The Detroit times., 1908-07-09
CONVENTION SITS
DOWN HARD ON
GUFFEY
NATIONAL COMMITTEE REJECTS
Pc NJ NJ S Y L v A NJ I A DISOR0AN.
izER's DELEGATES COMMUTE
CHEERING FOR BRYAN.

DENVER, July 9.-Persistent Col
Jim" Guffey. of Pennsylvania, who has
been the discordant note in the Demo
cratic convention harmony. at last has
probably got his quietus. AT last
nights session OF the convention. the
credentials committees report, ousting
eight Guffey delegates and seating
those of the Bryan-Kerr contingent
was adopted.
The actual vote was upon minor
lily report favoring the Gufrey dele
gate,. which was rejected, 6l5 TO 3S7
The Michigan delegation divided on
poll. but the unit rule prevailed and
the entire vote was cast against Guf
fey.
The report was signed by the rep
rcsentatives on the committee from
the following states: Maryland. New
Jersey, New York, Louisiana. Illinois
North Carolina. Georgia. Virginia,
Minnesota, Delaware, New Hampshire
Kentucky. West Virginia.
Straus Presented Report.
In his report, which was presented
by ]. l.. Straus, OF Maryland. the
statement was made and II was not
denied during the evening. that the
contestants produced no credentials
whatsoever and that they had made
no protect TO any local convention In
Pennsylvania nor appealed TO the
courts as they were entitled to do ~
the primary law OF the state.
On the other hand, the minority IN
sisted that the credentials which had
been approved by the national com
mittec. we're absolutely In perfect
form and that they had not been at
tackled IT. any way before the commit
tee The minority report concluded
with the declaration that the action
OF The majority OF his committees Is a
staggering blow at the independence
OF the Democracy Of the sovereign.
state
Just here Chairman. Bell made a
ruling which at once subjected him TO
the criticism OF those acquainted with
the practice in the house OF representa-
tives and similar bodies which are the
standard. The point is nice one.
but can be readily understood as &
matter OF convention practice.
In the first place. Mr.. Callahan
moved TO adopt the majority report.
Then Mr.. Straus moved as supsti-
tute for this the adoption of the min
ority report Gov Haskell. OF Okla
homa, who was not member of the
credentials committee, made sugges-
ton that one hours debate be allowed.
he time to be equally divided between
me two sides.
Thereupon MIR. Straus. made an ex-
cellent impression, both on the dele
gates and on the gallery, making a
point which was unquestionably well
taken. that as he had made an affirm
alive motion. he was entitled TO open
and close the bedate which was OF
great advantage
In making this point. he followed
the practice of the house or repre-
sentatives, but Chairman Bell ruled
that majority report always had
precedence, and was entitled toy the
opening and closing.
Hints Republicans Aided Guffey.
Chairman Callahan spoke in behalf
of the majority report. He did not
go into the merits of the case at all.
He merely declared that, i'm several
instances. more votes were cast at the
primary several times over than there
were Dmocratic votes at the last pre-
ceding election. The inference. OF
course, was that the Republicans as
sisted in the Democratic primary and
secured the election of the eight Cuff
fey delegates from the five ,Philadel-
phia districts.
There was nothing but inference.
however.
No Chance for Minority.
On the other hand, Mr.. Straus made
an argument in behalf OF the Guffey
delegates which was convincing Had
the chairman ruled different and Mr..
Straus had the opening and closing
part OF the debate. the vote for Mr..
Guffey would be different. The min
ority had no chance TO controvert the
charges made by Gov Haskell and the
vote was Immediately ordered.
1t was a foregone conclusion what
the result would be- The taking OF
the ballot was diversified. however,
by two significant incidents. One was
the demand OF ex-Mayor Dunno, OK
Chicago, for a poll of the Illinois del
egation. which demand was promptly
met by Roger G. Sullivan, with a
characteristic declaration that Dunno
was only seeking TO exploit himself
before the convention.
Second Case More Serious.
The second case was more serious.
II involved the vote of Pennsylvania
itself. It Immediately developed that
there we're two chairmen, because tho
delegation was so evenly divided that
III contentants practically held the
balance of power In taking the poll
IL was, OF course. necessary to have
some list OF the delegates tnereupon.
Chairman Bell decided that the roll
furnished by the national committee
was the only roll before the conven-
ton. Had he decided the same way
the day before. Pennsylvania would
not have been arbitrarily deprived OF
all representation on the various COM
mittees.
There were shouts of approval when
the solid votes of Illinois. George
Louisiana, Minnesota, New Jersey,
New York and the District OF Column