Atlanta tri-weekly journal. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1920-19??, 1920-06-05

full details of the method by
which the rump delegation repre-
senting A. Mitchell Palmer have
undertaken to establish their ere
dentials of admission to the Demo-
cratic national convention to be
held in San Francisco, June %. The
story is one of the most interesting
in the annals of Georgia politics.
The issue involved in the effort by
the Palmer delegates to gain admis-
sion to the national convention Will
be fought out before the Democratic
national committee at San francisco
and also before the credentials COM
mittee. Whichever way the contest
is decided by the national commit
tee, there will be an appeal to the
credentials committee. The Repub-
lican contest being staged in Chi
cago by the rival Georgia delega-
tons representing Wood and Palmer
is something of a whisper compared
with the noise that will be made at
Georgia Y Democrats mo- sHi SS VI
AS previously stated in The Jour
nal, there are two forms of creden-
tials prescribed by the DEMOCRATIC ma
tional committee. One is the form
for delegates elected by a Demo-
cratic state convention. The Other
is the form for delegates elcted by
the people in a Democratic state
primary. AS also previously stated,
the Palmer delegates used the lat
ter form, and their credentials were
certified by Hiram l.. Gardner, sec
rotary of the Democratic state eX-
ecutive committee. They could not
man of the committee, Judge James
J. Flynt, for the reason that he
refused to recognize the Palmer dele
gates.
The popularity of the credentials
to be presented by the Palmer dele
Democrats of Georgia, who are aware
of the fact that delegates to the ma
tlonal convention were not elected in
the primary. This popularity will
the Democratic national committee
and Of the credentials committee.
The regular delegation elected by
the Democratic state convention VIII VII
Palmer credentials Is thoroughly I'M
derstood at San Francisco.
NO Delegates in Primary
In the Georgia primary, held April
20. the Democrats did not vote for
delegates to the national convention.
They. voted directly for or against
the candidates for the Democratic
didates were A. Mitchell Palmer,
Senator Hoke Smith and Thomas E.
Watson. Neither candidate received
a majority of the county unit votes.
margin over Watson, and Watson
was second with slight margin
over Smith. It was about as near
an even split of the popular vote
and the county unit vote as ever hap
pened in a Georgia election.
Following the primary, there was
held in Atlanta, on May IS, a state
convention. The purpose of the con-
vention was to name Georgia's dele
gates to the Democratic national
convention. This was in accordance
with the rules of the primary laid
down by the Democratic state COM
mittee, as well as in accordance with
Democratic precedent and usage in
Georgia. The. convention offered to
name a delegation divided equally
primary. This was refused by the
right (by virtue Of rule 10 Of the
state committee) to name all the
delegates. Thereupon the conven-
ton elected a delegation divided
equally between Senator Smith and
Thomas E. Watson. A list of dele
gates put in nomination by the Pal
ner people was voted down, and the
Smith-Watson list was elected by a,
large majority of the votes in the
convention. Following the conven-
Palmer people. and voted down by
the convention, announced their in
tention of going to San Francisco and
contesting the admission of the reg
ular delegates.
There being two forms, and only
two, and one being a form for dele
gates elected by state convention,
and the other being a form for dele
gates elected in primary, 1t was
necessary for the Palmer delegates
TO hatr
elected by the state convention, they
were forced to use the other form.
Language of Primary Form
And this other form, for delegates
elected in a primary, reads as fol-
lows:
"T1,is is to certify that, at pri-
mary election, held in all the voting
districts and precincts of the state
of , and participated in by
qualified electors Of the said state
affiliated with the Democratic party,
In pursuance of action taken by the
Democratic state central committee
of the said state providing for such
prescribing the rules and regulations
thereof, on the - day of
1920, the following named persons
were duly elected delegates and alter
the Democratic national convention,
to be held in the city of San Fran
cisco, state Of california, on the 2sth
day of June, 1920, to witt"
Then follow blank lines for the
names of the delegates. On these
lines were written the names of the
Palmer delegates nominated by the
Palmer people in the state conven-
ton and voted down by the state
convention. After the names comes
the certificate to be signed by the
chairman Of the Democratic state
executive committee. In this partic-
ular case, for the reason explained
above, the certificate was signed by
the secretary, Mr.. Gardner, instead
of by the chairman, Judge Flynt.
The certificate reads as follows:
"In witness whereof, 7, the UNDER
signed chairman of the Democratic
of -, by virtue of authority
having fully canvassed the returns
from the primary election held in
accordance with an order of the said
state central committee, as afore-
said, have hereunto set my hand to
the foregoing certificate of election,
in the city of --, on this -- day
Of -, 1920"
Could Not Give Vote
In signing the above certificate,
Mr.. Gardner struck out the word
the word Secretary"
Just below the certificate ap-
pears the following:
"NoTE-Zn the case of primary
elections, it is advisable for The
chairman of the state central COM