The Washington herald., 1912-05-30

In the approaching Republican Nationa
Convention at Chicago, composed OF l0
delegates, there viii be no less than Is
contests. Practically one-fourth Of thu
entire membership is in dispute. rh'
settlement OF these contested cases vii
in all probability decide the nomina'
tion.
1t is no wonder. therefore. that all at
tention is now directed toward Chicago
where the National Committee Is sboui
to assemble, It has been the unbroker
custom Of the Republican party to al
low the National Committee to make VI
the temporary roll Of the convention
awarding seats to those delegates who
In the judgment Of the committee, are
entitled thereto by prima facie right
lnasmuch as substantial victories for
either the Taft or Roosevelt delegates
mean an enormous initial advantage,
the action Of the committee In the set.
tlement Of the numerous disputes be-
comes Of great Importance.
And yet, no matter how. the commit.
tee may decide. the final disposition lies
with the convention itself. It Is inter.
esting. on this account. to glance at the
record Of previous conventions to learn
the precedents which have been estsb-
lished, especially as to the participation
In the proceedings OF the delegates
whose elections have been made the
subject Of contests.
1t so happened that in the last three
Republican conventions-lsOU. 1904 and
lSOS-ths contests were few and unim-
portant In 1900 the denomination OF
President Mckinley was assured: in 1901
II was settled that President Roosevelt
W0TIlA u.
selection OF Mr.. Taft wAs predetermined.
Consequently, the contests had no bear
ing upon the result.
II Is necessary, therefore, to bark
back to 1892, when the Republican party
met in national convention at Mime
apolls. In that year President Harrison,
seeking denomination, was opposed by a
faction within his own party, and then,
as now, II was asserted that his strength
was In the South, where no Republican
electoral votes were obtainable. The
National Committee, favorable TO the
President, had given seats TO the Harri-
son delegates. The committee on Gre
dentiRls, however, undertook to patiently
investigate the conflicting claims and II
was not until the convention had been
In session. three days that the commit
tee made its report. Then two pro-
tracted sessions OF the convention were
AANNSaaaAg 10 UIhl dCLlOu-
In Alabama the ten delegates from five
Congressional districts and the four dele
gates from the State at large were con-
tested. The majority report OF the COM
mlttee on credentials Ousted the four
delegates-at-large and two OF the dis
trict delegates who had been given seats
by the National Committee. The minority
report sustained the National Committee
in this Instance. The nrst vote came
~
port in connection With these disputed
Alabama delegates. When the roll was
called the vote OF the Alabama delega-
ton was announced in its entirety.
Instantly there was a protest. Mr.
Mckinley, who was presiding, laid down
the law as Il had been in the past and
will undoubtedly be in the future
Every delegate seated in the conven-
tion by the National Committee" he said,
is entitled TO enjoy the privilege of
this convention until by a majority vote
they shall have been unseated, and" he
added. these gentlemen have not been
unseated."
But Mr.. Mckinley suggested that there
was another side 10 the. matter. "A
question more serious probably than the
one l have stated" he continued. lis
whether a delegate should vote in his
own case. Upon that question the chair
A long and interesting discussion en-
sued Senator Hiscock Of New York
made the point that as the convention
was governed by the rules Of the Fifty
first Congress, which debarred the
holder OF a contested seat from voting
in his own case, the Alabama delegates
whose title to a seat was in dispute
must not vote. Senator Spooner OF
Wisconsin concurred 1T is the uni
n. - eel
that no man shall be a judge in his own
case"
J. Sloat Fassett, Of New York, in
stantly pointed out, however. the logical
result Of this proposition. IF the con-
tentiOn Of Senator Spooner be correct"
he said, then the proceedings OF a con-
vention may at any time be brought 70
naught by a SUFFICIENT number OF con-
spirators who choose to make a contest
in each delegation" This remark was
greeted with cheers. The contestants"
he added. could Join together and
paralyze the action of any convention"
The wisdom OF Mr.. Fassetts sugges-
tion is at once apparent. There are 26O
contested cases in the approaching con-
vention. Suppose. for the sake Of the
argument. that. these contests had all
been created merely for the purpose
OF disfranchising an equal number of
AtASbdNts "uOet ~ una ldCtb IlkHl 10
their seats was unquestioned? An in
situation would Immediately
result The convention agreed with Mr..
Fassett and II was decided that the roll
made up by the National Committee
should be the roll TO be called.
AS a matter of fact, the chairman OF
the Alabama delegation voluntarily with
drew six votes, which action was ac-
cepted. Mr.. Mckinley, in announcing
the withdrawal. made this statement:
Il submit to the convention that the
delegates-at-larEe would be entitled to
vote upon the district delegates, under
standing, as I do, that there are diff
ferent questions involved; and the dis
trict delegates would be entitled to vote
for the deIegates-at-large upon that
question"
This statement met with general ap-
proval and when the vote was recast
upon the question Of the delegates-at-
large Alabama held out four votes. II is
noticeable, however, that upon the final
rTTATATN