The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-02-21

Congressman Bailey, of Texas, has
written a letter protesting against what
he terms 1.-The gross injustice of the rule
under which delegates to the national
Democratic convention have heretofore
been elected" The rule referred to is
the one by which Zach State is entitled
to twice as many delegates in a national
convention as it has Representatives and
Senators in Congress, without regard TO
their political complexion or the vote
cast by the State. Under this rule Mr..
Bailey points out that the State of
Massachusetts. which is not expected to
cast an electoral vote for the Democratic
nominees. has the same voice in naming
the candidates as the State of Texas,
which gives an overwhelming Demo-
cratic majority. Again, under this rule
the State of Pennsylvania, which has
not given an electoral vote to a Demo-
cratic candidate for President in thirty
years past. and probably will not for
thirty years to come. has more W in
naming the candidate than the States Of
Georgia, Mississippi and Arkansas COM
bined, without whose electoral votes
Democratic success would be hopeless.
Mr.. Bailey protests against this state
of things as unjust to the South. On
mature reflection and study of election
returns he has concluded that the real
strength of the Democratic party lies in
the Southern States. and that the nomi-
mating power of national conventions
ought to be apportioned accordingly. He
thinks the present system, unjust under
any circumstances. is peculiarly so in the
present distracted condition of the DEM
ocratic party. On this point he says:
SO long as the nomination of a candidate
for the presidency was largely a matter
of personal preference among men enter
tanning the same views and advocating the
same policies. the present system was not
particularly Objectionable. Bus now, that
serious differences OF opinion have arisen
In our party, Ii becomes the plain duty of
those charged with preserving it's organiza-
tiCn to adopt a rule which will moi permit
Democratic candidates to be nominated by
constituencies which will not aid in their
election, while they must be elected by
constituencies which have opposed their
nomination.
This lets the cat out of the bag. Mr..
Bailey could stand the injustice of hav-
ing the Democrats of Northern States
nominate candidates for those of South
ern States to elect as long as there was
harmony in the party. but now that it is
split wide open on the silver question he
wants the Southern States to claim their
rights in the national convention in or
der that they may prevent the nomina-
ton of honest money candidates for
President and Vice President. In lieu of
the present plan he propose that in APP
portioning delegates TO the national con-
vention each State shall be allowed two
delegates for each elector to which it
may be entitled in the Electoral College,
and one additional delegate for each
presidential elector chosen at the preced-
ing presidential election. This would
double the delegations of every Southern
State without increasing those of North
ern States. In effect IL would contribute
materially to the political strength of
the solid South. 1t is a very pretty plan
to prevent the sound-money wing of the
Democratic party from nominating can
didates for the populistic free-silver wing
to elect.