v
The Commoner.
VOLUME 6, NUMBER 3Q
fe
S 1 fl f
.JW
".i wFI
. Mr 1
W
M,J
IZ '( ill
i w.
' )J
-
THE ILLINOIS CONTEST AT ST. LOUI
In tho light of Mr. Bryan's suggestion that
Roger C. Sullivan of Illinois retire from tho demo
cratic national committee, one incident occurring
at tho democratic national convention of 1904 may
bo referred to. It will bo remembered that in
that convention, Mr. Bryan delivered a speech
against seating the Hopkins-Sullivan delegates.
Mr. Bryan's speech was delivered in support of
tho minority report of tho credentials committee.
Mr. Bryan was defeated and the Hopkins-Sullivan
delegation Was seated by a vote of 647, to 299.
Extracts from Mr. Bryan's address in the Illi
nois contest follow:
Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Conven
tion: I came to this convention in the hope that
we would be able to agree on a platform and on
candidates, and have nothing to stir up feeling
or arouse contention. (Applause.) I still hope
that we shall be able to agree upon a platform that
will represent the sentiments of all of us, so that
wo can present it to the country as the platform
of a united party. (Applause.) I will go further
than that. I still hope that we shall be able to pre
aent to tho country a ticket behind which wo
can stand as a united party. (Applause.) And, I
regret that I am compelled to come in at this
time and present a subject upon which your votes
will be asked. But, if there Is one democratic
principle more fundamental than another it is that
tho majority has a right to rule. (Applause.) If
you destroy the binding force of that principle,
there is nothing that can hold a party together.
(Applause.) It is be-cause I want the democratic
parly to Btand on the Jeffersonian principle of
majority srule that I present the minority report
In this case. (Applause.)
In the state of Illinois the majority was not
allowed to rule. (Applause.) That convention
was dominated by a clique of men who deliberate
ly, purposely, boldly trampled upon the rights
of the democrats' of Hlinols. (Applause.) The
evidence shows that no band of train robbers
ever planned a raid upona train more deliberately
or with less conscience than they did. (Ap
plause.) And the men who planned it and who
carried it out, have the audacity, the impudence,
and the insolence to say that, because they certi
fied 'that what they did was regular, you can not
go behind their certificate. (Applause.) If that
is-good law In a democratic convention, it ought
to be good doctrine in a court; and if it is good
doctrine in court, then the only thing train rob
bers will have to do in tlie future is to make a
report of their transactions, and certify over their
own signatures that it was a voluntary collection
taken up for religious purposes, and deny the
right of the robbed to go behind the returns. (Ap
plause.) They tell you that tho law of the party In
Illinois permits tho state committee to present
the chairman, and they deny tho right of the
convention to override the wish of the commit
tee. Such a rule would be undemocratic if in
force for such a doctrine would permit a past
w.u.miwB tu maum useir upon a new convention
and dominate a now set of delegates. (Applause.)
But, my frionds, that is not the law, for two
years ago John P. Hopkins, the same chairman
of the same committee, presented the recommend
ation of the committee and asked a vote upon it
and submitted the committee's recommendation
to the convention. Two years ago he recognized
the right .of the democrats in the state convention
to elect their temporary chairman. This time ho
2 fci darJ do for If h0 ha done it he
would have been repudiated by the convention
there assembled (Applause.) The minority pre
routed a minority report, or wanted to, but the
chairman of the committee, Mr. Hopkins brought
5?;i?U,S? Ufi t0 thG mention platform, and
fS?,nAJ,m th e?7el saId that hG wa e chair
man of the convention, and Mr. Quinn, seizing tho
gavel, began his rule of unfairness, tyranny and
despotism. (Applause.)
Then they had a sub-committee . of the state
committee put on the tempoTary roll the delegates
whom they wanted, but when tho credentials
committee brought in a minority report they re
fused to consider it and refused to allow a vote
upon it And yet, in spite of the fact that that
wT TZ not allowed t0 act UP the
credentials of its own members, was not allowed
J??ecv upon !ts own delegates in spite of all
that, the committee did not unseat enough for
more than half of tho men actually seated by the
Hopkins committee have signed petitions asking
that the contostees be sent home and that demo
crats who represent the people of that Btato bo
substituted for them in this convention. (Ap
plause.) In the hearing before the committee it was
asked: "Why did they not present a minority
report from the committee appointed to select
delegates at large?" There was a contest in that
committee; there was opposition to Hopkins and
Cable; but why should they expect a minority
report to be voted upon? Why should they expect
it, when the chairman had already held that a
minority report was only advisory and could be
put into tho waste basket, and need not be acted
upon? They are estopped to ask why a minority
report was not filed.
They made no attempt, they declared no
purpose to substitute delegates for the delegates
selected by the various districts. We admit in,
the report that if they had legally substituted
other men for the men selected by the districts,
they might have done so, but it must be the act
of the convention. The convention never attempt
ed it; the convention was .not asked to do it;
and the evidence shows that the resolution which
is a part of the record and upon which they rely
was never introduced and was never passed, but
that it is a fraud pure and simple, presented here
in defense of their claim. (Applause.)
Now, my friends, what is the duty of , this
democratic convention? These democrats of Illi
nois are not like the democrats of the south.
Down south the democrats have all the local
offices, and they can reward their workers for
their loyalty to the party. Up in Illinois there
is a strong republican majority and the demo
crats of Illinois, in many parts of the state, at
least, are struggling against overwhelming odds;
they are actuated by love of principle, not by
hope of office.
But wha't will you tell those men? Will you
endorse the action of that convention? Will you
approve the methods employed? If they had a
majority of the convention, why did they not per
mit roll calls? Would they deny the opposition
that right if they had had. the" votes to control
hy fair means? Men do not do wrong, as a rule,
unless they think it is necessary -to do so to carry
out some ohject, and the only ground upon which
you can decide that these men did wrong un
necessarily is to decide that they were so per
verted in conscience that they did wrong irom
choice rather than from necessity. (Applause.)
Their whole- conduct shows that their purpose was
conceived in sin, brought forth in iniquity and
carried out to the destruction of democratic hopes
in that state.
Give the democrats of Illinois something to
hop for. Do not tell them that when they go to
a democratic convention they must go armed as
to war, prepared to fight their way up to the
chairman of the convention. Let' the republican
party Btand as the representative of physical
force, if it will; our party stands for government
by the consent of the governed. (Applause.)
What could they do? They could either re
sort to force and risk the Wiling that would re
sult, or, it is said, they could bolt. Yes, three
fourths of the convention could have walked out
and left one-fourth in charge as the regular con
vention. They hoped for roll calls. They knew
that whenever they could get a roll call they
could assert their rights. They had only -this
one roll call, and when the convention was over
these men had to submit to the disfranchisement
of a majority of the democratic voters of Illinois,
or they had to bring their protest to this conven
tion. So this petition was signed, and these men,
eight hundred and seventy-two, ask this conven
tion to seat the men who have the right to seats
from the districts as shown by the evidence. They
do not ask you to seat any one man. They do
not ask you to seat any. set of men. They do not
ask you to seat Hearst men, or Parker men, or
anybody's men. They ask you to seat the choice
of the democrats, no matter for whom they may
be. (Applause.)
That convention was so openly, so notoriously
a gag-ruled and gang-run convention that two of
the men who had been out and had made a can
vas in the state for governor, refused to be can
didates before that convention. I honor Judge
Prentiss of Chicago and Mayor Crolius of Joliet,
(applause) who refused to be candidates before
that convention, and if Mr. Hopkins and Mr. Cable
had any respect for the right of a majority to
rule, they would be ashamed to be here, the rep
resentatlves of ' a minority of that convention.
(Applause.) But, my frionds, if they have not
learned to be ashamed to misrepresent a great
Btate, you ought to toach them that they can not
do it with the approval of the democratic nartv of
the United States. (Applause.) ' y l
Now their sin rests upon them; you do not
bear it. ,But if you decide to seat these men
theso delegates from the districts, against the evi
dence presented in behalf of the contestants from
the districts; if you decide to seat these two na
tional delegates, in spite of the protests of eight
hundred and seveny-one members, then you en
dorse their conduct; you take from the shoulders
of Hopkins and Quinn and Cable the odium that
they ought to hear, and put it upon the democratic
party of the nation. (Applause.)
You have not this condition in other states
today, but let this convention endorse this con
duct, and tho next national convention will seo
more than one state here with delegates chosen
as the result of gavel rule. And it is because this
question transcends in importance the interest of
any state or candidate or any faction that
I am here to present the minority report and to
ask you to do to the democrats of Illinois that
justice which this gang deliberately and insolent
ly denied them. (Applause.)
Mr. Menzies of Indiana and Mr. Quinn of
Illinois spoke for contestees, after which Mr.
Bryan again spoke as follows:
Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen: The
first speaker (Mr. Menzies) said that I had not
heard the evidence. I stayed in the sub-committee
of the national committee and heard evidenco
until nearly 3 oc'clock in the morning (applause),
and I heard more evidence than the gentleman
who talked to you and who questioned my knowl
edge of this case. (Applause.) More than that,
I.have examined affidavits; I have examined peti
tions; I have examined protests and I know ten
times as much about .the facts of this case as
the gentleman who denied my right to speak in
this case. (Applause.)
The gentleman desires to make use of the
report of the national' committee. The national
committee referred this case to the credentials
committee on the ground that the national com
mittee did not have time or authority to Investi
gate the merits, and in doing sp, by unanimous vote
said: "In some congressional districts there was
evidence to show that questionable methods pre-
vailed; in some it appears that delegates select
ed by district caucuses were replaced by persons
who had not been selected by the delegates from
the districts and in some instances it was at least
doubtful whether the substitutions were properly
made." That was the unanimous report of your
national committee after listening nine hours to
the testimony. (Applause.)
And now this committee considers the case
two hours, does not take any evidence, but only
hears arguments, and then reports that there was
no fraud and that you ought to seat these con
testees. Mr. Quinn, tho chairman of the Illinois con
vention, says that he was unanimously re-elected
five hours after he began his gavel rule. Yes,
my friends, everything done in that convention
was unanimous. (Applause.) It was unanimous.
If you do not believe It, read the sworn testimony
of the highwaymen who raided the convention.
The gentleman says that he is not a man who
bolts or who waits until after the convention to
decide, but he is the man who with gavel rulo
tries to force upon the loyal democrats of his
state two men who supported Palmer and Buck
ner in 1896. (Applause.)
These two men who seek seats in this con
vention against the protests of. eight hundred and
seventy-two' delegates were the men who kept
the path hot between Palmer and Buckner head
quarters and republican headquarters when the
hundreds of thousands of democrats of Illinois
were marching up to support the ticket. (Ap
plause.) Mr. Quinn asks: "Where does the protest
against John P. Hopkins come from" and he want
ed me to answer it. I will answer it. It comes
from eight hundred and seventy-two better demo
crats than John P. Hopkins ever was. (Ap
plause.) I am willing that the men who left us
shall come back and share with the party in shap
ing its destiny; but God forbid that the loyal
democrats of Illinois shall by force and intimida
tion be made to march beneath the soiled banner
of these men. (Applause.)
The Sioux City Journal says the reporter who
guessed that BusselL Sage would leave all his
money to charity made the poorest guess on rec
ord. The Journal is wrong. Uncle Russell left
alWiis money to his wife, and we are reliably in
formed that "charity begins at home,"
WW
ajfo,tfaij awW atjUWi
&U