The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1912-07-29

Of which four have no county govern
ment The 24b counties under the
cali OF the convention were allowed
10 have something over 1000 dele
gates representing them, who were
given authority TO cast 78s votes OF
the 245 counties there were 80 coun-
ties in which the total Republican
vote was but 2.000, in II OF which
there were no Republican voters. IN
81 OF which there were less than Ten
each, and in none Of which was there
any Republican organization, ana IN
none Of which had a primary or con
ventiou been held The national com
r,ittee and the committee on creden-
tails and the convention, after tho
fullest investigation. decided that
these ninety me counties we're not
the proper source for a proxy TO give
A Netee equal Ia that to be cast by
The other Is6 counties, in which there
was Republican organization, ami
In which primaries or conventions
were held. This gave to the Taft men
n clear majority in the state conVen-
ton. and with ii eight delegates at
largo.
I
on the question whether the Taft del
egates appointed by the county COM
mjttce In King county, IN which Seat
tie is situated. were duly elected 10
the convention, or whether a primary.
which was subsequently held, and
81 which Roosevelt delegates were
elected, was properly called SO that
It's result was legal Under the la'7,
the county committee had the power
To- decide whether II would select the
delegates directly or should call
primary In some counties of the
state one course was pursued. and
in other counties the other, in King
county, tho committee consisted Of
$50 men. the ma jority Of whom we're
for Taft, and that majority, acting
through It's executive committee. pc
Iactod the Taft delegates to the state
conventions Therefore, the action
i. A!nA -laHtu! committee of $50
took In electing Taft delegates who
who made wa5oritv IN the state con
vention. was the only one which could
be recognized as valid"
The Alabama Case.
The abatement summarizes the con
tested district delegates by States as
follows;
"The Ninth Alabama contest turned
on the question whether the chair
man of q district committee had pow
err to fiji vacancies. whether a com
rnitteefnau who had gent his resignn-
ton to take effect only in case he
was not present. being present, should
he prevented from acting as commit
teernan. and, third. on tho identity
Of another committeeman. The VIII
ten resolution under which the right
Of the chairman TO appoint to vacan-
cies was claimed showed on It's face
that the specific authority was writ
ten In in different writing and dit-
fpreut Cofurrd pencil between the
lines. and affidavits were presented
" hich caused some Of the national
committee to hold II WAS forgery
The committee decided the two other
issues Of fact before them in favor
of the Taft contention, although the
first decision WAS conclusive
I'm the Fifth Arkansas, the ques-
ton was one of the identity Of one
faction or the other as tho l{epuhll~
can party. This convention followed
the example OF the convention Of
1908 IN holding that what was known
as the Redding faction was not tho
RepADttCAU pal " tidt ~ wa" q ~
funct organization, and had only &C
ouired life at the end of each four
years for the purpose OF using 1t in
The national convention. The con
teetants were therefore rejected. II
was shown that the other, or TAFT
faction. had been in active existenc"
as the Republican party; had nomi'
mated It local ticket and had run
congro sarIan.
THE Fourth California district pre-
sented this question: Under the state
law, the delegation, two from each
district. was elected on a general
ticket. in group Of twentY-six Each
delegate might either express his
presidential preference or agree 10
vote for the presto ential candidate re
ceivng the highest number In the
State In the Fourth district the Two
candidates from that district on the
/ TAFT ticket expressed a preference
for Taft. hat did not agree ia vote
for the candidates having tho highest
state vote These TAFT Delegates IN
the Fourth district received ma
toritv Of 600 more than the Roose-
/ welt delegates in that district The
+ national call forbade any law or the
acceptance Of any law which pre-
vented the election II the delegate
nv districts In other words the cal
OF the national convention was a
| variance with the STATE law TINE
convention recognized the party law
and held IL to be more binding thar
; that cr the State law, and allowed
! the two delegates who had received
In the Fourth district vote larger
than their two opponents aSNiene5
! "a that district. 10 become delegates
! in the convention.
Tn the Thirteenth Indiana distrtc
there wa no question about the vic
+ tory Of the Taft men, because III
+ Temporary chairman representing IN
Taft side was conceded to have beer
elected by one alf vote more thar
I the Roosevelt candidate,
In the seventh Kentucky district
the majority report Of the commit
tee on credentials was adopted unan
4 fruously by. the convention. no dele
CATION whose seats were contested ne
ing permitted to vote on its own case
There was not the slightest reaso'
+ for sustaining tho contest Tor KooSe
Welt delegates,
The Eighth Kentucky district wa
composed Of ten counties, having lt
votes, OF which SO were necessary {
a choice There was no contest Il
ave nf the counties, and although IN
Roosevelt men claimed that ther
was one In Spencer county, no con
test was presented against the seat
ing OF the regularly elected Tart deI
egates from that county This CAV
the Taft delegates e!ghty-four votes
o, two more than were necessary 20