Evening star., 1936-06-21
Candidates Presence
At Conventions
BY FREDERIC J. HASKIN.

remained at his Topeka capital while
the delegates foregathered at Cleveland
he was returning to the old course Of
convention etiquette in vogue in the
last century. The new etiquette which
permits candidates not only to be pres
ent at nominating conventions but to
take an active part in them, was intro
duced by Theodore Roosevelt. Since his
time the new system has been followed,
although Franklin D. Roosevelt did not
go to the Chicago convention which
nominated him until after the actual
nomination. Then he made a spectacu-
lar airplane flight to deliver his speech
Of acceptance.
The old system was based on a pure
conception Of the forms Of democratic
or republican type Of government. There
was theory that if an outstanding can
didate attended a convention In per-
son there might be present something
of an element Of coercion or intimida-
ton. For a man who was supposed to
command the support Of great many
voters to be present among the nomi-
mating delegates was regarded as in
bad political taste and something less
than modest. Unbiased, unswayed Iudg-
ment would be unlikely.
~ -
This code of political etiquette some
times resulted in embarrassment to
some individuals Avowed candidates
have modeStly remained absent from
national conventions, waiting for the
purple to fall upon them, only to learn
later that there was no point in absent
ing themselves, their names being given
scarcely any consideration.
Often in these times some wise-crack
er makes fun of the elaborate notiflca-
ton ceremony which followed the selec-
ton of a candidate for the presidency
by national convention. 1t was made
an almost ritualistic pilgrimage. OF
course the man had known of his nomi-
nation probably ever since the very in
slant it was accomplished. He may very
we'll have been present in the hall. Still.
the ceremony continued to be observed.
It's origin is closely connected with this
very matter of the etiquette Of attend
ance upon conventions by candidates.
In the earlier days possible candidates
stayed away. There was no rapid sys-
TEN Of communication Or transportation,
When such an absent candidate was
named by convention there was some
real reason for appointing a committee
to notify him. The first time this was
done was at the convention of the ma
tional Republican party in 1881. Henry
Clay was nominated and Henry Clay
was far away. The convention named
committee consisting of one member
from each State of the Union to proceed
to Kentucky and tell the fiery states
man-who said he would rather be right
than be President-that he had become
the choice of the party.
That was more than a century ago,
out ever after the conventions of all
parties appointed committees to notify
the men selected as standard bearers.
These occasions have taken on especial
significance because the acceptance
speech of the candidate which follows
notification is regarded as an important
public expression of his policies. Just
as the keynote speech delivered TO a
national convention is presumed to give
notice to the public what the party
stands for and plans to accomplish, so
the acceptance speech is presumed TO
give the same notice as TO the candi-
date himself The keynote speech is the
keynote of the convention; the accept
ance speech, if the candidate subse-
quently is elected, becomes the keynote
of his administration.
There have been some notable occa-
i1h, HoN IL
mated while attending conventions but
have been taken by surprise. One OF
the most fascinating cases is that OF
James Abram Garfield. Gen. Gar
field had served with distinction in the
House of Representatives, but was not a
candidate for the presidency. He was.
however. a delegate and, as such, was
in attendance. Indeed. he made a
notable speech nominating another man.
The speech made an excellent i'm
preston on the convention, an especial
ly excellent impression on a delegate
from West Virginia This delegate,
whenever the roll was called, cast his
lone vote for Garfield. 1t probably was
at first regarded by the rest of the con-
vention as something Of joke on the
part of the West Virginia delegate.
Gen. Grant had led on the first ball
lot. 1t was an especially close contest.
1t would have been Grants third term
had he been nominated and elected, and
the third-term tradition had gained a
great deal of strength. There was
strong movement against Grants nomi-
nation, but it must be remembered that
he was a great national hero and had
formidable support.
Ballot after ballot was taken and still
there was no decision. AS each ballot
was taken the voice of the delegate from
West Virginia doomed out with Gar
fields name. With the apparent dead
lock continuing. others began taking up
the idea and voting for Garfield. Finally
on the Seth ballot, Gen. Garfield was
nominated and, of course, became Pres
ident Of the United States
There is some disagreement among
| the historians and writers Of memoirs as
| to William Jennings Bryan's position
| when he attended the Democratic Ma
tionaI Convention of 1896 as delegate
There are those who say that he planned
what happened; that, in his own mind
| at least, he was very much candidate
But the country at large had never heard
of him and he was not candidate in
| the usual public sense.
What happened was dramatic in the
| extreme. Making a speech in his ca
pacity as a delegate, he discussed the
| issues of the times, especially streSSine
| free silver. 1t was the speech which
became noted as the crown Of thorn'
and cross of gold" speech, and it hao
the effect of swinging sudden support tc
bis oun candidacy Bland. the regular