The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1898-08-17

{Continued from Fourth Page)
San Francisco factions an hour IN
which to present their arguments.
MAJOR HARNEY'S CONTENTION.
Major Harvey thereupon took the
Hoor and presented his case in a logi-
cal manner. He briefly outlined the
history of the organization of tfe two
factions, and paid particular attention
TO the Campaign Committee appointed
October Is, 1897 of which body he was
elected Chairman. He held that under
the constitution of the organization,
the Campaign Committee was the regu-
3ar organization of the Democratic
party of San Francisco, and that ac-
cordingly it was the duty of said com
mittee to appoint or cause to be APP
pointed, delegates to the State con-
Nention.
He presented the constitution of the
Democratic party of the city and
county of San Francisco and read ex-
tracts from the same to prove that the
Campaign Committee was the properly
accredited body of the party. He
scored Colonel Sullivan, and commended
that under the constitution he had no
shadow of right to remove the Cam
paign Committee, or any right to ap-
point Committee of One Hundred and
Ten to take its place.
Major Harvey said that through the
magnanimity Of the Committee Of Nine,
appointed by Colonel Sullivan and
Gavin McNab, seventy-three of the
Committee of One Hundred were APP
pointed from the nine Assembly Dis
tricts of San Francisco which gave
Mckinley a majority over Bryan of
1900 votes, while from the nine As
sembly Districts which gave Bryan a
majority of 5000, only twenty-seven
We're appointed.
The speaker said it would be an in
suit to the intelligence of the De-
mocracy of San Francisco to seat this
delegation appointed by McNab and
Sullivan in direct opposition to the
constitution of the party organization
of San Francisco. He contended that
the Democrats of California could never
expect to elect a Governor unless by
and with the aid of the $4,000 Demo-
cratic votes of San Francisco, and that
those same voters We're represented by
his delegation.
He strongly appealed to the commit
eighths of the Democratic voters of San
Francisco, and act accordingly.
CAPTAIN FOLEY EMPHATIC.
Captain John Foley, ex-Supervisor,
and pioneer of the Forty-sixth Assem-
bly, District, named five other delegates
besides himself from his district, all
of whom are prominent Democrats and
large property-owners who were elected
on the Rainey-H Harvey ticket. On the
other hand, he asserted that of the six
delegates appointed by the Committee
of One Hundred from the district he
represented, not one of them lived
there, or had ever voted there. He
begged somebody to deny him, but as
nobody did he produced a San Fran
cisco directory, showing that four of
the six resided outside of the district,
and that the other two did not live in
the city at all.
Captain Foley offered on behalf OF
himself and the other five delegates
from his district to retire from the con-
vention provided 1T could be shown that
one of the six appointed by the McNaD
committee resided in the district. He
wanted to- know if the other side would
do the same but the opposition made
no effort to deny his statement. He
thought the committee could not af-
ford to GUST responsible persons like
himself and his associates, and seat a
set of dummies.
McNAB'S CASE.
Gavin McNab said he proposed to
show that the faction he represented
was composed Of respectable Demo
Gratis, led by Mayor Phelan. When, in
1892, Rainey and others sold out Pond
when running for Governor, he was the
first to demand reorganization Of the
party in the city. Such an organiza-
ton was effected, and was merely a
body of men standing for pure politics.
McNab referred to former tickets
nominated by delegates appointed by
committees in San Francisco, showing
that they had been elected by over
whelming majorities. He spoke OF
Samuel Ralney, whom he denominated
Buckeyes former partner. Rainey, he
said, is only in politics from the money
TO be got out of it, and IT was TO free
the party in San Francisco of such
men that delegates were appointed by
committees.
McNab spoke of primaries in San
Francisco, and claimed that at such
elections less than 1 per cent. of the
Democratic vote of the city was
cast. He said the people Of San
Francisco had already voted on
the question of the supremacy Of
the two factions, and that the highest
man on the Harvey ticket could not see
the lowest one on the ticket nominated
by the other side.
Mr. McNab said that respecting the
standing Of the two delegations 1t was
merely a question Of choosing between
Sam Rainey and James D. Phelan
Rainey, he said, is good at guessing, as
was shown by a recent primary, where
he foretold every man who would be
elected a week before the election took
place. AS a matter of fact, he said
there was only one ticket and that was
Rainey's, and as a consequence there
was no need of voting on them, so they
did not do so.
When asked by the Chairman Of the
committee to explain how the delega-
ton he represented was the one legally