Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1920-06-09
WEDNESDAY Evzesz,sa~m1 D.
THE, DESBGAaE AND BIS IN.
6ERUOVIOM

f". -.3
In tho state Of Dragon. ennatok
johnson received q Ma3oE3tJ~afS~
vok> IN the popular Primary. ~has&n6.
slight lead over General wood "
are not informed as to thAspersouad
laninEs Of all the dslsgaAss- slsoaA.
bat one Of those oeleE2tssedaolArs6
s1atshe wt1afeslsat MISREPRESENTATION,
voee where he plaases ana that h
int,ndsrts cast it for GansrA wsod.
In tust1fioahon Of HIS setitnde h
DstntB>ont that In hts -oandtdaey1for
theepostuon Of delegate hesmads .hla.
position known 10 tho voeeeSe0oaearanK.
himself opposed to Johason and In
favor Of Wood. and that II >efectedthe
fnAsnded -to"vote for Wood The-voe-
ses . e1ata1lberty~to 1ooetahtn With
tAat understanding or to4leave him at
hame. They~ehose to- sloceshim.. and
ne proposes to carry ost this orasana1
Program
His, right to cast his veto sfn. thts
m1aner<wn9sbe-c challenged shyIthe,aap-
porterss ofsJohnson on the ground
thak IN the preferential vote he has
received Instructions from hts con-
stftuentS and that the convention
must require him to carry out tho0
instructions. The decision will AFFECT
several votes, and in making it the
convention must establish a general
hne OF policy as to It's attitude toward
The preferential vote in the several
states.
The subject has not con1e up before
In Just this form, as the presidential
primary Is rather new. But the Re-
publican party IL on record, through
an unbroken line Of decisions In its
national conventions, in favor Of the
right Of the individual delegate to cast
his vote in the convention as he sees
1T. leaving 1t to him to adjust matters
with his constituents as he ma he
able to do.
1n-the old days OF the party con-
vention. which has largely been sup
planted by the primary election, the
unit rule was rather A
county convention, for instance send
@E deteg1tez to a s4a1e convention,
-7e7 CASA "~Sf7a: fhe delegation
-hS1i7 va g. & 80 on all matters
fnaA on Il roll! esI7 in the state con-
nsntIen. instead Of Blank county cast.
Ing 8 votes yes and 4 votes no, the
vote would be 10 votes yes. the ma
5ority governing the entire vote.
That rule was recognized in many
state conventions Of both parties. I'm
less recollection is at fault. 1t has
been recognized in Democratic na-
tionai conventions. But It has moi
beer recognized in Republican ma
tiona' COWS "ntions. Naturally Il all. the
memb.". OF a delegation v,rhed n
vote "''' way there was nothing Ia
hinder 'hem from doing 80. But
there has been consistant refusal r.
use the machinery Of the convention
to force members to vote contrary tc
their desire, no matter what their In
strucdons. These conventions have
uniformly recognized in the delegate
an Independent individual. empowered
to act inr all matters according 70 his
own best Judgment. If he chose tc
follow Instructions issued by some per.
son or"body, hat was his affair. bu1
the convention ha~ not meddled.
It seems likely that that policy VIII
be'fonswed~now The delegate come
as tho representative Of his peo.
pie and no Is responsible SO them
Tiny are '~atsIfherty. t. makeetheir. owr
selections. andshe and ehsy-tosathe,
onght~to bes1b3e to.determfne to wha.
UeentHhe hsshound'by any.expressaor
ofpre6xeno>>made at the polls. Fo,
n veonvont1on*to- adoptNhe+por1ey O,
requiring a11sde1egatsa>to comply wit,
state Instructions would involve. q.
inspection Reconsideration anA~
decfsfonaas'to whether or nottthe cir
cumstknces under which they ver.
atpen4gMeefhem binding, fopce. End.
les- consultations would result. snt
the'works<of q convention might b,
pf07ons0dsfor weeks. The seaeib1,
phnsfsfto AscceDes<he delegate n ha
face vseue,pandH9et him ma.hi, con,
wa$nn44N