The San Francisco call., 1896-04-24
THE DELEGATES
TO ST. LOUIS.
Should Go to the National
Convention I'm
pledged.
REPUBLICANS OPINIONS.
Instructed Delegations Have No
Influence in Party
Councils.
THE PRINCIPLE IS WRONG.
Sentiments Distinctly Expressed by
Many Leading Republicans of
California.
THE PRINCIPLE IS WRONG.

The sentiment among leading Repu5li-
cans of California, so far as it can be
ascertained by impartial interviews, is
largely in favor OF sending an unpledged
delegation TO the National Convention at
st. Louis.
William H. Crocker had definite views
on the subject of pledging delegations. He
said: Il am against the principle of in
strucuing delegates how to vote. Our dele
gates TO the st. Louis National Convention
should be permitted to form judgment
of what should be done after they get
there and look over the field. Events may
occur and conditions change materially
between the time that our State Conven-
ton meets at Sacramento and the assem-
bling of the National Convention in June.
1t is my opinion that the delegates should
be left free to take advantage of any
opportunity presented whereby they can
benefit the State. A delegation bound
and hampered with a pledge to support
only one candidate cannot command in
f1uence. 1t is practically divested of
power at the outset"
+. S. Chadbourne, whose political sa-
gacity is scarcely questioned, said: This
thing of pledging the delegates Is non-
sense. 1t is all well enough for our infalli-
bic and know-it-all takers here in Califor-
mia to shout that there is only one candi-
date for President IN the field aud that if
the California delegates are not pledged
TO swing their votes for that man that ali
chance of State recognition by the next
administration will be gone, but the talk
iC mo fTrrT, vl,or, %koo
ventlon meets at st. Louis that there are
other candidates. Assuming that Califor-
mia is pledged to vote for Mckinley, what
then. Why our delegates are not considered
not noticed. Other delegates say, Cal
fornla delegates are tied up; no use wasting
any time or giving anything in that direc-
ton. They can't change if they want to,
so if recognition is to be offered let us give
1t elsewhere and derive some good out OF
it. What if there should be break from
Mckinley to some other candidate despite
the predictions of our local lights who now
have the whole proceedings of the conven-
ton so cleverly mapped out, wouldn't our
pledged delegation be IN a fix? Tie up
our delegates for Mckinley and tip our
hand before we go to st. Louis and we get
nothing from Mckinley because he has
our delegates already pledged. If some
other candidate succeeds we cannot get
in line with the successful combination
because we are tied up with pledges to
Mckinley. The delegation ought not to
be pledged. Nothing can be gained by
instructions and very much may be lost.
We don't know it all out here in Califor-
MA"
Arthur F. Price said: 81 am in favor of
sending TO st. Louis an intelligent delega-
ton of unpledged men and of trusting to
their intelligence and patriotism. No one
can foretell what changes may take place
in public opinion throughout the country
before the convention meets at st. Louis -
Charles d. Haven said II do not take
an active absorbing interest in all political
questions, but on this question of pledging
delegations 1 am firmly convinced that
our delegates to the st. Louis convention
should not be instructed. We should send
men TO the convention who are capable of
forming sound judgment after taking in
the situation"
ID. ]. Staples, who was delegate to the
National Republican Convention at Chi
cago which nominated Mr.. Lincoln for the
fresloencv, ana VINO presented to that
convention Fremont's letter declining to
be candidate, was interviewed.
He said: 81 am heartily in favor of an
uninstructeG delegation. No one can tell
now what will happen in st. LOUIS, but on
principle l am opposed now as I was in
1860 to hampering a delegation with
pledges. Then there was a strong feeling
in the California State Convention that
the vote OF California should be cast for
Mr.. Seward. So many leading men of the
party refused to acknowledge that there
was any other available candidate that the
delegation was about to be instructed fcr
Seward. / opposed the instruction and
indicated that l would not consent to 90 il
pledged in advance to a course which
might not be found advisable when the
representatives of the great party as
sembled in convention. The delegation
went unpledged, but in Difference to home
sentiment the delegates who in their
hearts had recognized Mr.. Lincoln as the
winner and the right man for the place
did cast their first ballots for Mr.. Seward
The principle of pledging a delegation is