The daily telegram. [volume] (Clarksburg, W. Va.) 1901-1926, 1912-07-29
Go 90 - .hEse.l

+. ~ ". =
Ccontlnps5 ron pare shres.J
sould eeosnized.
C9ri te1 District Delegates.
The init Alabama contest turned
on the question whether the chair
man Of district COMMITTEES had
power 70 All vacancies, whether a
committeeman who had sent his res
ignation 70 take effect only In case
ne was not present. being present.
should be prevented from acting as
committeeman, and third, on the
identity of another committeeman.
The written resolution under which
the right OF the chairman to appoint
to vacancies was claimed showed
on It's face that the specific authority
was written in different writing and
different coiored pencil between the
lines. A number OF aftidavfts were
filed by committeeman who were.
present when the resolution passed,
to show that the resolution con-
talned no such authority. This gave
rise to a question of fact upon which
very large majority of both the
national committee and the commit
tee on credentials held that the lead
pencil insertion was forgery, that
the chairman did not have the au-
thority therefore to appoint to the
vacancies, and therefore the action
Of his committee was not valid.
This made 1t necessary to reject the
contestants. The committee decided
the two other issues Of fact before
it IN favor Of the Taft contention.
although the first decision was CON
elusive.
Arkansas-Fifth District.
In the Fifth Arkansas district the
question was one.of the identity OF
one faction or the other as
the Republican party. This conven-
ton followed the example of the
convention Of 1903 in holding that
what was known as the Redding fac
ton was not the Republican party,
that it was a defunct organization,
and had only acquired life at the
end Of each four years for the pur-
pose of using it in the national con-
vention. The contestants were
therefore rejected. 1t was shown
that the other or Taft had been in
active existence, as the Republican
party, had nominated a local ticket
and had run congressman.
CaREornia-Fonrth District.
The Fourth California district pre-
scented this question: Under the
state law, the delegation. two from
each district, was elected on gener-
al ticket. in group of twenty-six.
Each delegate might either express
his presidential preference or agree
to vote for the presidential candidate
receiving the highest number of
votes in the state. In the Fourth
district the two candidates from that
district on the Taft ticket expressed
Ia preference for Taft, but did not,
agree to vote for the candidate hav-'
ing the highest state vote. These
Taft delegates in the Fourth dis
trict received a majority Of 200 or
more than the Roosevelt delegates in
that district. The national cali for
bade any law or the acceptance of
any law which prevented the cleo
ton OF delegates by districts. In
other words, the call OF the national
committee was at variance with the
state law. The state law sought to
enforce the state unit, and required
the whole twenty-six delegates to
be voted for all over the state, as
signing two to each district on the
ticket to abide the statewide cleo
ton, while the Republican national
convention has insisted upon the
unit of the district since 1880. That
has been the party law. This con-
ventIon. recognized the party law and
held 1t to be more binding than that
of the state law, and allowed the
two delegates who had received in
the Fourth district vote larger
than their two opponents assigned
to that district, to become delegates
in the convention. This was clearly
lawful. for state has no power to
limit or control the basis of repre-
sentatlon OF voluntary national
party in national convention. The
fact that President Taft by telegram
approved all the twenty-slx dele
gates representing him is said to