The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1902-07-16
INSTRUCTIONS ARE BINDING.
A democrat" asks this question:


Under the plan of organization have
right to vote contrary to their instruc-
tions? Can any power other than the
county convention authorize delegates to
disregard their instructions?"
The Plan of Organization is so plain
upon this point that there is no need for
any construction. The provision relating
to instructions is as follows:
"At every county convention (before
delegates to State, Congressional, Judi
cial, Senatorial or other conventions are
| chosen) there shall be a vote taken for
| the different candidates for office, whose
names may be presented, and the dele
gats shall vote for their respective coun-
| ties in accordance with this vote; that
| is to say, each candidate shall receive
| in the State, Congressional, Judicial,
| Senatorial or other convention the pro-
portion of the vote to which the county
nay be entitled, which he received in
| the county convention. The chairman
and secretary of the county convention
shall certify to each convention the vote
| received by each candidate given: Pro-
| presented it shall be lawful to instruct
| for him. At all State and District con-
ventions the delegates from the different
counties may disregard the vote of th"ir
respective counties as to any candidate:
| Provided. that two thirds majority of
all his votes from the county consent"
| The last provision was inserted to
make it impossible for a few delegates
| to perpetuate a deadlock by making it
possible for thirds of the friends
of a minority candidate to quit voting
| for him. But the vote can never be
withdrawn until two-thirds of his own
| friends and supporters latter voting for
him in good faith as long as he has a
chance of receiving the nomination.
agree to withdraw his name.
This question has been raised and
passed upon twice in Judicial conventions
| this year. In the Tenth Judicial District,
| sided, Mr.. Bailey had a minority vote
| that had been instructed in the Iredell
county convention. If the majority in
that county could have violated instruc-
lions and cast Iredell's vote solid for it's
| own candidate, Mr.. Long, he would have
| been nominated early. But Mr.. Hender-
of Organization, the minority vote must
be cast for Mr.. Bailey until thirds
of Mr.. Bailey's supporters in Iredell
county consented to having the vote
changed And so there was a deadlock
all night About daybreak, Mr.. Longs
representative in Iredell in writing con-
scented to have the Bailey Iredell
minority vote cast for Mr.. Long, and Mr..
Long was thereupon nominated on the
412th ballot.
At the Judicial convention in the
Fourth Judicial District, delegate from
Nash asked for a ruling of the chair upon
this point: Whether the delegates from
township that had been instructed
could vote contrary to their instructions.
The chairman-State Senator T. M. Ar
rington-ruled that they were bound to
vote in accordance with their instruc-
tions He added that if there was any
dissent from that ruling, the chair would
entertain an appeal from the chairs
ruling. No appeal was made.
1t is settled that instructions are bind
ing. The Plan of Organization made this
matter plain and stringent, because in
some former conventions complaints had
been made that delegates in some coun-
ties instructed to vote for one candidate
voted for another. 1t was to make GER
tain that no such thing could happen in
the future that the law was made so
plain that there can be no open question
as to it's construction.