The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1898-06-21
DEMOCRATS IN Caucus.
Decision on Making Caucus Action
binding Postponed.

Binding Postponed.
Washington, June 2O.-The Democratic
caucus, called to consider the question of
making caucus action in the future abso-
lutely binding upon caucus participants,
remained in session until midnight.
Final action was postponed until next
Monday night when, If a quorum is pres
ent, vote viii be taken upon the resolu-
lions offered tonight by Mr.. Bailey and
amended by Mr.. McRae of Arkansas.
Mr.. Bailey's resolutions provided that
caucus action should be binding upon all
questions not involving constitutional con-
tentions or questions treated in the ma
tional platforms.
After considerable debate, Mr.. Bailey ac-
cepted an amendment offered by Mr. Nc
Rae, excepting questions involved in state
district platforms and pledges made per
sonally by members
Many speeches followed when. at length
upon motion of Mr.. sulzer of New York
the previous question upon the Bailey reso-
lutlons as amended was ordered and
pending a vote, adjournment to Monday
night was taken.
II rs likely that no quorum will be pres
enI Wneu the caucus iilttlS dEdHis si5 AiiN
adjournment OF Congress being generally
considered near, and the desire of the OPP
position to have no action taken along the
lines suggested tonight, probably viii re-
suit in such absence as will defeat action
Monday
In advocacy of his resolution. MIR. Bailey
contended that more unity of action by the
Democrats was necessary 10 party welfare
and that unless Democratic representa-
tiVes were to act in the future without de
vision upon important questions which
might arise between national conventions
their effectiveness in keeping before the
country a fixed Democratic position and
in shaping future party policy would be
impaired Without unity, the party would
be in the attitude OF a chaotic organiza-
ton, without certainty, without purpose
and IL could not enlist the support OF the
country as would be the case otherwise.
His resolutions further provided that
upon questions of party policy a two
thirds vote should be required In caucus,
while a majority vote would be sufficient
upon questions of House, procedure and
caucus nominations.
Mr.. Bailey was notably supported by
Mr.. Swanson of Virginia and MIR. Clark
of Missouri who argued strongly in sup
port of his contentious.
Among those who opposed Mr.. Bailey
and thought no new rule in regard 10 the
effect OF caucus action should be adopted
were Messrs McMillin Of Tennessee
Cochran of Missouri Lewis of Washing
ton, Mcguire of California, Suzer of New
York DeArmond Of Missouri, Allen OF
Mississippi, Cummings Of New York and
Hay of Virginia.
Generally they argued that. while the ma.
tional platform should govern every Demo
crat, all should be left free TO act as they
might elect upon new questions, and then
face an excuse, II they could. to their con-
stituents for their action. The long stand
ing rue OF Democratic caucuses, should be
followed thought those who opposed any
departure, and il was pointed out by many
notably Mr. Mcguire, that should a rule De
made requiring absolute obedience TO Dem
! ocratic caucus action 1t would embarrass
seriously, and in many cases, defeat ef-
| forts at fusion, because such efforts 10
fuse upon a'basis of promises to their de-
sired allies would be confronted with the
fact that those promises could not be re-
deemed unless a Democratic caucus should
| permit.