The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1898-09-11

crnor, and when Mcguire was chosen
the faction he represented, having all
| along stood for no fusion, withdrew.
He did not, he said base his argument
solely upon the fact that Mcguire was
nominated, but also upon the fact that
the convention had no power to APP
| point committees to do something
which the convention itself had no
power to do. He held the convention
had no power to appoint committees to
confer with other parties with view
| to making arrangements for placing a
fusion ticket in the field.
Mr.. Gator cited authorities, and read
from a recent holding of Supreme Just
ice Garroute touching upon the point
| in question, and in which the ticket
was a combination of two other po-
| litical parties, and consequently did not
represent the party it was designed to
represent.
Mr.. Gator again reverted to the call
for the convention, which specifically
| stated that there should be no fusion
except under one common platform,
and he held that the instant the con-
vention failed to carry out the instruc-
tons of the party contained in the call
as issued by the State Central Commit
! tee it ceased to be a convention.
The speaker contended that, as the
fusionists had abandoned the party
trust, and accordingly ceased to be a
convention, the middle-of- the-roadsters
had an undoubted right to organize
and hold a convention under the call.
He cited a Michigan decision, which,
he held, bore directly on the case in
hand and left no doubt about the right
to do as they had done. He contended
that the call issued by the Central
Committee limited the action of the
convention and made the delegates
merely the agents of the people who
elected them, to carry out the instruc-
tions contained in the call.
Judge Van Meter stated that two
thirds Of the delegates to the conven-
| ton were instructed by their county
conventions to fuse, and that the dele
gates so instructed We're the agents of
the people they represented, direct, and
We're not the agents of the call issued
by the State Central Committee.
Seth Mann, Chairman of the Demo-
cratic State Central Committee, held
| that under Gators construction the
State Central Committee, which was
| tilG Creature Vi d COHNGHtlOn, LdO lIlOI 7
power than the convention which Gre
ated it.
Mr.. Gator said there was nothing to
prove that a majority of the delegates
| to the convention We're instructed by
their respective county conventions.
| Judge Bridgeford and Judge Van Me-
ter said such evidence could be easily
collected.
Mr.. Gator contended that even if
such evidence could be found the fact
remained that the convention was held
under the call, and that it would hold
in any court in the land.
Judge E. A. Bridgeford, in opposing
the protest lodged by Mr.. Gator, dealt
almost entirely upon the statutes de-
filming the power of conventions and the
law governing the nomination of can
| didates by such conventions. He
claimed that at the Populist Conven-
ton two candidates were placed in
| nomination for Governor, James CT.
| Mcguire and 7. A. w. Shanahan. No
protest was made at the time against
the nomination Of Mcguire, and the
middle f-the-road faction stayed in
with the understanding that if Shana-
han was nominated they would go
ahead, but if Mcguire was nominated
they would withdraw.
Judge Bridgeford read the statute of
the code, which provides that no dele
| gate who has taken part in one con-
vention shall act as a delegate to an
| other convention. He contended that
the middle-of-the-road wing of the
party had taken part in the convention
which nominated Mcguire, and had
voted against his nomination without
protest, and that under the law gov
erning the case they were debarred
from participating in any other con-
| vention.
Judge Bridgeford contended that in
| a legal sense no trust was involved.
The convention itself was supreme, and
could, if it so desired, wreck any party.
Delegates We're responsible only to
| their constituents, and if delegate did
not follow instructions he had merely
violated his trust to his constituents,
and was answerable to them alone, but
that his action did not defeat the ulti-
mate act of the convention.
Mr.. Mann interjected that the middle
of-the-road Populists had no standing
before the Secretary of State, and that
the only thing the latter had to do was
to determine whether or not the
original convention was properly or
gained and had proceeded legally in
nominating it's candidates.
Secretary Brown said that so far as
authority was concerned he had no
| right even to hear arguments in the
case. He said, however, that he was
| willing to accept Judge Garroute' S
! opinion that a convention is the trustee
OF the party it represents.
Mr.. Van Meter said Judge Gar
routes party would not be very proud
of the opinion, and that it was the poor
est written legal document he ever saw.
Judge Bridgeford said it was hardly
in good taste to criticise Justice Gar
routes abilities.
Secretary Brown said he had the
| highest opinion of Justice Garroute's
ability as a jurist. and was willing to
put his faith in the opinion.
S. S. Van Meter said the two certifi-
Gates presented for filing were the re-
suit of two conventions, one regularly
organized and conducted as the Peo-
pies party convention the other a mi
nority of the original convention He
| eontended that the Secretary of State
| was empowered to ascertain only
which certificate was regular, and to
place the candidates named in that
| certificate on the ticket to be
voted on at the coming election.
He held that the Secretary had
no right to consider what the re-
suit of the action might be. or to in
quire whether or not if the middle-o Of
|