The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1932-06-24
ROOSEVELT IS
HURT BY FIGHT
ON old RULE
Opposition Is Stiffened by
His Decision TO Battle
Two Thirds Tradition.
CONFLICT IS BITTER
Coalition Against Naming
of New York Governor
Gains Strength.
Continued from Page One)

these developments with uneasi-
ness.
Referring to the effort to block
Roosevelt, under the traditional
two-thirds rule, Senator Cordell
Hull Tenn says:
I see signs of the same sort Of
influence which wrecked the party
in 1924 rather than concede the
nomination to man who has re-
ceived a clear majority of the dele
gates.
Rather than see this accom-
plished, any kind of legitimate eff
fort to suppress such a movement
would be wise and would save the
life of the Democratic party"
McAdoo Against Change
Senator Burton K. Wheeler
(MontD head of the Roosevelt
forces in this battle, said
There is strong movement for
abrogatioy. of the rule. and l will
support it,
Il always have been opposed to
the two-thirds rule" said Senator
Clarence C. Dill (WashD. Il shall
support any fight for its abolition, as
will delegates from my state, who
are instructed to that effect"
The personal interest in the pro-
posed shift is reflected in McAdoos
attitude.
Without the two thirds rule he
would have been nominated dur
ing the bloody ARRAY with Smith
eight years ago
But now he backs Speaker John
N. Garner of Texas, and he will re-
Sist any change.
Attempt of the Roosevelt forces
to abolish the two-thirds rule was
hailed as an admission of failure"
by Representative Sam Rayburn
CTex), campaign manager for
Speaker Garner, attacking James
A. Farley, Roosevelt manager, for
advocating it.
William Gibbs McAdoo, sponsor
Of the Garner candidacy, likewise
reiterated today his Steadfast op-
position to dispensing with the two
thirds rule, saying it is not right to
change lin the middle of the game.
The California delegation is on
record for change in 1886.
Reed Against Change
Former Senator Reed (Mo.) de-
nounced abrogation of the two
thirds rule las a very grave step
to take"
1T was good enough for Andrew
jackson, and it ought to be good
enough for 1882" Reed declared.
Chairman Jouett Shouse of the
Democratic national executive COM
mittee said that If the two-t thirds
rule is abolished, the unit rule also
should be eliminated. The two must
be linked together, he said. The
unit rule, by which many delega-
tions are bound, requires that all
votes in the delegation be cast as
a majority decides.
Former Secretary of Navy Jo-
Sephus Daniels denounced the two
thirds rule.
1T should be called the one
third veto rule" Daniels said. Il
am in favor of keeping it out. We
don't have it and don't want it"
Harrison Nom COmmittal
Senator Pat Harrison Miss.) was
-committal on arrival from
Washington. He said he never had
been wholly in accord with the two
thirds rule, but was inclined to queS-
ton desirability of changing it in
the middle of a convention.
Governor William H. Murray
(Okla0 in an interview today said
the two-thirds rule assured a def
mite opinion by the whole conven-
ton, and that nomination of any
man by less than two-thirdS vote
would mean a division of the con-
vention. He strongly favors reten-
ton of the rule.
Senator Huey P. Long. Roosevelt
champion, shifted from platform to
rules committee to help in the fight.
He will represent the shift in the
south, which hitherto has defended
the rule as a means of preventing
northern Republican states from
dominating party councils.
Short of Majority
The rule can be changed by
mere majority SIS, if it is recon-
mended by the rules committee at
the start of the convention.
After the convention has got
under way, however, any change
must command a two-thirds vote.
An unofficial canvass as of to-
day-and not allowing for last
minute shifts under pressure
showed that the lineup is as fol-
lows:
FOR RETENTION OF RULE. s1I.