councils of the party has been reduced from l 30 to 20.
 In the gubernatorial election of 1892, the l counties composing the Ninth congress
 sional district cast F .065 democratic votes
 as follows Blob 1006, Blount 1853, Hale | 2727, Perry 1852, Jefferson 8727.
 l Thus it appears that Jefferson cast 1n l that election 3S9 more democratic votes
 than all the other counties in the district, | and upon the basis of that vote, at ratio | of 200 votes to the delegate, Jefferson would
 be entitled to Al delegates, and all the l other counties of the district to but AZ.
 In the face of these figures let every l democratic voter of the district ask him. | self whnt democratic principle justites or 1 in any measure sustains the committee in | it's attempt to reduce the representation of
 Jefferson county from thirty to twenty. In the presidential election of 1892 the 1 counties of the Ninth Congressional district
 cast for MT. Cleveland 19, 953 votes, as fol-
 lows: Bibb 1152, Bount 1944, Hale 1850,
 Perry 3452, Jefferson 10, ,055.
 In that election a vote for Cleveland was | and has ever since been test of democ- 1 racy, and Jefferson cast 157 more votes for
 Cleveland for president than all the other
 counties of the district together. On the
 basis of that vote and at a ratio of 200 votes
 to the delegate, Jefferson would be justly
 delegates to 49 for all the other counties in | the district.
 l Iu the presence of this magnificent rec- l ord no democrat can deny that the at | tempted reduction of Jefferson county's 1 representation from 30 to 20 is, to say the | least, gross injustice and perversion of l democratic policy and principles.
 In the last gubernatorial election, Au-
 gust 6, 1891, the democratic vote, as nearly
 as can be ascertained, is as follows: Blob | 800 Blount 1900, Hale 5000, Perry 1900, l Jefferson 4655.
 On ratio of 200 votes to the delegate
 Blob would be entitled in any party con l vention 10 4, Bount to 8, Hale to 10, Perry l to aud Jefferson to 23 delegates. In that
 case Jefferson, with any other county, ex- 1 cept Bibb, in the. district would have
 majority and could control its action. The injustice of reducing Jefferson's rep | resentation from 30 to 20 on the basis of | their vote is 80 manifest that no candid 1 man will deny it.
 The committed, acting without any basis and upon no principle, had as much right
 and authority to reduce Jefferson S repre- l sentaton from 30 to 10, or or l. or-to deny l 1t any representation at all, as to reduce 1t | from 30 to 20. AS matter of principle the
 injustice would have been no greater. The bald, disreputable fact remains that | the executive committee, elected to repre- 1 seat the democratic party, and whose duty l it is to do so, in arbitrarily and despotically l fixing the representation, acted exclusively | and with more than partisan zeal in the in- l teresL of l.. w. Turpin, who is a candidate l for the nomination for congress, and who was in frequent private conference with l members of the executive committee, and, | as we believe, was the main factor in con- | cocting the scheme. They had no basis
 for the representation fixed, acted upon no l right principle of justice or politics, and
 for their conduct, which is intended to 1 work gross injustice, not to say outrage, l upon the democrats of Jefferson county
 they can give no satisfactory reason. Why then this action of the committee? f The fact is, that after an industrious can- l vass of the district for several weeks MT. l Turpin realizes that the people are unwill- l ing to endorse him for another term in | congress, and that before them he is irre-
 trievably defeated; that before conven- l tion of the party, composed of delegates
 elected upon the basis of population, or
 any other fair basis, his aspiration for a l third term in congress is doomed to dire
 disaster; that if fair basis prevails, by l every calculation and manipulation he can l possibly make, his cause is lost.
 What then is left for him and his ad- l herents to do? Only to get control of the l party machinery and work it so as to thwart the will of the people and secure his | nominatan. This could be done only by | forcing an arbitrary representation upon
 any other single county could not
 make the nomination. To this end 1t Is l evident the executive comlnitte were willing
 10 serve MT. Turpin, and did serve him as l far as possible.
 The explanation of the committees action
 is found in the fact that it was elected by 1 the convention that nominated MT. Fur l pin two years ago, and Is naturally favora- 1 ble to his renomination; also, in the fact | that of a majority of it's members some are
 the warm personal friends of MT. Turpin- l one of them being his bfother, while at
 least two of the others have been recipi- l ents, directly or indirectly of federal ap- | pointments at his hands; end are therefore