Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1900-09-06

The Democratic primaries in New.
CASTLE county take place next Satur-
day. and 1t is probable that they will
determine who is to be the Democratic
nominee for governor, as we'll as the
Democratic nominees for county Offices.
For. under the rule of rotation that
has prevailed for years, tho Democratic
domination for governor is conceded to
New CASTLE county this year, and the
choice Of New Castle county will doubt.
less be accepted by the State Congen-
tion. Abiding to this feature Of the
situation. the Seaford News says:
New Castle county by rule of rota-
tiou is entitled to the Democratic can
didate for governor and there will be
no attempt on the part of Democrats in
Kent and Sussex to deny her that right.
The party in the lower counties will,
however, expect New Castle to agree
upon a candidate and one who will be
acceptable to any good Democrat and
with this done will go in to elect him.
Tits to be hoped in view Of the rule CT
rotation that New Castle will itself
chose the candidate and present,him to
the convention with such majority at
least as will justify his acceptance by
the other counties. To concede the
candidate to New Castle county and
then have to decide who Of the several
candidates shall be the nominee is not
in the line of the rotation rule. When
it comes TO this necessity it would be
better to abolish the rule and choose
the candidate by the entire convention
py.l fss,t.. h. Sab L.
erned only by the desire to secure the
best and strongest man in the State
This states the situation very clearly.
II the New Castle county caucus de-
cides, by clear majority vote, in
favor of any one candidate, the candi-
date 80 favored is almost sure to be en-
dorsed by the convention. But such a
candidate must have majority of the
delegation, and not mere plurality.
There are four acknowledged candi-
dates for the nomination DIR. Black.
Mr., Ford, Mr.. Cooch and Mr.. Morrison
and it may be that each will have
enough strength to prevent any of the
Others from obtaining majority.
In this event, should the New Castle
county caucus find itself unable TO
agree upon candidate, the State Con
vention will have to take the task in
hand, and it will be bound by no rules
in the matter. 1t may nominate one
of the New Castle county candidates,
or 1t may decide to nominate candi-
date from Kent or Sussex. 1t will,
in fact, be absolutely untramnelled
should New Castle county fail to agree.
In the matter Of precedent there Is
nothing to stand in the way Of the con.
vention doing this thing. In 1874, John
W. Hall was leading candidate fol
the nomination for governor, but was
opposed on the ground that New Castle
county should have the governor, IL
having been about thirty years since 8
governor had been selected from this
county. So a movement was started il
favor of John'P. Cochran, which no.
suited in his nomination and election.
Then the rule of rotation began. In
1878, John W. Hall Of Kent county was
nominated by reclamation. In 1882,
the nomination was conceded to Sussex,
and Charles .. Stockley was the notni
nee. In 1885, 1t was conceded to New
Castle county, but, the county caucus
being unable to agree between Mr..
Biggs, Mr.. Herbert and Mr.. Cochran
the fight was taken into the conyen
tion, and MIR. Biggs was nominated.
The next two candidates were Mr.,
Reynolds of Kent county in 1880 ant
Mr.. Tunnel Of Sussex in 1894. Th,
latter, however, was defeated at thu
election, but, Governor Marvil havins
died meanwhile, neoessitating the cleo
tion of governor two years later, tn,
friends OF Mr.. Tunnel, at the State
Convention of 1896, insisted that it:ws
still the turn Of Sussex county to hay,
the nomination. The cconyentio,
agreed to this view of the situation
and Mr.. Tunnel was nominated ant
elecIed.
This year, however, there is no con
tention about the matter, and the nomi
nation is conceded to New Castl
county. But, as has been said above
the county must make It's choice il
caucus, If 1t desires to make sure o
the nomination. Should the caucus b
unable to agree, IL might be oonsidere,
as forfeiture Of the county's right &
the nomination. Certainly, if th
matter is referred to the State conyen
tion that body will have clsai RICH
to exercise its will in the matter, an,
TO take the candidate from whateve
section Of the State the majority ma
dictate. And its choice, in such al
event, would be entitled to the cordia
and loyal support Of every Democrati
voter.