Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1899-05-07
The Next National Democratic Com



vcntiOD.
To the Editor OF the Dispatch:
This extract from the New York Sun
is significant. The National Waterman
of the 9th quotes it in full. Very few
Virginia people will ever see it from
either paper. will be thankful-and hun
dreds OF your readers will be thankful
to have It reproduced. DEMOCRAT.
(New York SUM
More than two years have elapsed since
the Democratic National Committee had
it's meeting at Washington to arrange
the form Of the call for the national
convention of July. 1896. at Chicago.
The number of delegates to the Chicago
convention was $780, and the same number
will participate in the Democratic Ma
tional Convention of 1909. for there has
been no change In the number of presi-
Dental electors since 1896, and there will
be none until after the census OF 1890
The apportionment of six delegates for
each Territory. irrespective OF its area
or population. has become established In
Democratic conventions and none OF the
six territories SO represented at chicago
I'm 1886 has since then been admitted 10
statehood. On the preliminary vote on
the Chicago platform 62S votes were cast
in the affirmative. or clear two-thirds
majority OF the whole. Against the plat
form SOl votes were recorded and one
Minnesota delegate RETAINED from
voting.
The four States Of New York, Pennsyl-
vania Massachusetts,, and Wisconsin
l..
corded against the Chicago platform or
1896. At that period New York was rep
resented in the United States Senate by
two Democrats. The chairman or the
Democratic National Committee, VINO
called the convention together on July
eth. was W. +. Harrity, of pennsylvania
Massachusetts presented as its candidate
for President the Democrat whom II had
thrice elected Governor. and Wisconsin
was represented in Washington by two
Democratic senator's Both New York
ana Wisconsin had been carried by the
Democrats at the preceding presidential
election. The Importance OF these -FOUR
States secured for them respectful
hearing at the Chicago convention,
though they were all opposed to the plat
form.
Since 1896 however. the Democratic
party in Pennsylvania. Massachusetts,,
and Wisconsin has come under the con-
troll of the Chicago platform forces and
porters of Bryan were nominated FOR Of
fee In New York no Democrat running
for office last year dared 10 oppose the
Chicago platform and there Is no poSsl-
bility that any Democratic state ConVen-
ton this year or next will express dissent
from IT, The delegation from New York
I'm 1860 will probably be i'm favor of II; in
no event will it be committed against II.
OF the 30l votes against the chicago
platform at the convention two years ago
States. Il
total of GO votes were cast by these Otner
States: Connecticut. Il; Maryland ~
Minnesota. II: New Jersey. 20. and South
Dakota s. At that time one OF the sena-
tors from New Jersey was a Democrat,
both senators from Maryland were Dem,
ocrats Connecticut was in the doubtful
column and Minnesota and South Dakota
were waVering on the nnanciai question:
New Jersey and Maryland are now re
publican States. Connecticut Is as surely
Republican as New Hampshire or Rhode
Island Both Minnesota and south Dako-
Ia have now silver governors elected III
1888 though in cach STATE the lcHldlnu'i
of the Republican ticket was successful.
The declaration Of the Minnesota Demo
Gratis who elected John Lind was that
1--WE hereby reafirm the Democratic ma
tional platform and pledge 10 II our uii
swerying support until its principles snail
have become the established govern
mental policy; and the Democrats OF
South Dakota demanded the Tree anu
unlimited coinage OF silver at the ldlio
of l6 TO /. without asking for the consent
or waiting for the ana OF any o'hei h''''''
on earth. e,,o1 ,,,o COG
delegates who voted for the chicago pidt-
form there has been little detection from
/, and these among them have now Gov
ernors who are Democrats or VINO Were
elected as FusiOnists on platform ,ndt
reafirmed the Chicago platform: Ala-
bama, Arkansas, Colorado, floriua' VII" VII
afafg NJ
Souri, Montana. Nebraska. south caro-
lima. Tennessee. Texas. aud virginia. III
Kentucky Republican Governor WIS
elected i'm 1855. put a silver Democrat on
silver platform carried ,he S,a.v al a are
last election. Utah and Montana are
both Democratic States on the hnancial
ouestion. and there Is no belief anywhere
that their delegates will no be FOUND lot
silver i'm 1900. " -. ~
Gratis faithful to the Chicago platform
are now more completely in control OF
the party organization than they Were
in 1876 Since then they have become
predominant in the Democratic party III
Wisconsin, Minnesota. and South Dakota
three states which voted against them
I'm 1886. Moreover the New England
States. which presented pretty SOLID
front against the Chicago platform in
the convention of 1896. are now in nearly
every case under the control of the friends
of Bryan. More especially Is this true OF
Massachusetts, Maine. and New Hamp-
shire which cast at the Chicago conven-
ton forty-five votes against the platform
and only five for II.
Meantime. the opponents OF. the chi
cago platform in the Democratic party
are gaining nowhere. and the most they
venture TO strive for at party conventions
is almost invariably nothing beyond mere
evasion of the currency issue. 1t is not
probable that they will be able TO muster
at the national convention of next year
more than half of the voting strength
they exhibited at Chicago In 1896. and even
as many as 80 delegates would be very
liLnrnl Inn