Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1899-05-17
WEDNESDAY MAY II, 1899.
,,,p Ro,NOKE RESOLUTION.

Much Is said about the Roanoke cohVeh-
tlons renominaiing Daniel The resoiu-
ton simply endorsed him as The proper
nerson TO succeed himself -lichmond Let
Ter I'm Petersburg lndeX-Appenl
There can be no doubt as to the action
Of the Roanoke convention. The resolu-
ton speaks for Itself. Here It is:
We cordially and heartily endorse the
course of our beloved and distinguished
senator. John W. Daniel. II the United
states Senate AND WILL OPPOSE ANY
CANDIDATE for the Legislature and
Senate of Virginia WAC is not in favor OF
his nomination.
1t thus appears that tho Roanoke con-
vention pledged the party TO defeat, if
possible. any candidate for tho General
Assembly who did not favor the re-elec-
ton of Major Daniel No opponent of
the Majors could receive our party's nom
ination. Whoever ran as the representa-
tive OF our party took upon himself the
obligation to vote for the reelection of
the Senator.
In fine. the convention made Major
Daniel the candidate of our partyl 1t was
impossible for the convention to take
"A more decided. determined, or urequiyo-
cal stand than it did take. And. there
fore. 1t seems to us very unreasonable and
illogical for any one who is acquainted
with the facts III the case TO contend
as some have done-that the Roanoke
convention committed itself TO the old
method OF nominating senators. Why.
"a Oft hf.
caucus no choice but to accept Major
Daniel as the senatorial nominee! In
deed, every member Of the caucus, when
ne accepted our nomination, became OBJ
ligated to vote for the reelection OF
Major Daniel.
Nor is it OF consequence TO say, when
we are considering this action as a pre-
cedent, that Daniel proved to be the unan-
imous choice of our party. The course
of the Roanoke convention shows that
1t considered it not improbable that there
might be some opposition to him, else
why did it threaten TO oppose any eandi-
date for the Legislature 81 and Senate
who was not in favor ot his nominal
ton?
Our friends who insist upon ii that the
Roanoke convention was in favor OF ad-
herring tenaciously to the custom OF the
party in making senatorial nominations
have n hard task before them to explain
away the conventions action In promising
Daniel every Democratic vote After th'
convention had spoken. as it did, the
members OF our party in Virginia had no
thing TO do but to register its Will. Tha
they did SO willingly. yea, gladly. is con
eeded; but from the moment when the
foregoing resolution was adopted by III,
Roanoke convention 1t was settled be.
You'd peradventure that Major DAME
was TO be our next senator. if the Demo
Gratis secured majority upon joint bal
lot. From that moment the senatorial
question was decided. 1t may be argue,
that that was an exceptional case, Grant
ed. But here now is another exceptiona
case. right at hand. only waiting the con
sideration of another convention!
Our further contention is that it is fo
the State Democratic Committee, in its
wisdom and discretion, TO say whether
A. would be well or not TO call State
convention; but we hold that the Roanok
convention neither prohibited, nor dis
countenaneed, nor discouraged nomi
nations by other state conventions. How
could it have done so? Could it have
said: 1T is all right for this State con
vention to select a senatorial nomine'
for our party, but II would be unwise fc
other state conventions 10 follow in on
footsteps? No. IL could not have SAT-
SO. and It did not say SO. either by act
or words On the contrary, 1t set pre-
cedent which is as memorable as is IT.
rejection Of the proposition 10 hold
state primary election TO nominate sen
ator.