i 
 
 
 
 
 
 - ^ ■ . ■ ■ ^ \ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 'cK 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 lN ^ 4r 
 

 
 
 
 
 .^' 
 
 
 ^' ^ V 
 
 
 ^>^ s 
 
 o\ 
 
 <v> <£* 
 
 
 
 ^ ^ 
 
 
 
 
 J* ^ 
 
 
 =3 <V 
 
 ^V / 
 
 
 
 ,S X*, 
 
 ,/* 
 
 
 
 c ^ 
 
 
 V * 
 
 
 V </\. 
 
 - aV v <>- 
 
 
 * * 
 
 AV c l 
 
 o 
 
 / «n* ^ v , " 
 
 V ^ 
 
 
 "* \* 
 
 
 
 
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 Dnimcnik Rational €mkutxou t 
 
 HEX.ID I3NT 1S60, 
 
 AT CHARLESTON AND BALTIMORE. 
 
 PROCEEDINGS AT CHARLESTON, 
 
 APRIL 23-MAY 3 
 
 PREPARED AND PUBLISHED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF 
 
 JOHN G. PARKHURST, Recording Secretary, 
 
 CLEVELAND: 
 
 KEVINS' PRINT, PLAIN DEALER JOB OFFICE. 
 
 1860. 
 

 ■ /r 
 
 m 
 
PROCEEDINGS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 tmmxtit pational $0ttventi0tt 
 
 AT CHARLESTON, 1860. 
 
 IFIIELST JD^^T. 
 
 Monday, April 23, I860. 
 
 In accordance with the call of the Democratic National Committee, the 
 Delegates to the National Convention assembled at 12 o'clock this morning, 
 in the Hall of the S<uth Carolina Institute, in Charleston, S C. 
 
 Hon. David A. Smallet, of Vermont, Chairman of the Democratic Na- 
 tional Committee, called the Convention to order, in the following words : 
 
 Gentlemen of the Convention : "We are assembled on this o- casion as 
 the National Democratic Convention, called by the National Democratic 
 Committee, pursuant to the authority confided in them by the Convention 
 assembled at Cincinnati, to nominate candidates for the Presidency and Vice 
 Presidency of the United States, and to transact such other business as the 
 interests of the Democratic party may dictate. What is the pleasure of the 
 Convention ? 
 
 Mr. H. R. Jackson, of Georgia, nominated Thompson B. Flotjrnoy, of 
 Arkansas, as President of the Convention pro tern. Carried unanimously. 
 
 Messrs. H. Pi,. Jackson, of Georgia, and G. W. Mi Cook, of Ohio, were 
 appointed a Committee to conduct the temporary Presiding Officer to the 
 Chair. 
 
 Col. Flotjrnoy, on taking the Chair, said : 
 
 Gentlemen of the Convention : I thank you n-ost sincerely for the 
 honor you have done me, and I shall endeavor so to demean myself as to 
 bring about a speedy organization of this body ; and, I hope, in a satisfactory 
 manner. 
 
 The Rev. Charles Hanckel, D. D., of the Episcopal Church, then 
 addressed the Throne of Grace in prayer. Ihe Delegates all in a standing 
 position during the prayer. 
 
 Mr. Fisher, of Virginia. We are not yet organized, as I understand, r.or 
 has a Secretary yet been appointed. I therefore propose the name of William 
 F. Ritchie, of Virginia, as temporary Secretary of the Convention. Carried 
 unanimously. 
 
 Mr. Fisher. I now ask the Presiding Officer to read a letter which I will 
 send to the Chair, and in connection with whn h I have a resolution to offer. 
 
 Gov. J. A. "Winston, of Alabama, objected to the reception of the com- 
 munication until the Convention was permanently organized. 
 
 Mr. Fisher. The letter relates to the organization. , 
 
4 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 The President. The Chair decides that if it relates to the organization, 
 it is in order. 
 
 Mr. Fisher took the Secretary's stand, and was about to read the commu- 
 nication, when 
 
 Mr. John Cochran, of New York, claimed to be heard one moment before 
 the letter was read. 
 
 Mr. Fisher. That is the very issue involved. 
 
 Mr. Cochran. I claim to have the floor, and shall retain it until I am 
 properly interrupted. I rise to a question of order. The resolution must be 
 offered before the communication is read, otherwise there is no question before 
 the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Lawrence, of Louisiana, rose to a point of order. The gentleman 
 from New York has no right to address the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Fisher. The gentleman is not properly a member of this body. 
 
 Mr. Cochran. I rise to a point of order, and shall not yield the floor. 
 The gentleman from Virginia claims that he -has a resolution to offer. It is 
 out of order to read a communication when no motion is before the House. 
 
 The Chair. The Chair decided that if the communication refers strictly 
 to the organi zation, it can be read. 
 
 Mr. Pugh, of Ohio. The proper way of the gentleman from Virginia will 
 be to communicate to the Chair, or to the Convention, the substance of the 
 letter ; then we shall see to what business it relates. 
 
 Mr. Fisher. I have been requested to read the communication, and I shall 
 do so. [Mr. F. proceeded to the Clerk's stand and attempted to read the com- 
 munication.] 
 
 The Chair. Before the letter is read, the Chair inquires of the gentleman 
 whether it is a communication from a State ? 
 
 Mr. Fisher. It is from a Delegatton claiming a seat here. 
 
 Mr. Cochran. I rise to a point of order. I had been awarded the floor, 
 and had not yielded it. I claim, therefore, that the gentleman from Virginia 
 is out of order. 
 
 Mr. Fisher. The State of Virginia is not responsible for my conduct. I 
 am responsible alone for my own acts, and I stand here on the right to the 
 floor, awarded me by the Chair. 
 
 The Chair. The gentleman from Virginia is out of order. The Chair 
 decides that the communication, being only from a contesting Delegation not 
 now recognized by the Convention, is out of order. The gentleman from 
 New York (Mr. Cochran) has been awarded the floor. 
 
 Mr. Fisher. The Delegates from whom this communication comes are 
 representatives of the State of New York. They claim it as a right to be 
 heard — 
 
 The Chair — [rapping to order.] The gentleman from Virginia has been 
 ruled out of order, and I call upon the Convention to support the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Fisher. I have the floor, and I do not mean to be unfairly ruled out 
 of order. [Stiouts of "Order ! order! "] 
 
 Mr. John Cochran. I move, Mr. President, that the rules of the last Na- 
 tional Convention be adopted as the rules to govern this body. 
 
 Mr. L. P. Walker, of Alabama, rose to address the Convention. 
 
 The Chair. Debate is out of order, unless some question is before the Con- 
 vention. Does the gentleman from Alabama make any motion ? 
 
 Mr. Walker. I desire to speak. 
 
 Mr. Walker. I appeal from the decision of tbe Chair by which lam ruled 
 out of order, and that I have a right to do. 
 
 The Chair. The gentleman has a right to appeal. The question will be, 
 shall the decision of the Chair be sustained? 
 
 Mr. Walker. I desire to be heard — [Cries of " Question ! question ! "] 
 
 The Chair.- Nothing is in order until the question on the appeal is decided. 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 5 
 
 Mr. Clark, of Mississippi, in a loud tone of voire, claimed the right of the 
 gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Walker) to be heard on the appeal he had 
 taken Jrom the decision of the Chair. 
 
 The Chair. If the Convention will come to order, the Chair will state the 
 question before it. 
 
 Mr. Walker. If the Chair will refrain from entering into a conference 
 with me, and will allow me to speak for a few moments, he will then him- 
 self underhand what is the question to which I desire to sj eak. 
 
 The Chair. The Chair has no desire to prevent the gentleman from being 
 heard, unless the Convention itself shall decline to hear him. He is in order 
 if speaking on the appeal from the decision ot the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Walker. The question properly before the Convention is, whether 
 the communication presented by the gentleman frcm Virginia (Mr. Fisher) 
 shall be read. It is simply a parliamentary rule that any gentleman who 
 offers to a body like this a respectful paper, has the right to demand that it be 
 read. The gentleman from Virginia has presented a communication relating 
 directly to the organization of this Convention, from a State Delegation claim- 
 ing t\ e right of a seat here. It must be eniertained at once, if the right of the 
 contesting delegation is to be respected at all. I hold that the question on 
 the reading of the communication is before the House, and as I rose to 
 speak to that question, I hold that the decision of the Chair ruling me out 
 of order is incorrect. 
 
 The Chair. The question before the Convention is, shall the decision of 
 the Chair be sustained? 
 
 The Chair was sustained by a vote almost unanimous. 
 
 The Chair. T he ayes have it, and the decision of the Chair is sustained. 
 
 Mr. Fisher. I now offer the resolution which I purported to offer in con- 
 nection with the communication which I desired to read. 
 
 1 he Chair. A question is already pending. It is the motion of the gen- 
 tleman from New York, that the rules of the last National Convention be 
 adopted as the rules to govern the present Convention. 
 
 The motion was unanimously adopted. 
 
 Mr. Fisher. I now ask to read the communication and the resolution 
 which I purport to offer in connection therewith. 
 
 The Chair. It has already been decided that this subject is not in order. 
 The decision of the Chair in that respect, has been sustained by the voice of 
 the Convention. The Chair is therefore compelle 1 to rule the gentleman from 
 Virginia again out of order. 
 
 Mr. Geo. W. McCook, of Ohio, offered the following : 
 
 Resolved, That a Committee of one from each State be selected "by the 
 respective delegations, whose duty it shall be to select permanent officers of 
 the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Fisher. I move to amend this resolution, and I presume my right 
 to do so will not be disputed. 
 
 1 he Chair. An amendment will he in order if it is pertinent to the ques- 
 tion before the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Barksdale, of Mississippi, obtained the floor, and moved the following 
 as a substitute for Mr. McCook's resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That a Committee on Credentials be appointed by the several del- 
 egations respectively, to be composed of one from each State in which there 
 is no disputed delegation, whose duty it shall be to report to the Convention 
 the Delegates that are entitled to seats on this floor. 
 
 Mr. Kichakdbon said : Mr. President— I hope my friend from Ohio will 
 accept the amendment of the gentleman from Mississippi. There is a con- 
 troversy in the State which I represent upon this floor. Sir, I want the 
 Convention, and I want the country, to see what are its merits. I shrink from 
 
f) Democratic National Convention. 
 
 no investigation, and when the Convention comes to see the character of the 
 contest, they wtll be amazed at what small things contests can be raised about. 
 
 It is humiliating to me, at t hi - period of my life, to have a contest of this 
 matter of my Democracy with such opponents as those who are contesting 
 my seat here. I am anxious that the Convention shall have this matter be- 
 fore them, without one word or any action from me, and decide it. With that 
 decision I am sure I shall be satisfied. 
 
 Mr. John Cochran, of New York, rose to speak, but was interrupted by 
 
 Mr. Lawrence, of Louisiana, who rose to a point of order. No gentlemen 
 from New York had yet been admitted as regular Delegates by the voice of 
 the Convention, and until that question had been decided, no person had a 
 right to be heard from that State. 
 
 Mr, Cochran. Mr. Chairman, I ask the gentleman from Louisiana by what 
 right he himself holds a seat on this floor? 
 
 Mr. Lawrence. As a Delegate from the State of Louisiana, whose seat 
 is not contested. 
 
 Mr. Cochkan. And, Sir, by the same right, as Delegates from the State of 
 New York, do we hold our seats here on this floor. 
 
 Mr. Lawrence. It is well known that there are two sets of Delegates from 
 the State of New York, both claiming a right to seats in this Convention. 
 One of those delegations is headed by Mayor Wood, the representative man 
 of the New York Democracy. The other, by Mr. Dean Richmond, an equally 
 worthy gentlemaw and reliable Democrat. I hold that — 
 
 The Chair. The gentleman from Louisiana is not in order. The Chair 
 has already decided that all discussion is out of order upon this question until 
 the Convention shall have been permanently organized. 
 
 Mr. W. S. Barry, of Mississippi, asked that the roll be called. The Con- 
 vention could not proceed with any regularity until it is ascertained who are 
 and who are not Delegates. 
 
 Mr. Cochran obtained the floor. He said : Mr. Chairman — I was well 
 pleased to hear the remarks of the gentleman from Illinois, respecting the 
 resolution one ed by the gentleman from Mississippi. The sentiments 
 expressed by him are ours, and the amendment offered meets the unqualified 
 approbation of the Delegates from New York. We are the sole representa- 
 tives of the regular and orthodox Democracy of that State, but while 
 maintaining that position, we are not actuated by such feelings as to pretend 
 that there may be no controversy respecting our claims. Whether the gen- 
 tlemen who contest our seats come with claims of greater or less magnitude, 
 we have no objection that every man shall be heard in his own behalf. We 
 of New York have not been educated in that school of ethics or politics to 
 claim that we only can be right, or to desire to sit in adjudication on our own 
 case. If the Convention should offer to us to be judges in our own case, we 
 would decline it as men and as gentlemen, but more particularly as men 
 clothed with the robes of regularity, and as representatives of the Democracy 
 of the great State of New York. Wishing to submit ourselves to the 
 decision of the Convention, we are ready to agree in the adoption of the pro- 
 posed amendment. 
 
 Mr. Pugh, of Ohio, des : red that the resolution should set forth the States 
 from which there are supposed to be contested seats. 
 
 Mr. Barksdale then modified his substitute so as to provide for the 
 appointment of a Committee on permanent organization — one from each State 
 (except in New York and Illinois.) to be selected by the Delegates from each 
 State. 
 
 Mr. McCook. I accept the amendment proposed by the gentleman from 
 Mississippi, with the understanding that it is to be confined to the Delegates 
 whose seats are contested entirely. If it is so modified, I will accept it. 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 
 
 "*1 
 
 There is then no objection to it, for we come here as Democrats whose Con- I 
 ventions have always excluded from their Committees the States whose seats 
 are contested. 
 
 Air. W\ S. Barry, of Mississippi, suggested that the resolution be so framed 
 as to create a Committee on the contested seats only. It' a general Committee 
 >u credent als is formed, it may be five days before they report. 
 
 The resolution of Mr. McCook, as proposed to be amended by Mr. Barks- 
 dale, was then read. 
 
 Mr. Mathews, of Mississippi, was about to offer a resolution as a substi- 
 tute for the original resolution and the amendment, when — 
 
 Mr. John Cochran rose to a point of order. The original resolution 
 related to a permanent organization of this Convention. The proposed amend- 
 ment had reference to certain seats alleged to be contested, and was not perti- 
 nent to the original motion. 
 
 Mr. J. B. Clark, of Mi.-souri, obtained the floor. He held that the 
 amendment was not pertinent to the orignal resolution. The National Com- 
 mittee admit to the floor of the Convention such Delegates from the several 
 States as are entitled to seats. Every gentleman here is, therefore, to be 
 regarded as a Delegate. He therefore moved the previous question, with a 
 view of bringing the Convention to a vote on the original resolution. 
 
 The Chair inquired, before putting the motion for the previous question, 
 whether the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. McCook) had accepted the amendment 
 of the gentleman from Mississippi. 
 
 Mr. McCook. The amendment of the gentleman from Mississippi was not 
 modified in accordance with my suggestion, and, therefore, I did not accept it. 
 While 1 am in favor, with him, of a Committee on Contested Seats, I am anx- 
 ious that the question on organization should be disembarrassed of this issue. 
 
 Mr. Richardson, of Illinois, argued that the original resolution contem- 
 plated a permanent organization. The amendment offered by the gentleman 
 from Mississippi contemplated a Committee on Contested Seats, but if adopted, 
 would really exclude the two great States of New York and Illinois from a 
 representation or the Committee on Organization. To this he objected. 
 
 Judge Meek, of Alabama, raised the point of order, that none of the reso- 
 lutions are in order until the roll of Delegates has been called, in order that 
 it may be ascertained who are the representatives prope.ly present in the 
 Convention. 
 
 Mr. Richardson. The substitute offered by the gentleman from Mississippi 
 varies the proposition from its original form. The original had reference only 
 to the Committee upon Credentials. The gentleman from Ohio proposes to 
 rai^e a Committee upon Organization. The gentleman from Mississippi 
 moves to amend by excluding the two States in which there is said to be a 
 contest. From that Committee ought to be excluded only the State that is 
 called up. There is no reason why the State of Illinois and the State of 
 New York should be excluded from the Committee on Organization. There 
 may be, and there are reasons which I acknowledge to be satisfactory to me, 
 why I should not sit in the contested case of Illinois. But there is no reason 
 why a member of our Delegation should not sit in the contested case of New 
 York. But when you come to pluralities, you not only take us from the 
 Committees but strike down the power of the two States in this Convention. 
 
 Mr. Barksdale desired to correct a misapprehension of some Delegates. 
 He did not desire to discuss the merits of any contested seat, but he referred 
 to the Cincinnati Convention, at which no State from which the.e were con- 
 testants was admitted to a representation on the Committee on Permanent 
 Organization. 
 
 Mr. Craig, of Missouri, desired to correct the gentleman from Mississippi. 
 The contested seat from that State was decided at Cincinnati before the per- 
 
s 
 
 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Maine 
 
 New Hampshire... 
 
 Yeas. 
 
 8 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 Nays. 
 
 1 
 15 
 
 Massachusetts, 
 
 Rhode Island 
 
 Connecticut 
 
 13 
 
 4 
 
 & 
 
 7 
 
 Pennsylvania 
 
 Delaware 
 
 Maryland 
 
 New York 
 
 Virginia 
 
 27 
 
 3 
 
 7 
 
 35 
 
 Tennessee 
 
 Kentucky 12 
 
 Wisconsin 5 
 
 Michigan 6 
 
 Iowa 4 
 
 Arkansas 
 
 California 2 
 
 Oregon 3 
 
 Minnesota 4 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 .12 
 
 manent organization, and the Missouri Delegates were fully represented on 
 the Committee. 
 
 Mr. Cessna, of Pennsylvania, moved to amend by striking out all after 
 the enacting clause in the original resolutions, and inserting as follows : 
 
 JResolved, That there now shall be appointed two Committees; each to con- 
 sist of one member from each State, to be selected by tbe respective delega- 
 tions thereof ; one a Committee on Permanent Organization, and the other on 
 Credentials ; and that in determining the controversy in regard to the disputed 
 seats of the Illinois Delegation, the members of the Committee on Creden- 
 tials of that State shall not be permitted to vote thereon, and in determining 
 the controversy from the State of New York, the members of the Committee 
 on Credentials from that State shall not be permitted to vote. 
 
 Mr. Cessna moved the previous question, which being ordered, the vote 
 was taken upon the above substitute by States, and the same was adopted, as 
 follows : 
 
 Yeas. Kays. 
 
 North Carolina 10 
 
 South Carolina -. 8 
 
 Georgia 1U 
 
 Alabama 9 
 
 Louisiana 6 
 
 Missouri 9 
 
 Indiana 13 
 
 Illinois 11 
 
 Ohio 23 
 
 Mississippi 7 
 
 Texas 4 
 
 Florida 3 
 
 Mr. Fisher. We protest against the vote of the State of New York being 
 received and counted here. 
 
 The Chair. The protest is not now in order. 
 
 Mr. Fisher. We desire to enter it on the journal. 
 
 The original resolution, as amended, was then adopted. 
 
 Mr. Cessna moved to reconsider the vote, and to lay the motion on the 
 table. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. Mathews, of Mississippi, offered the following : 
 
 Besolved, That the Delegates from the States of New York and Illinois, 
 whose seats are contested, be requested not to participate in the proceedings of 
 this body, until the Committee on Credentials shall have determined and 
 reported to the Convention, which of said contestants are entitled to seats. 
 
 Mr. Clark, of Missouri, raised the point of order that a similar motion had 
 been offered, and the Convention had virtually rejected it. 
 
 Tbe Chair. The point of order is not well taken. 
 
 Mr. Cessna moved to lay the resolution on the table. 
 
 Mr. Clark, of Mississippi, objected to the delegations from New York 
 voting on this question, on the ground that they are parties in interest. 
 
 The vote to lay the resolution on the table was then demanded by States, 
 and resulted as follows : 
 
 257^ 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 ... 8 
 
 North Carolina 10 
 
 South Carolina. 8 
 
 Georgia 
 
 Alabama 
 
 Louisiana 
 
 Missouri 9 
 
 Indiana 13 
 
 Illinois • 11 
 
 Ohio... 23 
 
 Mississippi 
 
 Texas 
 
 Florida 8 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 
 Maine 
 
 N ew Hampshire 5 
 
 Vermont 5 Georgia 
 
 Massachusetts 13 
 
 Rhode Island 4 
 
 Connecticut™., 6 
 
 New Jersey 7 
 
 Pennsylvania 27 
 
 Delaware , 3 
 
 Maryland 8 
 
 New York 35 Texas 
 
 Virginia 15 
 
 So the resolution was laid on the table. 
 
 The roll of States was then called, and the following Committees were 
 appointed : 
 
 Tennessee 
 
 Kentucky 12 
 
 Wisconsin 5 
 
 Iowa 4 
 
 Michigan 6 
 
 Arkansas... 
 
 California 
 
 Oregon -3 
 
 Minnesota 4 
 
 Yeas. Nays 
 .12 
 
 44 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 9 
 
 On Permanent Organization— Virginia, John Brannon ; Indiana, S. K. Wolfe ; Connecticut, A. C. 
 Linpit ; Minnesota; J. Travis Roarer; Michigan, A. C. Baldwin; South Curolina, B. H.Wilson; 
 Oregon, John K. Limerick ; New York, Sidney T. Fai r child; Louisiana, E. LaSere ; Rhode Island, 
 John M, Francis ; Massachusetts, t hester W. chapin ; De'aware, John B. Pennington ; Iowa, E. H. 
 Thiuer ; New Jersey, Robert Hamilton ; Illinois. A. M. Herrington ; Texas, F It. Lubbock; Penn- 
 sylvania, John Cessna ; Ohio, George W. Houk ; Florida, Thomas J. Eppes ; California, G. W. Pat- 
 rick ; * ississsippi, Charles Clark; Arkansas, J< hn J. Sturman ; North Carolina, Wm. A.Moore; 
 > arylainj, John 11 Emory; Missouri, Samuel B. Churchill; Georgia, John H. Lumpkin; Tennes- 
 see, Thomas M. Jones ; Kentucky, Colbert Cecil ; Wisconsin, E.S.Bragg; Alabama, A. B. Meek; 
 Vermont, H. E. Stoughton; New Hampshire, Robert S., Webster ; Maine, Wm. H. Burrell. 
 
 On Credentials— Virginia, E. W.Hubbard; Indiana/ S. A. Hall; Connecticut, James Gallagher; 
 Minnesota, Henry H. Sibley; Michigan, Benjamin Follett ; South Carolina, B F. Perry ; Oregon, 
 Lausing Mont: New York, D. DeWoli ; Louisiana, F. H. Hatch ; Rhode Island, George H. Browne; 
 Massachusetts. Oliver Stevens ; Delaware, Wm. G. Whitely ; Iowa, D. 0. Finch; New Jersey, Albert 
 It. Speer; Illinois, Wm J. Allen; Texas. Gen. E.Greer; Pennsylvania, A. M North; Ohio, Jas. B. 
 Steedman; Florida, Charles E. Dycke ; California, John S.Dudley; Mississippi, Wm S.Barry; 
 Arkansas. Van H. Manning; North Carolina, R. R. Bridges ; Maryland, Wm. S Gittings ; Mis- 
 souri, John M. hrum ; Georgia. Julian Hartridge ; Tennessee, W H. Carroll; Kentucky, G. T. Wood,; 
 Wisconsin, P.H.Smith; Alabama, M. W.M.Brooks; Vermont, Stephen Thomas; New Hamp- 
 shire, Aaron P. Hughes ; Maine, Charles D. Jameson. 
 
 Mr. S. H. Buskirk, of Indiana, moved the following : 
 
 Resolved, That the States be called in their order, and that the list of Dele- 
 gates from each State be furnished to the Secretary, and, whenever there is a 
 contest, the papers relating to such be referred to the Committee on Creden- 
 tials. 
 
 Adopted, and the list of Delegates handed to the Secretary, by the Chair- 
 men of the different Delegations. 
 
 Mr. Lawrence, of Louisiana, moved as an amendment, to add at the end of 
 the resolution that the communication of the New York contesting Delega- 
 tion in the hands of the Chairman be read, and then referred to the Commit- 
 tee on Contested Seats. 
 
 Mr. Cochran moved to amend, by referring the letter without reading, and 
 called the previous question, which was ordered. 
 
 Mr. Cochran's amendment was adopted, and the resolution of Mr. Buskirk 
 amended so as to refer the New York letter to the Committee on Contested 
 Seats without reading, was then agreed to. 
 
 Mr. 0. B. Ficklin, of Illinois, offered the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That a Committee of one Delegate from each State, to be selected 
 by the Delegation thereof, be appointed to report resolutions, and that all reso- 
 lutions, in relation to the platform of the Democratic party, be referred to said 
 Committee, on presentation, without debate. 
 
 Pending the question on this resolution, the Convention, on motion of Mr. 
 Dawson, of Pennsylvania, adjourned until 10 o'clock to-morrow (Tuesday) 
 morning. 
 
 SECOND 3DA-3rT. 
 
 Tuesday, April 24, 1860. 
 
 The Convention re-assembled at 10 o'clock, in the Hall of the Institute. 
 The galleries were filled, the North gallery being reserved exclusively for 
 ladies. 
 
 Hon. T. B. Flournot called the Convention to order, and announced that the 
 first business in order was the reading of the minutes of yesterday's proceed- 
 ings, but these not being in readiness, the reading was suspended. 
 
 The President pro tern, announced that the next business in order was the 
 report of the Committees. 
 
 Mr. Payne, of Ohio, suggested that the question pending at the adjourn- 
 ment was first in order. The reports of Committees would only be first in 
 order after the permanent organization was completed. 
 
 The President. The question pending at the adjournment is not neces- 
 sarily in order, but the Chair will entertain a motion to take up the business 
 on the table, if no objections are made. 
 
10 
 
 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Judge Meek, of Alabama, moved that the Committee on Permanent Organiz- 
 ation be now requested to report. 
 
 The Presibent pro tern. That is in order. If the Committee on Perma- 
 nent Organization is ready to report, their report will be received. 
 
 Mr. Cessna, of Pennsylvania, Chairman of the Committee, made the 
 following report of Permanent Officers of the Convention: 
 
 For President— Hon. CALEB CU6HING, of Massachusetts. 
 
 For Viee Presidents and Secretaries : 
 
 MAINE. VIRGINIA 
 
 Vice President— Th D. Robinson. jVice President — 0. It. Funston 
 Secretary — C. Record. 
 
 NAW HAMPSHIRE. 
 
 Yice President — Daniel Marcy. 
 Secretary- 
 
 -George A. Bingham. 
 
 VERMONT. 
 
 Vice President — Jasper Rand. 
 Secretary— P. W. Hyde. 
 
 MASSACHUSETTS. 
 
 Vice President— Isaac Davis. 
 Secretary— B. F. Watson. 
 
 RHODE ISLAND. 
 
 Vice President— Gideon Bradford. 
 Secretary — Amisa Sprague. 
 
 CONNECTICUT. 
 
 Vice President — Samuel Arnold. 
 Secretary— M. R. West. 
 
 NEW JERSEY. 
 
 Vice President — YVm. Wright. 
 Secretary — Jon C. Rafferty. 
 
 NEW TORE. 
 
 Vice President— Erastus Corning. 
 Secretary — Edward Cooper. 
 
 PENNSYLVANIA. 
 
 Vice Pres't — Th s. Cunningham. 
 Secretary — Franklin Vansant. ' 
 
 DELAWARE. 
 
 Vice President— W H. Ross. 
 Secretary — John H. Buley. 
 
 MARYLAND. 
 
 Vice President — W. P.Bowie. 
 Secretary— E L F. Hardcastle. 
 
 ILJ.IN0I8. 
 
 Vice President— Z Cas^y. 
 Secretary— Robert Li. Ghws. [Secretary— R. E. GooieU. 
 
 NORTH CAROLINA. ARKANSAS. 
 
 Vice President — Bedford Brown. Vice President — Francis A.Terry. 
 Secretary — L. W. Humphrey. Secretary — V, W Hoadlt-y. 
 
 SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 Vice President— B. H Brown. 
 Secretary — Franklin Gaillard. 
 
 GEORGIA. 
 
 Vice President — James Thomas. 
 Secretary — J J. Dimond. 
 
 ALABAMA 
 
 Vice President— R. G. Scott. 
 Secretary — N. H. R. Dawson. 
 
 MISSISSIPPI. 
 Vice President — James Drane. 
 Secretary— W. H. H. Tyson. 
 
 LOUISIANA. 
 
 Vice President — B. Taylor. 
 Secretary — Charies Jones. 
 
 OHIO. 
 
 Vice Presid(nt — David Tod. 
 Secretary— W. M. Stark. 
 
 KENTUCKY. 
 
 Vice President — B. Spalding. 
 Secretary — Robert McKee. 
 
 TENNESSEE. 
 
 Vi e President — J. 0. C. Atkins. 
 Secretary — John R. Howard. 
 
 INDIANA, v 
 Vice President — Isaac C. Elston, 
 
 MICHIGAN- 
 
 Vice President — H. H Riley. 
 Secretary— John G. Parkhurst. 
 
 FLORIDA 
 
 Vice President— B. F. Wardlaw. 
 Secretary — C. E. Dycke. 
 
 TEXAS. 
 
 Vice President— H. R. Runnels. 
 Secretary — Thomas P. Ochiltree. 
 
 MISSOURI. 
 
 Vice Pres't— Abraham Hunter. 
 Secretary — J. T. Mense. 
 
 IOWA. 
 
 Vice President— T. W. Claggett. 
 Secretary — J. W. Bosier. 
 
 WISCONSIN. 
 
 Vice Presideut — Fred'kW Horn. 
 Secretary — A F Pratt. 
 
 CALIFORNIA. 
 
 Vice President— J. A Dreibelbis. 
 Secretary — John S. Dudley. 
 
 MINNESOTA. 
 
 Vice President— W . W. Phe'.ps. 
 Secretary— G. T. Hosser. 
 
 OREGON 
 Vi;e President — S. P. Denison. 
 Secretary— R. P. Metcalf. 
 
 ecretary — Lafayette Devlin, 
 
 The announcement of the name of the permanent President was received 
 with loud applause. 
 
 The Committee farther recommended that the rules and regulations 
 adopted by tne National Democratic Convention of 1852 and 1856 be adopted 
 by this Convention for its government, with this additional rule : 
 
 " That in any State whichhasnot provided or directed by its State Conven- 
 tion bow its vote may be given, the Convention will recognize the right of 
 each Delegate to cast his individual vote." 
 
 John N, Francis, Secretary. JOHN CESSNA, Chairman. 
 
 Mr. McCoox, of Ohio, moved that the report of the Committee be accepted, 
 and the Committee discharged. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. McCook moved that the report of the Committee be adopted. 
 
 Mr. Clark, of Mississippi, stated that the additional rule had been added by 
 the Committee without the knowledge or consent of a majority of the mem- 
 bers. The question on its adoption was brought before the Committee, and 
 voted down on a call of the States. 
 
 Mr. Cassidt, of Pennsylvania, rose to a point of order. The report had 
 been adopted, and there was no question before the Convention. 
 
 The Chair. The point of order is not well taken. 
 
 Mr. Clark. The report has been accepted, not adopted. The Committee 
 at its regular meeting, had refused to alter the rules of the former Conven- 
 tions, by the addition of the rule now reported. He did not charge any un- 
 fairness to the presiding officer of the Committee, who, doubtless, did his 
 best to get all the Committee together again, to re-consider its original action. 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 11 
 
 'O 
 
 But he, and others of the Committee, had not been notified and had no know- 
 ledge of the alteration that had been made, until it was announced here. He 
 therefore moved that the proposed additional rule be stricken from the report. 
 
 Mr. Richardson, of Illinois. If I propose to go into an inquiry of what 
 was done by the Committee, it nrght be proper to say that the proposition 
 now submitted was acted upon in a fuller meeting, as I am told, than that of 
 last night, and adopted unanimously. I do not propose to discuss with the 
 gentleman trom Mississippi the subject as to the action of the Committee. I 
 propose to place it upon the basis of its own merits. Where a State Conven- 
 tion has met and instructed its Delegation as a unit, and they have accepted 
 the condition, they are bound by it. Wherever they give no such instruction, 
 wherever they have refused in a State Convention to give such instruction, it 
 is proper to place the right of the Delegate upon the broad and di-tinct 
 ground of right. But where they have entered into an organization, and are 
 pledged, they are not at liberty to over-run the expressed wishes and will of 
 their constituents. But I propose to place the question of individuality upon 
 the broad ground of right, and right alone. [Applause.] I say upon that 
 ground the report of the Committee ought to be adopted. 
 
 Mr. Lubbock, of Texas, made an explanation of the action of the Com- 
 mittee. They had spent some three hours in session, at which this subject 
 was fully, fairly and freely discussed. The resolution now proposed to be 
 added had been voted down. The Chairman of the Committee had called a 
 meeting this morning, in order, as it w T as understood, to receive the names of 
 the Vice Presidents and Secretaries not reported at the regular meeting. At 
 this adjourned meeting, Avhen many members of the Committee were absent, 
 the alteration had been made. He called upon the Convention to sustain the 
 majority of the Committee, and to discountenance any usurpation of power 
 on the part of a portion of a Committee. They had to-day presented to the 
 Convention, as its permarent presiding officer, a man of ability — a man of 
 intellect — a man of power — [cheers] — and the rights of every Delegate were 
 safe in his hands. The merits of the proposed amendment were fully 
 discussed before the Committee, and no reason was seen, ii[ on a full argument, 
 why the rule that had worked well in 1852 and 1856 should not work well 
 now. 
 
 Mr. Barry, of Mississippi, suggested that the Committee on Permanent 
 Organization had no power or right to report rules. He should raise the point 
 of order at the proper time. 
 
 Mr. Lubbock continued to argue in favor of striking the proposed amend- 
 ment from the report. 
 
 Mr. :^alisbury, of Delaware, desired the reading of the proposed rule, as. 
 many of the Delegates did not fully understand the question. 
 
 Mr. Cessna explained that, as Chairman of the Committee on Organization, 
 he had labored hard to get the whole of the Committee together, again to 
 consider this question of rules. If he had failed, it had only been because 
 of the limited time. As to the merits of the proposed amendment, he held 
 that the old rule of 1852 and 1856 would be construed to deprive those Dele- 
 gates who happened to be in a minority from freely and fully expressing 
 their views in the Convention and in reality disfranchising them. Ihe rule 
 which it was proposed to add to the rules of the former National Conventions 
 of the party, was to the effect that in any State, which is not directed by its 
 State Convention how to cast its vote, the Convention will recognize the 
 right of each Delegate to cast his individual vote. Although it was not in 
 order to allude to what had taken place in a Committee, yet as other gentle- 
 men had done so, he might be permitted to say that a similar proposition had 
 only been voted down by a small majority. Upon the re-assembling of the 
 Committee, a large majority had agreed to the rule row reported. As he 
 
12 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 had stated already, he had endeavored to procure the attendance of all the 
 Committee at the adjourned morning session. Only two had been absent, and 
 with these exceptions, he had been unanimously instructed to make the 
 report as it had been made. They had heard that the rule formerly adopted 
 had worked well in foimer years, and they were therefore urged to adhere to 
 the old rule. 
 
 But, as he had said, should the old rule prevail now and the majority of the 
 Pennsylvania Delegation decide among themselves to cast the vote of the State 
 as a unit, he and the constituency represented by him would be virtually 
 disfranchised. In the Pennsylvania State Convention, of which he was a 
 member, no proposition to cast the vote of the State as a unit was entertained. 
 The Committee on Re?olutiors in that Convention had, od the contrary, rejected 
 such a prop* sition. The amended rule was designed simply to explain beyond 
 a misconstruction, what was the honest meaning of the rule that heretofore 
 prevailed, but which was now in danger of misinterpretation. In the Conventions 
 at Baltimore and Cincinnati, the right of every Delegate to vote had been 
 recognized, and several of the States, Ohio amongst the number, had divided 
 their votes on almost every ballot. It might as well be claimed that it was 
 wrong to change the platform, as that it was wrong to alter the rules. He as a 
 Northern man, had come here prepared to change the platform of the party, if 
 it was deemed advisable to do so, and he had also come with a candidate from 
 the extreme South as his first choice for the Presidency. He asked the 
 Convention not to strike out this amendment, and so leave him to be dis- 
 franchised if a wrong interpretation should be put upon the old rule. 
 
 Mr. C. did not profess to be extreme in his views, but he desired to be pro- 
 tected in his rights. He was not of those to threaten non- concurrence in the will 
 of the majority, but was prepared to submit and to stay in the Convention, even 
 it disfranchised. There were some of his colleagues who were prepared to vote 
 for one man, who was not his own choice. They also were in a minority of the 
 whole Delegation, and it would be an act of injustice to disfranchise them. He 
 again appealed to the Convention not to reject the proposed amendment to the 
 rules. To disfranchise a portion of the Democracy of Pennsylvania might be 
 to give that State to the Republicans, but if the rights of all Delegates were 
 respected, the Democracy would again achieve there a glorious triumph. 
 [Applause.] 
 
 Mr. Barry, of Mississippi, raised the point of order that the Committee on 
 Permanent Organization had no right to report rules, and that so much of their 
 report should be rejected, 
 
 Mr, Josiah Randall, of Pennsylvania, said he, too, was in favor of a candi- 
 date from the South, and would vote for -no man who had not the entire 
 confidence of the South. If the gentleman from his own State, (Mr. Cessna,) 
 said as much, he would act differently from what was supposed to be Irs views 
 and wishes at home. He desired that the proposed amendment should be 
 stricken out, because with the two- third rule that prevailed in the Convention, 
 such amendment would virtually disfranchise the majority, and enable one-third 
 of a delegation to neutralize the action of the remaining two- thirds. He re- 
 viewed the action of the Pennsylvania State Convention, and protested against 
 any action of the Convention that would destroy the efficacy of the vote of that 
 {State in the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Bishop, of Connecticut, claimed that the point of order raised by the 
 gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Barry) ought to be decided at once by the 
 Chair. 
 
 The Chair. The point of order must be settled at once by the Chair. The 
 Convention yesterday decided to adopt the rules of the last National Convention, 
 and the Chair is of opinion that in reporting rules, the Committee traveled out 
 of its province, and that so much of its report is out of order. [Applause.] 
 
 Mr. Bishop. I now move the previous question. 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 13 
 
 o 
 
 The Chaie. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Richardson) was recogniz-d 
 by the Chair, and has the lloor. 
 
 Mr. Bishop. I raise the point that the gentleman rose to address the Chair, 
 on a question now declared out of order, and is not, therefore, entitled to the 
 floor. 
 
 Mr. Richardson, who had remained standing, said that he had heard the 
 remarks of the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Randall) with surpriflfe. It 
 might be interesting for the Convention to know how long that gentleman had 
 been a member of the Democratic party. 
 
 A Voice. I hope the President will not allow any personal allusions. 
 [Cries of "Order ! order!" 4, Go on ! Go on !"] 
 
 Several Delegates rose at once to points of order, without being recognized 
 by the Chair, when 
 
 Mr. McCook, of Ohio, desired to appeal from a decision of the Chair. It had 
 been decided by the Chair that so much of the report as related to the recom- 
 mendation of rules to govern the Convention, was out of order. The Chair 
 had based his decision upon the statement that the rules of the last Convention 
 had been adopted yesterday by the present Convention to govern its action. 
 This was an error. The resolution adopted yesterday had reference only to the 
 temporary organization, and only adopted the old rules untd the permanent 
 organization should be effected. Ohio, on this ground, desired to appeal from 
 the decision of the Chair. 
 
 The President pro tern The Chair now remembers that the statement of 
 the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. McCook, is correct. The Chair in making hi3 
 former decision, labored under a nrsapprehension, and now recalls and reverses 
 that decision. The report of the Committee on Organization is in order. 
 
 Mr. Lawrence, of Louisiana, read from the report of the previous day's pro- 
 ceedings, and argued that the resolution contemplated that the Committee on 
 Organization should report permanent officers only, and that they had no power 
 to leport rules. 
 
 Mr. Whitney. I call for a division of the question on the report of the 
 Committee. 
 
 Mr. Briere, of Alabama, again raised the point of order, that the Committee 
 on Organization had, under the resolution, no power to report rules at all. 
 
 Mr. Cessna rose to a point of order. The Convention was now entertaining 
 questions as to the power of the Committee on Organization to report rales. 
 The report made by that Committee had been received and accepted. It was 
 too late now to entertain such questions of order as had been raised. The point 
 should have been taken before the acceptance of tho Committee's report. 
 
 Mr. Whitney. Do I understand the Chair to rule that the question on the 
 adoption of the report of the Committee on Organization is divisible ? 
 
 The President pro tern. The Chair so decides, the question is divisible. 
 Mr. Richardson. I claim the right to the floor, which [ have not yet yielded .. 
 After I have said what I desire to say, then the gentleman can press his motion 
 for a division 6f the question. 
 
 The President pro tern. The gentlemaa from Illinois is entitled to the 
 floor. 
 
 A Delegate. The Chair has decided the question to be divisible. The 
 question, therefore, is on that portion relating to the permanent organization. 
 The gentleman from Illinois must speak to the question of the permanent 
 organization, unless he appeal from the decision of the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Samuels, of Iowa. Whether the question is divisible or not, is now im- 
 material. The call for a division cannot affect the right of the gentleman from 
 Illinois to the floor. He was entitled to the floor, and could uot be deprived 
 of it by any such point of order. 
 
 The President pro tern. The question as to whether the report is divisible 
 
14 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 came up in order. The Chair has decided that it is divisible. Does the gen- 
 tleman from Illinois appeal from the decision of the Chair? 
 
 Mr. Samuels. But I again ask the Chair, if the- gentleman from Illinois, 
 when he was entitled to the floor and had not yielded it, can be deprived of 
 his right by such a point of order ? 
 
 The Chair. Certainly not. The point of order having been raised, was 
 decided by the Chair, but the division of the question could not be called for, 
 uutil the gentleman from Illinois had yielded the floor. 
 
 A Delegate raised the point of order that the gentleman from Illinois had 
 •pokeu once on this question before he had taken the floor the second time, aid 
 was not, therefore, entitled to speak again until others desiring the fluor had 
 been heard. 
 
 The President pro tern. When the gentleman from Illinois obtained the 
 floor, the Chair did not observe any other gentleman who desired to speak. 
 
 Mr. Richardson was proceeding when the points of order had interrupted 
 him, to pay his respects to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Randall. He 
 relieved it had been asserted, and not denied by him, that he had recently 
 come into the Democratic fold. About the political history of the gentleman 
 he knew but little. The gentleman has taken upon himself to thrust into this 
 debate the complicated question of the Presidency, and to raise the question 
 between Northern and Southern candidates. He was not here for the purpose 
 of disturbing these questions now. From early boyhood to this hour his man- 
 hood had been devoted to the cause of the Democratic party, until his life had 
 fallen into "the sere and yellow leaf." He did not desire to be driven by re- 
 cruits of yesterday from his position. It might be that some of those who had 
 fought and contended with the Democrats throughout many a campaign, were 
 willing to follow the example of the Greeks of old before Troy, and when they 
 could not make an impression upon its walls, to enter within them concealed 
 in a wooden horse, and thus to effect the capture of the city. When gentlemen 
 who have so recently joined the party come here, they are welcome, and they 
 will, no doubt, in time, do good service in the party ; but the gentleman from 
 Pennsylvania, in his attempt to thrust this question of the Presidency upon us, 
 was premature, and he protested against his course. The Convention were en- 
 gaged in deciding a question of right or wrong respecting a report of the Com- 
 mittee on Organization. The Committee had reported rules for the govern- 
 ment of the Convention. In all previous Conventions which he had attended, 
 the Committee on Organization had exercised the same power. This Com- 
 mittee had done no more than former Committees had done, and they had in 
 their report followed out the spirit of the resolutions adopted at Cincinnati. 
 
 Mr. Wright, of Pennsylvania, took the floor. 
 
 Mr. Wright. "Wright of Pennsylvania " You ought to know me, for I 
 have been in every Convention that ever was held. [Loud laughter.] If 
 there ever was a time or occasion when there should be harmony among the 
 members of the Democratic party it was now. He was surprised that pfrer a 
 Committee composed of representatives of every State in the Union had 
 made a report, with only two Stares dissenting, any opposition should r»e 
 mad^ to its adoption. He charged upon those who had made this opposition 
 the consequences that might ensae from the rejection of this report It was 
 well known that unless some harmonv shall prevail in the Convention the 
 nominations made here woul 1 be worth but the paper upon which the naies 
 of i he nominees were written. From the year 1836 to 1860 he had been a 
 member of the Na ional Democratic Convention every time it had assembled, 
 and he never yet had seen an attempt to reject a report of this kind forced 
 upon the Convention. The practice of every Democratic Convention had 
 been to allow every Delegate entitled to a vote to cast that vote as he pleased, 
 unless under instructions from his State. The State of Pennsylvania had 
 
Proceedings at Charleston, 15 
 
 given this privilege to her representatives here, ond it was the people, no* 
 the Delegates, who were heard. When it was agreed by a Sta'e that her vote 
 should be cast as a unit, he was the last man to object to it ; but when the 
 State Convention foils to exercise that power, or is silent upon the subject, 
 then it is the province of the Deb gates who are here, to act in their repre- 
 sentative capacity, and to cast their votes in conformity with the wishes of 
 their constituency. It was well known in the Convention of 1844 when the 
 Democratic party did him the honor to make him the presiding officer, the 
 State of Pennsylvania exercised the right to cast its divided vote. In the 
 Convention of 1848, the Delegation of Pennsylvania was again divided from 
 the State, and he was himself one of eight Delegates who cast votes in the 
 minority. In 1852 Pennsylvania presented its own candidate, and wastl ere- 
 fore united. 
 
 A Delegate. Did not the State of Pennsylvania cast a unit vote in 1844 ? 
 
 Mr. Wright. No. Only upon some points upon the question of the adop- 
 tion of the two-third rule, the vote stood twelve to thirteen. The minority 
 nominated for the Presidency Richard M. Johnson. He thought he could 
 pledge Pennsylvania as a unit this time for a Presidential candidate. Now 
 the Committee had brought this report into the Convention, and he advocated 
 its adoption. But he was not one "who would secede, if the Convention 
 should adopt a rule unpalatable to him. He would stay in the Convention 
 so long as a majority of the body remained here. But if the rule was 
 adopted here as adopted at Cincinnati, it would be construed into the right to 
 deny him the privilege of casting a representative vote for his own district. 
 They would be acting in opposition to the Democracy of his own State, who 
 had agreed that he should have the power he claimed. The Convention had 
 no right to ostracise him, and to deprive him of a power conferred upon him 
 by the State he represented. He moved the previous question. 
 
 [Cries of " No ! no!" and several Delegates attempting to speak amidst 
 calls for " Question 1" and cries of " Hear ! hear ! hear !"] 
 
 Mr. Wright insis'ed upon the call for the previous question. 
 
 The President pro tern. The Chair desires to explain the state of the 
 question. The Chair decided the report of the Committee, so far as it related 
 to rules, out of order. The only question now before the House is on that 
 portion of the report which names permanent officers. The previous ques- 
 tion has been demanded upon this, and until the Convention shall decide 
 whether or not it will order the previous question, debate is out of order. 
 
 Mr. McCook rose to a question of privilege. He desired to remind the 
 Chair that the State of Ohio had appealed irom its decision, and that the 
 Chair had receded therefrom. 
 
 The President pro tern. The gentleman from Ohio is correct. The Chair 
 reviewed its decision, but decided that a division of the question on the 
 report was in order. The previous question has been demanded. 
 
 [Loud cries of " Question ! question !"] 
 
 The previous question was then ordered. 
 
 The President pro tern, 'lhe question now is on the adoption of the 
 report of the Committee nan'ing permanent officers of this Convention. 
 [Cries of "Question ! question !"J 
 
 The report was then adopted with one dissenting voice. 
 
 Several Delegates rose to address the Chair. 
 
 The President pro tern. No business is in order until the permanent offi- 
 cers now chosen have taken the'r places. 
 
 Mr. Samuels, of Pennsylv mia, obtained the floor, and moved the appoint- 
 ment of a Committee of two to conduct the permanent presiding officer to 
 the Chair. Agreed to. 
 
16 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Messrs. Clark, of Mississippi, and Richardson, of Illinois, were appointed 
 such Committee. 
 
 The President pro tern, then addressed the Convention as follows : 
 
 Gentlemen of the Convention : — Before introducing to you the perma- 
 nent officer of this Convention, I wish to return to you my thanks for the 
 compliment you have paid me. To have presided over such a body as this 
 is indeed honor enough for any gentleman. But before retiring, fellow-citi- 
 zens, let me exhort you in your councils to moderation and harmony. 
 Recollect we are brethren engaged in the same great cause — embarked on 
 the same vessel, and under such circumstances that one plank of the ship 
 cannot sink without the others being submerged. Recollect that we have a 
 common destiny and a common fame. You should regard each other as 
 brothers, and not as hostile forces marching forward to hostile music, under 
 different flags. The Democratic party has but one flag — the flag of our 
 common country — and that teaches us fraternal love and unity. Let us 
 then talk no more about sections. We know no North, no South, no East, 
 no West, where Democrats are concerned. No ; we go on the Democratic 
 principle, that it matters not where a Democrat resides — whether in the land 
 of perpetual flowers, or in the land of eternal icebergs and everlasting frosts — 
 if he be a Democrat, he may embark on the same deck, and be protected by 
 the same Stars and Stripes. He is a Democrat, and, all other things being 
 equal, he is entitled to the same consideration from wherever he may come. 
 Let us talk no more of sections. It obliterates the kindest feelings from our 
 hearts. To take a sectional view of Democrats, as compared with the broad 
 ground of Democratic brotherly love, regardless of sections, is like a sluggish, 
 winding, obscure stream, as compared with the noble and gigantic Mississippi, 
 which rolls onward in its course to the Gulf of Mexico. Fellow-citizens, our 
 duty here is plain. We come here to consider the good of the great Demo- 
 cratic party. To effect our object, requires a concentration of efforts. It is 
 our duty to meet all our brethren most cordially, and so to combine all in- 
 terests as to secure the effect and advantages of a concentration of effort. 
 That concentration of effort may well be illustrated by the course of the 
 great Father of Waters, the river which commences at its source in the moun- 
 tains, in springs and streams so small, that a hunter would scarcely widen 
 his steps to cross them. But, running on, it mingles with other streams ; 
 yet so shallow that the mother duck can scarcely swim her callow young in 
 its waters. Then rolling onward, it mingles with yet other streams, until, at 
 last, it forms the great Mississippi River — so deep and so vast that all the 
 navies of the world could ride in safety upon its waters. It is your duty to 
 gather all these streams of Democracy together into one flood, so that the 
 bark freighted with all our hopes and destinies may ride in triumph and in 
 safety, [Loud and continued applause.] • 
 
 The Committee appeared upon the platform with the Hon. Caleb 
 Cushing, who advanced and shook hands with the temporary President. 
 
 Mr. Flournoy. Gentlemen of the Convention :— It is with great 
 pleasure I introduce to you, as your permaneut presiding officer, Col. Caleb 
 Cushing, of Massachusetts, and allow me to congratulate you on the wisdom 
 of your selection. 
 
 Mr. Cushing was greeted with loud and long-continued applause. When 
 the cheers had subsided, he spoke as follows : 
 
 Gentlemen of the Convention :— I respectfully tender to you the most 
 earnest expression of profound gratitude for the honor which you have this 
 d^y done me in appointing me to preside over your deliberations. It is, 
 however, a responsible duty imposed, much more than a high honor conferred. 
 In the discharge of that duty, in the direction of business and of debate, in 
 the preservation of order, it shall be my constant endeavor faithfully and 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 17 
 
 •a 
 
 impartially to officiate here as your minister, and most hnmbly to reflect 
 your will. In a great deliberative assembly like this, it is not the presiding 
 officer in whom the strength resides. It is not his strength, but yours — your 
 intelligence ; your sense of order ; your instinct of self-respect. I rely, 
 gentlemen, confidently upon you, not upon myself, for the prompt and par- 
 liamentary dispatch of the business of this Convention. 
 
 Gentlemen, you have come here from the green hills of the Eastern States 
 — from the rich States of the imperial center— from the sun-lighted plains of 
 the South — from the fertile States of the mighty basin of the Mississippi — 
 from the golden shores ot the distant Oregon and California — [loud cheers !] 
 — you have come hither in the exercise of the highest functions of a free 
 people, to participate, to aid in the selection of the future rulers of the 
 Republic. You do this as the representatives of the Democratic party — of 
 that great party of the Union, whose proud mission it has been, whose proud 
 miss on it is, to maintain the public liberties — to reconcile popular freedom 
 with constituted order — to maintain the sacred, reserved rights of the sove- 
 reign States— [loud and long continued applause] — to stand, in a word, the 
 perpstual sentinels on the outpost of the Constitution. [Cries of "that's the 
 talk," and loud cheers.] Ours, gentlemen, is the motto inscribed on that 
 scroll in the hands of the monumental statue of the iireat statesman of South 
 Carolina " Truth, Justice, and the Constitution." [Loud cheers.] Opposed 
 to us are those who labor to overthrow the Constitution, under the false and 
 insidious pretense of supporting it ; those who are aiming to produce in this 
 country a permanent sectional conspiracy — a traitorous sectional conspiracy 
 of one half the States of the Union against the other half; those who, im- 
 pelled by the stupid and half insane spirit of faction and fanaticism, would 
 hurry our land on to revolution and to civil war ; those, the banded enemies 
 of the Constitution, it is the part — the high and noble part of the Democratic 
 party of the Union to withstand ; to strike down and to conquer ! Aye ! 
 that is our part, and we will do it. In the name of our dear country, with 
 the help of God we will do it. [Loud cheers.] Aye, we will do it, for, 
 gentlemen, we will not distrust ourselves ; we will not despair of the genius 
 of our country ; we will continue to repose with undoubting faith in the good 
 Providence of Almighty God. [Loud applause ] 
 
 Gentlemen, I will not longer detain you from the important business of the 
 Convention. Allow me a few moments for the purpose of completing the 
 arrangements with the elected officers of the Convention, and then the Chair 
 will call upon you for such motions and propositions as may be in order before 
 the Convention. [Applause.] 
 
 The Temporary Secretary proceeded to call the roll of the Vice Presidents, 
 who took their places upon the platform. 
 
 The names of the Secretaries were then called. 
 
 The President stated that it might occupy some minutes for the Secreta- 
 ries to make arrangements amongst themselves for the business of the Con- 
 vention. He therefore suggested a brief recess. 
 
 The Convention took five minutes recess. 
 
 Upon the Convention being again called to order, 
 
 Mr. Jacksont, of Georgia, rose to a question of privilege. That question 
 referred to the Delegation from the State of Georgia, on whose behalf he 
 claimed for one moment the attention of the Convention. 
 
 The President. The gentleman will state his question of privilege. 
 
 Mr. Jackson. It is as to the right of the State of Georgia to a larger 
 nrmberof representatives on the floor than the regular number allowed her 
 on the floor of the Convention. The question as to the representation of 
 Georgia had been referred back, by the Committee on Credential, to the 
 Delegates from the State, on the ground that while a greater number of 
 
 2 
 
18 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Delegates than were regularly entitled to seats claimed admission to the 
 Convention, there was yet not a contest as to the seats. The State of Georgia 
 had appointed forty Delegates to come to Charleston, at two Conventions 
 which had been held at different times in that State. 
 
 Mr. Baylies, of Rhode Island, rose to a question of order. The Delegates 
 from Georgia had appeared before the Committee on Credentials, and it was 
 out of order to bring this subject before the Convention in advance of the 
 report of the Committee. 
 
 Mr. Jackson said the Committee on Credentials had already acted on the 
 matter, by referring it back to the Delegation from the State. 
 
 The President. The gentleman from Georgia will please pause a few 
 minutes. The question of order has been raised that the subject has been 
 referred to the Committee on Credentials, and that the report of that Com- 
 mittee is not yet in possession of the Convention. The point of order is well 
 taken. The subject cannot now be brought up in order ; but any motion 
 the gentleman from Georgia has to make will be in order whenever the 
 report of the Committee on Credentials shall be presented to the Con- 
 vention. 
 
 Mr. Barry, of Mississippi, moved that the rules of the Democratic Con- 
 vention of 1856 be adopted as the rules of this, and on this he called the 
 previous question. 
 
 Mr. Montgomery, of Pennsylvania, raised the point of order that the 
 report of a Committee on Organization, embracing the question of rules, was 
 yet before the Convention. The resolution, therefore, on the same subject, 
 was not in order. 
 
 The President. The question pending before the Convention when the 
 permanent officers took their places, was on the remaining portion of the report 
 of the Committee on Organization; that question is the one now in order. 
 
 Mr. Barry. Then I move to strike out from the report the additional rule. 
 
 Mr. McCook moved that the Convention take a recess till 4 P. M. The 
 Committee on Credentials had not yet reported, and there is great difference 
 of opinion on the report of the Committee on Organization, now before the 
 Convention. For the convenience of the Convention he made this motion 
 for a recess. 
 
 The President. The Chair will take the opportunity, before putting the 
 question for recess, as he is not aware how that will be decided, to give two 
 notices : 
 
 The first was a notice that the Committee on Credentials desired the 
 attendance of its members. 
 
 The second was a letter from the Trustees of the Charleston College, 
 inviting the members of the Convention to visit their Institution, which 
 was read as follows : 
 
 To the Honorable, the President of the National Democratic Convention now 
 meeting in Charleston: 
 
 Sir: — In obedience to the directions of the Trustees of the College of 
 Charleston, I beg leave to submit to you, sir, and through you, if you please, 
 to the other members of the Convention over which you preside, the sub- 
 joined notice — and to invite you and them, at your individual or collective 
 convenience, to visit the Museum of the College. We flatter ourselves that 
 you will find it deserving of your attention ; and we shall be much gratified 
 if your examination of it should hereafter be one of many agreeable recol- 
 lections of your meeting in our city. 
 
 I have the honor to be, with the highest respect, sir, your verv obedient 
 servant, M. KING. 
 
 Charleston, April 23, 1860, 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 19 
 
 "O 
 
 COLLEGE OF CHARLESTON. 
 
 The Museum of the College of Charleston will be open to visitors every 
 week day during the meeting of the Convention. On Saturday from 9 A. M. 
 to 6 P. M., and on every other week day from noon to 6 P. M. 
 
 It contains an extensive collection of highly valuable and many rare spe- 
 cimens in Natural History, Mineralogy, Geology, and Paleontology, of great 
 interest to the scientific inquirer, and well worthy the attention of every, 
 intelligent observer. By order of the Board of Trustees, 
 
 April 23, 1860. M. KING, President 
 
 The invitation was accepted by the Convention unanimously. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. McCook's motion for a recess, and' 
 the same was lost. 
 
 Mr. Russel, of Virginia, called for the reading of the latter portion of the 
 report of the Committee on Organization, which was read. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, ot Michigan, rose to a point of order, when the temporary 
 Presiding Officer left the Chair; the report of the Committee on Organiza- 
 tion was before the Convention, and the previous question was called and 
 ordered. A division of the question was called for. The question was put 
 on the first portion of the report of the Committee on Organization, and it 
 was adopted. The present Presiding Officer then took the Chair. The ques- 
 tion now was upon the adoption of the latter portion of the report. As the 
 previous question had been ordered, the latter portion of the report must be 
 voted upon without debate or amendment. 
 
 The President. If the facts are as stated by the gentleman from Michi- 
 gan, the point of order is well taken, and the position of the gentleman is^ 
 correct. The present presiding officer will appeal to his predecessor for in- 
 formation as to the correct position of the question. 
 
 Mr. Flournoy explained the position of the question, showing that the 
 previous question had been ordered ; that the question on the first part of the 
 report had been put and carried, and that the Convention was still under the 
 operation of the previous question, thus preventing amendment or debate. 
 
 Several Voices. " What is the question before the Convention ?" 
 
 The President announced the question to be on a motion made before the 
 previous question was ordered, to strike out from the report of the Committee 
 on Organization the additional rule. 
 
 The vote by States was demanded and the roll was called. 
 
 When Virginia was called, Mr. Moffit protested against the whole vote of 
 the State being cast in the negative. He denied the justice of. the principle 
 that a district had not the right to decide how it would vote,- Whilst he 
 denied the propriety of any interference on the part of this Convention, he 
 contended for the principle, and in the name of his constituents protested 
 against the principle contended for. He claimed and reserved to himself and 
 colleague the right, at any time, to decide for his district. He was appointed* 
 by the people of his own district, and was responsible to them alone. 
 
 When Indiana was called, several Delegates from that State rose to make 
 statements, and great confusion ensued, until the Chair compelled the observ- 
 ance of order. 
 
 When the State of Tennessee was called, Mr. Ewing stated that the Dele- 
 gation at its previous meeting had adopted a resolution that on all questions 
 but the nomination of a President, the vote of the State should be cast as a 
 unit. He had taken the sense of the Delegation, and the majority had voted 
 " no." He was, in casting the vote in the negative, not representing his 
 own individual, opinion at all. An affirmative vote on this proposition would 
 virtually abolish the rules adopted at former Conventions. He was, there- 
 fore, individually opposed to the vote. 
 
 Mr. Burrows, of Arkansas, cast half a vote in the affirmative. 
 
Teas. Nays. 
 
 Maine, 8 
 
 N^w Hampshire. 5 
 
 Vermont 5 
 
 Massachusetts 6 51 
 
 Rhode Island 4 
 
 Connecticut 6 
 
 New York 35 
 
 New Jersey 7 
 
 Yeas. Nays 
 
 Ohio 28 
 
 In iana 13 
 
 Illin..H 11 
 
 Michigan *: 
 
 Wisconsin 5 
 
 Iowa 4 
 
 Minnesota 4 
 
 California 2j 1* 
 
 Oregon. 3 
 
 103| 197 
 
 20 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Mr. Hooker, of Mi-sissippi, protested against his State casting a united vote 
 when he was opposed to the vote thus cast. He was called to order, and the 
 vote was then announced, the motion to strike out the additional rule being 
 lost by the following vote : 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 
 North Carolina 7 JS 
 
 South Carolina 8 
 
 Georgia 10 
 
 Florida 3 
 
 Alabama. 9 
 
 Louisiana 6 
 
 Mississippi -..- 7 
 
 Texas 4 
 
 Penn=y vauia 14 KHJArkansas k 3i 
 
 iDjlaware If i|;Missouri 3 7 
 
 Maryland 3f 4|Tenness"e ~ 12 
 
 Virginia 15 Kentucky 12 
 
 At the request of Mr. Clark, of Mississippi, the report of the Committee on 
 Organization was again read, and adopted by an almost unanimous vote. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, moved to re-consider that vote, and to lay that 
 resolution on the table. Adopted. 
 
 Mr. Payne, of Ohio, called for the consideration of the resolution for the ap- 
 pointment of a Committee of one from each State to report a Platform, and that 
 all resolutions relating to the Platform shall be referred to that Committee 
 without debate. Upon that resolution he called the previous question. 
 
 Mr. Barlow, of New York, desired to offer an amendment, and asked that it 
 be read for information of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Payne. I object to the reading, and demand that the call for the pre- 
 vious question shall be put. 
 
 The previous question was ordered and the resolution adopted. 
 
 Mr. Payne moved to re-consider that vote, and to lay the resolution on the 
 table. Adopted. 
 
 Mr, Burrows, of Arkansas, offered the following : 
 
 Resolved, That this Convention will not proceed to ballot for a candidate for 
 the Presidency, until the Platform shall have been adopted. 
 
 The President. The first business in order will be the call of the States, 
 that the names of the Committee on Resolutions may be handed in. The ques- 
 tion will then be taken on the motion of the gentleman from Arkansas. 
 
 The following names were then reported as the Committee on Resolutions : 
 
 Committee on Resolutions and Platform— Maine, A. M Roberts ; New Hampshire, Wm. Beven ; 
 Vermont, E. M. Brown ; Massachusetts, B. F. Butler; Kho.ie Island C. S. Bradley ; Connecticut. 
 A. G Hazard; New York, Ed Cogswell; New Jersey, Benj Williamson; Pennsylvania, A. B. 
 Wright ; Delaware. J. A. Bayard ; Maryland, B. S. Johns< n ; Virginia. J. Barbour ; North Carolina. 
 W. W. Avery ; South Carolina, J. S. Preston ; Georgia, J. v\ ingfield ; Florida, J. B. Owens; Alabama, 
 John Erwin ; Louisiana, R A Hunter ; Mississippi, E Barksd ale ; Texas, F. S Stockdale; Arkansas, 
 N. B. Burrows; Missouri, John M, Krum; Tennessee, Samuel Milligan ; Kentucky, R. K. Williams , 
 Ohio, H. B Payne; Indiana, P. C. Dunning ; Illinois, 0. B. Ficklin ; Michigan, G V N Lcthrop; 
 Wise >nsin, A. S. Palmer ; Iowa, B, M. Samuels ; Minnesota, J. M. Cavanaugh ; California, Austin E. 
 Smith ; Oregon, James J. Stevens. 
 
 Mr. Richardson, by consent of the Convention, stated that in a few remarks 
 he made this morning, he had been misinterpreted by a certain gentleman on the 
 floor. He had intended no discourtesy to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, 
 Mr. Randall, or to the Whig party, all of whom he desired to see come into the 
 Democratic fold. He could not, he would not offer a discourtesy to a gentle- 
 man so much his senior as the gentleman from Pennsylvania. He deemed this 
 explanation to be a duty — nothing more, and nothing less. 
 
 The question then recurring on the resolution of Mr. Burrows, of Arkansas, 
 
 Mr. Bishop called for the previous question. 
 
 Mr. Hamilton, of Maryland, moved to lay the resolution on the table. 
 
 The vote was called by States, and the motion to lay the resolution on the 
 table was lost by the following vote: 
 
Proceeding's at Charleston. 21 
 
 Yeas. Nays | Yeas. Nays.. Yeas. Nay*. 
 
 Maine 8 jVorth Carolina H> |Ohio 23 
 
 Vow Hampshire 5 'So th Carolina. 8 Indiana 13 
 
 ■ [llinoI« 11 
 
 Michigan 6 
 
 Wisconsin 5 
 
 Iowa 4 
 
 Minnesota . 4 
 
 California 4 
 
 Oregon 3 
 
 Fermonl 5 'Georgia 10 
 
 baaetts 11 {Florida 3 
 
 Rhode Island 4 lAlalmraa 9 
 
 Connecticut 2 4 'Louisiana * 6 
 
 sew York 35 I Mississippi 7 
 
 Hew Jersey 7JTexas... 4 
 
 Iennsylvania 17 10 ! Arkansas:. 4 
 
 lelaware 3 [Missouri 9 
 
 Maryland 5* 2i;Tenres<ee 12 321 270+ 
 
 Virginia 15 'Kentucky 12 
 
 The question recurring on the adoption of the resolution, the call for the prt- 
 T ious question was seconded, and the previous quest-on ord 'red. 
 
 The resolution was then adopted hy an almost unanimous vote, only two or 
 ;hree voices being heard in the negative. 
 
 Mr. Bisnop, of Connecticut, offered the following : 
 
 Resolved, That no member of this Convention be allowed to speak more than 
 once on the same question, nor for a longer time than fifteen minutes. 
 
 Mr. Bishop called for the previous question. 
 
 Mr. Cooper, of Alabama, moved to lay the resolution on the table. Lost. 
 
 Mr. White, of Massachusetts, called for a division of the question. 
 
 The previous question was seconded and ordered before the question was put. 
 
 Mr. Avery, of No'th Carolina, raised the point of order that the Convention 
 was acting ur.yler the rules of the House of Representatives, and that the one 
 hour rule was, therefore, the rule of the Convention. This resolution would 
 consequently be an alteration of the rules, and must lie over one day. 
 
 The President decided the point of order well taken, and the mover of tl e 
 resolution gave notice that he should call it up for adoption to-morrow. 
 
 Mr. Fisher, of Virginia, moved the following : 
 
 Resolved. That the Presiding Officer of this Convention be, and he is hereby 
 requested, to invite the ministers of different denominations in this city tv^open 
 the daily proceedings with prayer. Adopted. 
 
 Mr. Whiting, of Delaware, moved to adjourn until 10 o'clock to-morrow 
 morning. He made the motion because the Committee on Contested Seats de- 
 sired to hold a sess'on in the Hall this afternoon, and they would be prepared 
 to report to-morrow morning. 
 
 The moticn was temporarily waived. 
 
 Mr. Ewing, of Tennessee, suggested that the several resolutions to be re- 
 ferred to the Committee on Platform be handed to the Chairman of that Com- 
 mittee. Agreed to. 
 
 Judge Meek, of Alabama, presented to the Convention the Platform of his 
 Stare, which was referred under the rule. 
 
 The Chair announced that the Committee on Re-Vutions would meet at 
 Masonic Hall at 5 this afternoon. 
 
 It was announced that the Committee on Contested Seats would meet at 
 Market Hall at 5 P. M., to adjourn to the Hall of th - C mvention. 
 
 The Secretaries of the Cmvention were requested to meet in their Room 
 after the adjournment. 
 
 Mr. Pearce, of Louisiana, handed in a resolution from his State, which was 
 referred under the rule. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Pearce, the Convention then adjourned until 10 A. M., to- 
 morrow. 
 
 Wednesday, April 25, 1860. 
 
 The Convention met at ten o'clock, A. M., and the proceedings were 
 opened by prayer by the Rev. Dr. Bachman. 
 
 In consequence of the necessary absence of Mr. Hyde, Chairman of the 
 Recording Secretaries, the reading of yesterday's Journal was by unanimous 
 
22 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 consent dispensed with, and the keeping of the records of the Convention 
 were placed in charge of John G. Pakkhubst, of Michigan. 
 
 The calling of the roll was by unanimous consent dispensed with. 
 
 No Committee being ready to report, the President stated the first busi- 
 ness in order to be the resolution of Mr. Bishop, of Connecticut. 
 
 The Secretary read the resolution as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That no member of this Convention be allowed to speak more 
 than once on the same question, nor for a longer time than fifteen minutes. 
 
 Mr. Bishop demanded the previous question on the resolution. 
 
 The call for the previous question was seconded, and on the question, 
 " Shall the main question be now put?" a vote by States was called for by 
 several States. 
 
 The question being taken by a vote of States resulted, yeas 121, nays 182, 
 as follows : 
 
 Yeas. 
 Maine 8 
 
 Connecticut 1 
 
 New Jersey , 7 
 
 Pennsylvania „.27 
 
 Nays . 
 
 New Hampshire 5 
 
 Vermont 5 
 
 Massachusetts „ 13 
 
 Kh.de Island 4 
 
 Delaware ^Connecticut 5 
 
 Missouri _ & 
 
 Tennessee 12 
 
 Kentucky 11 
 
 Indiana. . 13 
 
 Illinois 11 
 
 Michigan 6 
 
 Wisconsin 5 
 
 Iowa 4 
 
 California 4 
 
 New York 35 
 
 Maryland 8 
 
 Virginia... .„ „- 15 
 
 North Carolina 10 
 
 .^outh Carolina 8 
 
 Georgia...., 1U 
 
 Florida „ 3 
 
 Alabama 3 
 
 Louisiana 6 
 
 Mississippi.™ „ 7 
 
 Texas 4 
 
 Arkansas 4 
 
 Kentucky^ 1 
 
 Ohio 23 
 
 Minnesota „ 4 
 
 Oregon 3 
 
 So the main question was not ordered. 
 
 Mr. Walker, of Alabama, moved to amend the resolution by adding : 
 
 Provided, That it shall not be applied to any discussion upon the platform 
 to be reported to this Convention by the Committee on Resolutions. 
 
 Mr. Bishop accepted the amendment of the gentleman from Alabama, 
 and called the previous question on the resolution as modified. 
 
 The call for the previous question was sustained, and the main question 
 ordered to be put. 
 
 The question was taken on the resolution as modified, and it was adopted. 
 
 Mr. Simmons, of South Carolina, offered the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That such part of the South gallery of this hall as may be neces- 
 sary for the accommodation of the alternates be reserved for their use, and 
 that the remaining part of the galleries be opened for the public accommo- 
 dation. 
 
 Mr. Craig, of Missouri, moved to lay the resolution on the table, which 
 motion was agreed to. 
 
 The President laid before the Convention the following communication 
 from the Commissioners of the Orphan Asylum of Charleston. 
 
 Charleston, April 24, 1860. 
 To the Honorable, the President and Delegates of the Democratic Convention : 
 
 Gentlemen : — The Commissioners of the Orphan House of Charleston 
 respectfully invite the Delegates of the Democratic National Convention, now 
 assembled in this city, to visit the Orphan A-ylum of Charleston, situated in 
 Calhoun street, to inspect its organization, domestic arrangements, discipline. 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 
 
 and economy, and to examine, more especially, the educational departments 
 of their School. 
 
 The Institution will be open to the inspection of the Delegates at all times, 
 but more especially on Wednesday afternoon, the 25th of April instant, at 
 4 o'clock, when the Public Exhibition of the School takes place. 
 
 Respectfully, H. A. DeSAUSSURE, 
 
 Chairman of Commissioners Orphan House. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, moved that when the Convention adjourn it 
 adjourn to meet at 4 o'clock, P. M. 
 
 A Delegate moved to amend the motion so that it would read five o'clock 
 instead of four. 
 
 Mr. Dent, of Pennsylvania, moved that when the Convention adjourn, it 
 adjourn to meet at 7 o'clock P. M". 
 
 The question being taken on the motion that when the Convention adjourn, 
 it adjourn to meet at 7 o'clock, it was decided in the negative. 
 
 The question being taken on the motion that when the Convention adjourn, 
 it be to meet at 5 o'clock, it was also lost. 
 
 The question was then taken on the motion that when the Convention 
 adjourn, it be to meet at four o'clock, and it was agreed to. 
 
 On motion, the Convention then adjourned. 
 
 AFTERNOON" SESSION. 
 
 The Convention re-assembled at four o'clock, P. M. 
 
 Mr. Wright, of Massachusetts, moved the following resolution, viz : . 
 
 Resolved, That the Committee on Resolutions be instructed to report in 
 print, so that every member may be furnished with a copy — which was 
 unanimously adopted. 
 
 Mr. Lowry, of Indiana, offered the following resolution, viz : 
 
 Resolved, That the Officer of the Convention having charge of that matter, 
 be and he is hereby required to have the doors to the Hall of the Convention 
 opened for the admission of those entitled to enter, at least one hour before 
 the time set for each meeting of this body. YY hich was adopted. 
 
 A communication from the officers of the Citadel Academy, inviting the 
 members of the Convention to a'tend the parade at 5j^ o'clock, Thursday 
 P. M., at the Academy grounds, was read and received w ; th cheers. 
 
 Mr. Lowrv, of Indiana, moved the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That a Committee of one from each State be appointed by the 
 Delegates thereof, to report the names of one person from each State, to 
 constitute the Democratic National Committee, to continue in office until 
 their successors are appointed, whose duty it shall be, in addition to other 
 things, to fix the time and place for the holding of the next National Con- 
 vention, and said first named Committee shall also consider and report. 
 
 Mr. Lawrence, of Louisiana, moved that the resolution be laid over 
 one day. 
 
 Mr. Burnett, of Alabama, moved to amend by adding, " and said Com- 
 mittee shall not issue tickets of admission to the floor of the Convention to 
 any Delegates whose seats may be contested." 
 
 Mr. Terry, of Arkansas, offered a further amendment as follows : 
 
 " And said Committtee shall have power to fill any vacancy in said 
 Committee." 
 
 Mr. Pugh, of Ohio, moved that the resolution and amendments be 
 referred to a committee of thirty three, one from each State, and upon this 
 he called the previous question. 
 
24: Democratic National Convention. 
 
 The call for the previous question was seconded and ordered, and the 
 main question was put, and the motion of Mr. Pugh was carried. 
 
 The names of the members of this Committee to be handed in to-morrow 
 morning. 
 
 Mr. Krtjm, of Missouri, Chairman of the Committee on Credentials, then 
 presented the following rep.trt and resolutions, upon which the Convention 
 had agreed, and he claimed for it the attention ef the Convention : 
 
 MAJORITY REPORT. 
 
 To the National Democratic Convention : 
 
 Mr. President : — Your Committee on Credentials, immediately after their 
 appointment, entered upon the discharge of the duties assigned them, and 
 carefully examined the credentials of the several Delegates to this Convention. 
 
 Your Committee find that all the States in the Union, exc pt the States of 
 Massachusetts, Maryland, Illinois and New York, are represented in th : s 
 Convention by Delegates duly elected in the several States by State or 
 District organizations of the Democratic party, and your Committee append 
 to this report, as a part thereof, full lists of the Delegates so elected. 
 
 Your Committee further report that there were contesting claimants to the 
 seats held by the Delegations in the following cases, viz: 
 
 In the Fifth Congressional District of Massachusetts. 
 
 In the Fourth Congressional District of Maryland. 
 
 In the State of Illinois, and 
 
 In the State of New York. 
 
 The contes'ants in these several cases had a full and impartial hearing 
 before your Committee, and, after a full consideration of their respective 
 claims, your Committee are of opinion that the sitting Delegates representing 
 these Districts and States are justly entitled to their respective seats. 
 All of which is respectfully submitted. 
 
 JOHN. M. KRUM, Chairman. 
 
 Resolved, That the sitting Delegates to this Convention from the State of 
 Illinois, of whom Col. W. A. Richardson is Chairman, are entitled to their 
 respective seats. 
 
 Resolved, That Cornelius Doherty and K. S. Chaffee, Delegates represent- 
 ing the Fifth Congressional District of Massachusetts, are entitled to their 
 respective seats. 
 
 Resolved, That F. M. Landham and Robert J. Brent, Delegates represent- 
 ing the Fourth Congressional District of Maryland, are entitled to their 
 respective seat^ 
 
 Resolved, That the Delegates to this Convention from the State of New 
 York, of which Dean Richmond is Chairman, are entitled as such to seats 
 therein. 
 
 Adopted. 
 
 Mr. Brooks, of Alabama, presented the following Minority Report and 
 Resolutions : 
 
 . MINORITY REPORT. 
 To the Honorable President of the National Democratic Convention : 
 
 The und rsigned, members of the Committee on Credential, under an 
 imperious sense of duty, are constrained to dissent from the report of the 
 majority of this Committee, and respectfully recommend that the two 
 Delegations from the State of New York be authorized to select each thirty- 
 five Delegates, and that the seventy Delegates thus selected be admitted to 
 this Convention as the Delegates of the New York Democracy, and that they 
 be allowed two hours to report their selection — the two Delegations to vote 
 separately, each to be entitled to seventeen votes, the remaining vote of said 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 25 
 
 \-> 
 
 State to be cast alternately by the two Delegations, the sitting menbers 
 casting it the first time. 
 
 (Signed.) WM. M. BROOKS, Delegate from Alabama. 
 
 JOHN S. DUDLEY, Delegate from California. 
 
 E. GREEX, Delegate from Texas. 
 
 VAN H. MANNING. Delegate from Arkansas. 
 
 JULIAN HARTRIDGE, Delegate from Georgia. 
 
 W. S. BARRY, of Mississippi. 
 
 Mr. Brooks, of Alabama, offered the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the two Delegations from New York be authorized to 
 select each thirty-five Delegates, and that the seventy Delegates thus selected, 
 be admitted to this Convention as Delegates from the New York Democracy, 
 and that they be allowed two hours to report their selection. The two 
 Delegations to vote separately, each to be entitled to seventeen votes, the 
 remaining vote to be cast alternately by the two Delegations — the sitting 
 members to cast it the first time. 
 
 Mr. McCook, of Ohio, moved the adoption of the Majority Report, together 
 with the Resolutions accompanying said report. 
 
 Mr. Brooks, of Alabama, moved the adoption of the Minority Report of 
 the Committee on Credentials and Resolutions, as an amendment to the 
 Majority Rep ;rt. 
 
 1 he previous question being demanded by Mr. McCook, was then seconded 
 and ordered, and a division of the question called for. 
 
 The reso utions and reports were read. 
 
 The main question was ordered. 
 
 The first, second, and third resolutions of the Majority Report were adopted. 
 
 The question then being on the amendment of Mr. Brooks, of Alabama, 
 the State of Alabama called for. the vote by States, and the State of Missis- 
 sippi seconded the call. 
 
 The amendment was lost by the following vote : 
 
 Maine 
 
 New Hampshire 
 
 Yeas. 
 
 Nays. 
 8 
 5 
 5 
 13 
 4 
 6 
 
 "i 
 
 27 
 
 3 
 
 8 
 10 
 
 North Carolina.. 
 South Caroliua.. 
 
 Georgia 
 
 Florida __• 
 
 Alabama 
 
 Yeas. 
 .... 5 
 
 .."-10 
 
 .'.'.".' 9 
 
 Nays. 
 4 
 8 
 
 3 
 
 6 
 
 1 
 
 8 
 
 3 
 
 12 
 
 Ohio 
 
 Indiana 
 
 Yeas. 
 
 Nays 
 23 
 13 
 11 
 
 
 Michigan 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 Iowa 
 
 Minnesota 
 
 California . . . 
 Oregon 
 
 55 
 
 4 
 
 New York 
 
 New Jersey 
 
 
 Mississippi 
 
 Texas 
 
 Arkansas 
 
 7 
 
 4 
 
 .... 3 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 
 .... 3 a 
 
 
 Maryland . 
 
 Virginia 
 
 
 ... 9 
 
 21°/^ 
 
 Kentucky 
 
 
 
 The question then recurring on the adoption of the resolution of the ma- 
 jority, the same was adopted by a large majority. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Pe.k, of Michigan, the entire Report of the Committee 
 wa3 then adopted. 
 
 Mr. North, of Pennsylvania, moved to re-consider the motion to adopt the 
 report, and to lay that motion on the table. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. North, of Pennsylvania, moved that the rejected claimants for seats 
 in this Convention be allowed honorary seats on the floor of the Convention. 
 
 The resolution was laid over under the rules for one day. 
 
 Mr. Montgomery, of Pennsylvania, offered the following reso^tion : 
 
 Resolved, That the appointment of a Committee of one from each State to 
 select a National Committee of the Democratic party, for the next four years, 
 be postponed until after the nomination of a candidate for the Presidency. 
 Which was adopted. 
 
26 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 The President. I will entreat the Convention to be in order while the 
 painful announcement of the death of a member of this Convention is an- 
 nounced. 
 
 Hon. H. E. Stoughton, of Vermont. 
 
 Mr. Presidknt: — I arise by request of the Delegation from Vermont, to an- 
 nounce to this Convention the sad intelligence of the sudden death of Hon. 
 John S. Robinson, one of the Delegates at large from our State, who but yes- 
 terday stood in his place upon this floor, in his usual health, officiating as 
 Chairman of this Delegation. 
 
 This morning about six o'clock, and while the deceased was apparently in 
 a quiet slumber, he had an attack of apoplexy, and so sudden was his death 
 that he was not able to utter one word or wish to be communicated to tho.-e 
 who ere this are stricken down with anguish by the intelligence of the death 
 of their friend in this far distant city. 
 
 The deceased was about fifty-five years of age, a lawyer, standing in the 
 front rank of his profession, always a Democrat, and as such a member of our 
 State Senate, and in 1853 he was elected Governor in the Federal State of 
 Vermont — the only Democratic Governor of that State any of the Delegates 
 present have seen since they were voters therein. 
 
 We, in common with all who knew him, held him in high estimation for 
 his purity in public and private life. 
 
 His remains, on the adjournment of this Convention, will be taken from 
 the Mills House to the New York steamboat, to be conveyed to New York, 
 and thence to his own mountain home, it being all we have left of him to re- 
 turn to the widow and fatherless. 
 
 Col. B. P. Wardlaw, of Florida. The sad announcement of death at any 
 time, Mr. President, chills the heart and deadens every sensibility ; but, S'.r, 
 when that melancholy announcement is made upon an occasion of this sort, 
 it comes with double force, and falls like a leaden pall upon the inmost re- 
 cesses of onr soul. Our deliberations had scarcely begun ere the unrelenting 
 monster, Death, invades our councils— the councils ot this mighty Republic. 
 
 One of the Delegates to this Convention, from the Old Green Mounta n 
 State, has been suddenly struck down in our midst ; and whilst we bow in 
 humble reverence to Omnipotent fiat, as he lies near by, still in the chilly 
 arms of death, far awav from his home in the icy mountains of the North, 
 the Peninsula State, Florida, desires, as an humble tribute of respect, to 
 mingle her grief in condolence, and with her rich profusion of flowers, to 
 scatter them around the bLr of the lamented son of Vermont. Therefore, I 
 tender the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That with feelings of deep regret, this Convention has just learned 
 that one of her members, Gov. Robinson, a Delegate from Vermont, has sud- 
 denly passed from time to eternity, and in respect to his memory, this Con- 
 vention will now stand adjourned until 10 o'clock to-morrow. 
 
 Capt. Isaiah Rysders, of New York, moved that the Convention, on 
 adjourning, proceed in a body to the Mills House. 
 
 The resolutions ef Mr. Wardlaw and Capt. Rynders were adopted, and the 
 Convention then adjourned until 10 o'clock to-morrow, and proceeded in a 
 body to attend the remains of Governor Robinson to the boat. 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 
 
 27 
 
 APPENDIX TO THE THIRD DAY'S PROCEEDINGS. 
 
 List of Delegates appended to the Report of the Committee on Credentials, 
 with their Post Office addresses.* 
 
 MAINE. 
 
 Bion Bradbury, Eastport. 
 Georg-< F Shepley, Portland. 
 K Wilder Farley, Newcastle. 
 Amos M Roberts, Bangor. 
 S R Lyman, Portland. 
 Thomas K Lane, Saco. 
 S Blanehard, Yarmouth. 
 Calvin Record, Auburn. 
 Thomas D R« binson, Bath. 
 Henry W Owen. Bath. 
 Henry A W.yman, Snowhegan. 
 Charles D Jameson. Bangor. 
 J Withrop Jones, Ellsworth. 
 P S J Talbot. East Maehias. 
 J Y McClintock, Belfast. 
 W H Burri.l, Belfast. 
 
 VERMONT. 
 
 John S Robinson, Bennington. 
 Jasper Rand, Berkshire, 
 Henry Keyes, Newbury. 
 E M Brown, Woodstock. 
 Charles G Eastman, Alontpelier. 
 Pitt W Hyde, Hydeville. 
 H E Stoughton, Bellows Falls. 
 Stephen Ihonias, West Fail lee. 
 Lucius Robinson, Newport. 
 H B Smith, Milton. 
 
 NKW HAMPSHIRE. 
 
 Jonah Minot, Concord. 
 Daniel Marcy. Portsmouth. 
 Robert S Webster, North Birnstead. 
 G orge W Stevens, Dover. 
 Aaron P Hughes, Nashua. 
 Edward W Harrington. Manchester. 
 AJpheus F Snow. Claremont. 
 Ansel Glover Alstead. 
 William Burns, Lancaster. 
 George A Bingham, Bath. 
 
 MASSACHUSETTS. 
 
 Caleb dishing, Newburyport. 
 Jas G Whitney, Boston." 
 Oliver Stevens, B< ston. 
 Isaac Davis, Worcester. 
 Win N Swift, New Bedford. 
 Edward Merrill. New Bedford. 
 Phineas W Lelai.d. Fall River. 
 Alex Lincoln, Hingham. 
 Orison Underwood, Mi ford. 
 Bradford L Wales, Randolph. 
 James Riley, B ston. 
 Isaac H Wright. Boston. 
 Corueliu- Doherty, Boston. 
 K S Chaffee, East Cambridge. 
 E G Williams, Newburyport. 
 C G Clark, L.v nn. 
 F 1'rince, Winchester. 
 Geo Johnson, Bradford. 
 Benj F Butler, Lowell. 
 Walter Fessenden, Townsend. 
 Henry H Stevens, nudley. 
 Geo W Gill, Worcester. 
 C W Chnpin, Springfield. 
 Joaiah Aliis, Whately. 
 I' N Carpenter. Greenfield. 
 Charles H^ebner, Lee. 
 
 CONNECTICUT. 
 
 James T Pratt, Bock Hill. 
 Sumuel Arnold, Haddain. 
 Andrew C Lippitt New London 
 W D Bishop, Bridgeport. 
 
 A G Hazard, Enfield. 
 M B West, Stafford. 
 E Aug Russell, Middletown. 
 C M lngersol, New Haven. 
 William L Converse, Norwich. 
 Kufus L Baker, Windham. 
 James Gallatiher, New Haven. 
 P C Calhoun, Bridgeport 
 
 RHODE ISLAND. 
 
 Welcome B Sayles, Providence. 
 Charles S Bradley, Providence. 
 George H Browne. Providence. 
 John N Francis, Provide nee. 
 Edward F Newton, Newport. 
 Amasa Sprague, Providence. 
 Gideon Bradford, Piovidence. 
 Jacob Babbit, Bristol. 
 
 NEW TORE. 
 
 Dean Bichmond, Buffalo, Erie county. 
 
 Augustus t»chell New York Oily. 
 
 Isaac V Fowler, New York City. 
 
 Delos DeWolf, Oswego, Oswego county. 
 • Wiiliam H Ludlow, Sayvilie. Suffolk county. 
 
 Tennis G Bergen, Bayridge, Kings county. 
 
 H McLaughlin, Brooklyn, Kings county. 
 
 Francis H SpiDola, Brooklyn, Kings county. 
 
 John Y lavage, New York City. 
 
 Wm Miner, New York City. 
 
 Samuel L M Barlow. New York City. 
 
 John Clancy, New York City. 
 
 Isaiah Bynders, New York City. 
 
 Edmund Driggs, Brooi-lyn, Kings county. 
 
 John Cochran, New York City. 
 
 Arguste Belmont, New York City. 
 
 Nelson J Waterburj . New York City. 
 
 Wm N Mclutyre, New York City. 
 
 Edward Cooper, New York City. 
 
 Samuel F Butterworth, N^w York City. 
 
 Gouverneur Kemble, Cold Springs, Putnam Co. 
 
 Edwin Croswell, New York City. 
 
 Benjamin F Edsall, Goshen, Orange county. 
 
 John C Holley, Monticello, Sullivan county. 
 
 Win F Russell, Saugerties, Ulster county. 
 
 Geo Beach, Cairo, Green county. 
 
 Thi-odore Miller, Hudson Columbia county. 
 
 Henry Staats, Red Hook, Dutchess county. 
 
 David L Seymour, Troy, Rensselaer county. 
 
 Moses Warren, Troy, Rensselaer county. 
 
 Erastus Corning, Albany, Albany county. 
 
 Peter Cagger, Albany, Albany county. 
 
 John Titcomb, Waterford, Saratoga county. 
 
 Charles R. Ingalls, Greenwich. Washington co. 
 
 Lemuel Stetson, Plattsburgh, Clin on county. 
 »H^nry A Tilden, New Lebanon, Columbia county. 
 
 James C Spencer, Odgensburgh, St Lawrence vo. 
 
 Lorenzo Carry 1, Salisbury. Herkim-r county. 
 
 Alonzo C Page, Schenectady, Schenectady county. 
 
 David Spraker, Ciiuajoharie, Montgomery county. 
 
 Samuel North, TJnadilla, Otsego county. 
 
 Alexander H Burhans, Boxbury. Delaware co. 
 
 John Stryker, Rome, Oueida county. 
 
 [) P Bissel, L T tica. Oneida county. 
 
 Henry S Raudall, <'ortlandvill«>. Cortland county. 
 
 John F Hubbard, Jr., Norwich, Chenango co. 
 
 Williard Johnson, Fulton, Oswego county. 
 
 Sidney T Fairchild, Cazenovia. Madison county. 
 
 D C West, Low vide. Lewis county. 
 
 Allen C Beach, Watertown, Jefferson county. 
 
 James P Haskin, Syracuse, Onoudago county. 
 
 John J Peck, Syracuse, Onondago county. 
 Elmore P Ross,*A"burn, Cayuga county. 
 
 * At the adjourned session of the Convention at Baltimore, no corrected lists of Delegates weit 
 furnished the Secretary ; and, consequently, the above is the only list published. 
 
2a 
 
 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 JohnN Knapp, Auburn. Cayuga county. 
 Win W Wright, Geneva. Ontario county. 
 Darius A Ogden, Penn Yan, Yates county 
 Henry l> Barto, Trumansbuigh. Tompkins county. 
 Charles Hulett. Horsehe ads, Chemung county. 
 C C B Wa'ker, Corning, Steuben county 
 A J Abbott, Genesee. Living-ton county. 
 S B Ji wett, < la r kson, Monroe county. 
 B FGilkeson, Rochester Monroe county. 
 Marshall B Cbamplain, Cuba. Allegany county. 
 H nry J Glowacki, Batavia, Genesee county. 
 San ford E Church, Albion, Orleans county. 
 A H Eastman, Lockport, Niagara county. 
 JohnT Hudson, Bnftaio, Erie county. 
 A'pheus Prince, Clarence. Erie county. 
 John C Devereux, Ellicottville, Cattaraugus co. 
 LI J Miner, Dunkirk, Chautauqua CO. 
 
 NEW JERSEY. 
 
 William Wright. Newark- 
 
 B ii.jamin Williamson. Elizabeth. 
 
 James W Wall, (absent) Burlington. 
 
 John O'Rafferty, New Germantown. 
 
 Samuel Hanna, Camden. 
 
 John L Sharp. Millville. 
 
 George F Fort, New Egypt. 
 
 David Naar. Trenton. 
 
 Albert R Speer, New Brunswick. 
 
 Joshua Doughty, Somerville. 
 
 Robert Hamilton, Newton. 
 
 John Hurler, Haekeusack. 
 
 Samuel Westcott, Jersey City. 
 
 Jacob YanArsdale, Newark. 
 
 PENNSYLVANIA. 
 
 Joseph B Baker, Philadelphia. 
 
 Witl.am Bigler, Clearfield 
 
 Kenneiiy L Blood, Brookville. 
 
 Kichard Brodhead, Easton. 
 
 N B Browne, Philadelphia. 
 
 Edward Campbell, Jr.. Pittsburgh. 
 
 Lewis C. Cassiuy, Philadelphia." 
 
 J >hn Cessna, Beof'ord. 
 
 Hugh Cbn-k, Philadelphia. 
 
 A H Coffroth, Somerset. 
 
 Keister Ciymer. Beading. 
 
 Thomas Cunningham, Beaver. 
 
 John L Dawson, Uuiontown. 
 
 Henry H Dent, Condersport. 
 
 James Dunlap, Butler. 
 
 Peter Ent, Lightstreet. 
 
 E Evans, West Chester. 
 
 Wiluam A Galbraith. Erie. 
 
 James A Gihson, Pittsburgh. 
 
 Robert M. Gibson, Washington. 
 
 C D Gloniuger, Lebanon. 
 
 A J Glossbrenner, York. 
 
 Pi A Guernsev, Willsboro'. 
 
 R J Ha Idem an, Harrisburg. 
 
 Charles Hotlestein, Milton- 
 
 Francis W Hughes, Pottsville. 
 
 Owen Jones, Cabinet. 
 
 S P Johnson, West Greenville. 
 
 F Latter. Reading. 
 
 San:uel Megargee, Philadelphia, 
 
 William Montgomery, Washington. 
 
 William H McGee. Allegheny City. 
 
 George V.cHenry, Darby. 
 
 • hambers McKibbon. Philadelphia 
 
 James Nill, Chamnershurg, 
 
 H M North, Columbia. 
 
 Asa Packer, Mauch Chunk. 
 
 Israel Painter, Wert Newton. 
 
 Henry M Phillips, Philadelphia. 
 
 A A Plumer, Franklin 
 
 Josiah Rand nil, Philadelphia. 
 
 John Reif-nyder, Liverpool. 
 
 W M Reilley, Philadelphia 
 
 John Roberts. Philadelphia. 
 
 John Ross, McYeytown. 
 
 W P Shaittucjf, Meadville. 
 
 D W Gray, Wendridge. 
 
 George N SinTlh, Johnstown. 
 H B Swarr, Lancaster. 
 Franklin Vanzant. Oakford. 
 C L Ward, Towanda. 
 H W Weir, Indiana. 
 Thomas B Wilson, Allentown. 
 HendrickB Wright. Wilkes bar re. 
 
 DELAWARE. 
 
 John H Beverley, Smvrna. 
 William H Ross Seaford. 
 James A Bayard, Wilmington. 
 John B Pennington, Dover. 
 William G. Whiteley, Newcastle. 
 William Saulsbury, Georgetown. 
 
 MARYLAND. 
 
 John Contee, Buena Yista. 
 William T. Hamilton, Hagerstown. 
 Levin Woolford, Princess Ann. 
 John R Emory, Centerville. 
 Wm S Gittings, Baltimore City- 
 Samuel S Mafiit, Elkton, Cecil county, 
 Carville S Stansbury, Stemcer's Run. 
 William Byrne Baltimore City . 
 ELF Hardcastle, Royal Oak 
 Daniel Field, Federalshurgh. 
 Robert J Brent. Baltimor • City. 
 T \I Lanahan, Baltimore City. 
 Bradley J Johns-cm, Fredrick City. 
 John J Morrison, Barton. Allegheny county. 
 Oscar Miles, Milestown, St Mary's couDty. 
 D W Bowie, Prince George county. 
 
 VIRGINIA. 
 
 Arthur R Smith, Portsmouth. 
 
 John J Kindred, Jerusalem. 
 
 Lewis E Harvie, Chala, Amelia county. 
 
 Wm F Tnompson, Crimea, Dinwiddie county. 
 
 William H Clark, Halifax Court H use. 
 
 Walter Coles, °itteylvania Court Houso. 
 
 E.lmund \V Hubart, Curdsville. 
 
 Robert H Glass. Lynchburg. 
 
 William L Early, Madison Court House 
 
 Robert A. Coghill, New Glasgow. 
 
 Walter D Leake Goochland Court House. 
 
 James Hobbs, Manchester. 
 
 George Booker. Hampton, 
 
 M W Fisher, Eastville 
 
 Wm A Buckner. Bowling Green. 
 
 Henry T Garnett. Oak Grove, Westmoreland co. 
 
 James Barbocr. Brandy ^tati^n. 
 
 John Seddon, Fredericksburg. 
 
 John Blair Hoge. Martinsbu<-gh. 
 
 0. R. Funston, White Post. 
 
 S M l'ost, Staunton 
 
 S H Moffatt, Harrisonburgh. 
 
 Daniel H Hoge, Blacksburg. 
 
 James W Davis, Greenville Court House. 
 
 R.bert Crockett, Wytheville. 
 
 William T Cecil, Tazewe'l Court House. 
 
 Henry Fitzbugh. Kanawha Court House. 
 
 John Brannon, Weston. 
 
 William G Brown, Kingwood. 
 
 Charles W Russell, ^heeling. 
 
 NORTH CAROLINA. 
 
 William W Avery, Morgantown. 
 William S Ashe, Wilminerton. 
 Bedford Brown, Locust Hill. 
 V illiam W Holden. Raleigh. 
 William A Moore, Edenton. 
 Nicholas M Long, Weldon. 
 Robert R Bridges, Tarboro'. 
 Lottv W Humphrey Richland. 
 Walter L Steel, Rockingham. 
 James Fulton, Wilmington. 
 Thomas S Green WaTenton. 
 J W B Watson, Smithfield. 
 Robert P. Dick, Greensboro'. 
 Charles S Winstead, Roxboro'. 
 Samuel Hargrave, Lexington. 
 Hampton B Hammond, Wadesboro 
 William Landers, Lincolnton. 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 
 
 29 
 
 Columbus Mills, Columbm. 
 Henry T. Fanner, Flat Rock. 
 
 south Carolina. 
 James Simmons, Charleston. 
 Bamni 1 McGowan, Abbeville Court House. 
 H B Wilson, Georgetown. 
 R B Boylston, Winusboro' 
 J H Witherspoon, Lancaster Court House. 
 E W Charles, Darlington Court House. 
 George N Reynolds, Charleston. 
 Thomas Y. Simons, Charleston, 
 Jamas Patterson, Barnwell Court House. 
 B H Bro«n, Barnwell Court House. 
 Arthur Simpkins, Edgefield Court House. 
 Lemuel Boozer, Lexington Court House. 
 B F ferry, Greenville. 
 J P Reid, Andersou Court House. 
 John S Preston, Columbia. 
 Franklin Gaillard, Columbia. 
 
 GEORGIA. 
 
 Henry L Benning, Columbus. 
 John H Lutnpk'n. Rome 
 Isaiah T Irwin, Washington. 
 Henry R Ja -ksun, Savani.ih. 
 Junius Wingfield, Eatonton. 
 Hiram Warner, Greenville. 
 Solomon Cohe , Savannah. 
 James L Seward, Thouiasville. 
 Julian Ilartriuge, Sa\anuah. 
 W B GauMen, Huntsville. 
 W J Johnson, Fort Gaines. 
 John A Jones, Columbus. 
 James M Clark, Lumpkin. 
 W M Slaughter. Albany. 
 E L Stroecker, Macon. 
 P Tracy, Macon. 
 C Gibson, Gr.ffin. 
 E J McGehee, Perry. 
 James J Dim. nd, Stone '-'ountain. 
 J A Render, Greenville. 
 Samuel C Candler, Carrel Ron. 
 G J Fain, Calhoun, 
 E R Hardin, Dalton 
 James Hoge, Atalanta. 
 Mark Johnston, Car eisville. 
 William II Hull. Athens. 
 George Hillyer, Monroe. 
 A A Franklin Hill, Athens. 
 Henry P Thomas, Lawnenceville. 
 L H Briscoe, Milledgeviile. 
 Jen' Lamar, Covington. 
 J W Burney, Monticeilo. 
 James Thomas, Sparta. 
 
 L A Nelms, . 
 
 1) C Barrow, Lexington. 
 H Cleveland, Augutta. 
 H R Casey, Appling. 
 
 1L0R1DA. 
 
 T J Eppcs, Apalachicola. 
 
 John Milton, Marianna. 
 
 B K Wardlaw, Madison Court House. 
 
 EDycke, Tallahassee 
 
 George L Bowne, Kry West. 
 
 John B Owens, Ocala. 
 
 ALABAMA. 
 
 F S Lyon, Peraopolis. 
 
 A B Meek, Mobile. 
 
 W L Yancey, 4 ontgomery. 
 
 L W Lawler, Talladega. 
 
 J A Winston, Mobile. 
 
 L P Walker, Huntsville 
 
 H D Smith, Graveley Springs. 
 
 G G Griffin, Demopolis. 
 
 N H R Dawson. Selma. 
 
 RG Scott, Claiborne. 
 
 J W Portis, Suggsville. 
 
 L L Cato, Eufaula. 
 
 T J Buineit, Greenville. 
 
 J R Breare, Newton, Da'e county. 
 
 ] V J Bulger, Dndeville. 
 
 ! P Harper, West Point. 
 
 ! J CB Mitchell, Mount ^cigs. 
 
 j W r C Mclver. Tuskeegee. 
 
 ' John Erwin. Gre> nsborougb. 
 
 VV M Brooks, Marion. 
 
 J C Guild, Tuscaloosa. 
 
 A W Dillard, Livingston. 
 
 F G Norman, Tuscumbia. 
 
 K M Patton. Florence 
 
 W C Sherrod, Oourtland. 
 
 R Chapman, Huntsville. 
 
 G C Bradley Huntsville. 
 
 T B Cooper, Center. 
 
 A J Henry, Guntersvile. 
 
 J T Bradford, Talladega. 
 
 W Garrett. Socopetoy. 
 
 P G King, Montevallo. 
 
 Mississippi, 
 
 W S B rry, Columbus 
 
 Ohar'es Clark, Prentiss, Bolivar county. 
 
 E Barksnale, Jackson. 
 
 W S Wilson, Pott Gibson. 
 
 James Diane, Bankston 
 
 Beverly 'athews Columbus. 
 
 J M Tiiomson, Houston. 
 
 W II H Tyson. Carroll ville. 
 
 Joseph R Daws, Canton. 
 
 C E Hooker, Jack-on. 
 
 J T . c inas. Del'a. Coahema county. 
 
 I) C Glenn, Mississippi City. 
 
 George H Gordon, Woudville. 
 
 LOUISIANA. 
 
 E LaSere, New Orleans. 
 
 E Lawrence, New Orleans. 
 
 F H Hatch. Kew Orleans. 
 
 A Talbot. Iberville. 
 
 R A Hunter. Alexandria. 
 
 Richard Taylor. St Charles Parish. 
 
 D D Withers, New Orleans. 
 
 John Tarlton. Bayou Bueff, St Vary's Parisb. 
 
 Charles Jones. Trinity. 
 
 B W Pearce, Sparta, Bienville Parish. 
 
 A Vouton. Vermillionville. 
 
 James A McHattou, Baton Rouge. 
 
 TEXAS 
 
 H R Runnels. Boston Bowie county. 
 
 E Greer, Marshall, Harrison county. 
 
 Thomas P Ochiltree, Marshall, Harrison county, 
 
 M W Covey, Jeffersou, Cass county. 
 
 F R Lubbo k, Houston, Harris county. 
 
 Gny *i Bryan, Galveston. 
 
 Josiah F Crosby, El Paso. 
 
 F S Stockdale, Port Lavrwa. 
 
 ARKANSAS. 
 
 J P Johnson, Laconia. 
 Thompson BFlournoy, Laconia. 
 N B Bui rows, Van Buren. 
 F A Terry, Waverly Post Office. 
 John J Sturman, Dardanelle. 
 John A Jordan, South Bend, 
 Van H Manning. Hamburg. 
 P W Hoadley, Little Rock. 
 
 KENTUCKY, 
 
 G A Caldwell, I ouisviile. 
 
 D P White. Greensburg. 
 
 J C Mason Owingsville. 
 
 R K Williams. Maytield. 
 
 William Bradley, MadisouviPe. 
 
 G H Morrow, Paducah. 
 
 Lateyette Green. Falls of Rough. 
 
 S B Greenfield. Hopkinsville. 
 
 G T Wood, MunfordsviUe. 
 
 J A Finn, Franklin. 
 
 S B Field, Columbia. 
 
 John S Kindrick, Somerset. 
 
 R Spalding, Lebanon. 
 
 W B Read, Hodjiesville 
 
 John Diahman, Barbourville, 
 
30 
 
 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Colbert Cecil, Pii-eton. 
 William Garvin, Louisville. 
 S B Dehnven, LaGrange. 
 K M Johnson, White Sulphur 
 .1 B Beck, Lexington. 
 N Gre >n, New Liberty, 
 K McKee, Louisville. 
 H D Helm, Newport. 
 B P Butler, Carrollton. 
 
 TKNNBSSEE. , 
 
 Andrew Ewing, Nashville. 
 
 John R Howard, Lebanon. 
 
 J D C Atkins, Paris. 
 
 Samuel illigav, , Greenville. 
 
 Wi.liam Henry "axweU, Joneeborough. 
 
 John D Riley, Rogersville. 
 
 Thomas M Lyon Kuoxville. 
 
 W E B Jones Livingston. 
 
 George W Bowles, Cleveland. 
 
 William Wallace, Maryville. 
 
 David Bunford, Dixon Springs. 
 
 James ML Sheid, Manchester 
 
 J:>hu v cGavock, Franklin. 
 
 James M A vent, Muri'rresboro'. 
 
 Robert Mathews, Shelbyville. 
 
 W L McClelland, Lewi^burg. 
 
 Thomas W l ones, Pulaski. 
 
 W C Whitthorne, Columbia. 
 
 Alfred Robb, Clarksville. 
 
 Thomas Menees, Springfield. 
 
 William H Wall. Paris. 
 
 James Connor, Ripley. 
 
 William H Carroll, Memphis. 
 
 Samuel MeClonahan, Jackson. 
 
 MISSOURI. 
 
 J B Henderson, Louisiana. 
 W J W Mcllhany, St Charles. 
 R F Lakeunn. Hannibal. • 
 
 G A Shortriige, Bloomington 
 John B Clar-, Washington City, D C. 
 Austin A King, Richmond, Ray county. 
 George P -orris, Platte City. 
 James Craig, St Joseph. 
 Win Douglas, B louville. Cooper county. 
 N C Claiborne, Kansas City. 
 PS Wilkes. Springfield. 
 J A Scott, Elk Mills 
 C G Corwin, Jefferson City. 
 J F Mense, Washington. Franklin county. 
 A Hunter, Benton, Scott county 
 Jihn O'Falion, Jr, Sulphur Springs, Jefferson c 
 John M Krum, St Louis. 
 Sam B Churchiii, St Louis. 
 IOWA 
 A C Dodge, Burlingten. 
 B M Samuels Dubuque. 
 D Finch, Das Moines. 
 Wm H Merritt. Cedar Rapids. 
 T W Claggett. K-okuk. 
 J W Bosler, Sioux City. 
 E H Thayer, Muscatine. 
 W H M Pusey, Council Bluffs. 
 
 WISCONSIN. 
 
 John R Sharpsteiu, Milwaukee. 
 Alex S Palmer, Geneva. 
 Alex F Pratt, Waukesha. 
 Wm A Barstow, Janesville 
 James H Earnest, Shulsbargh. 
 Charles Whipple, Eau Claire. 
 Perry H Smith, Appleton. 
 Fredk W Horn, Ce'larburg. 
 Edward S Bragg, Fond du Lac. 
 Johu Fitzgerald, Oshkosh. 
 
 MINNESOTA. 
 
 W A Gormans, St Paul. 
 Geo L Becker, St Paul. 
 Henry H Sibley, Mendofa. 
 A J Edgerton, Maniorville. 
 A M Fridley, St Antbonw 
 J Travis Roaser, Mankato. 
 W W Phelps, Red Wing. 
 
 ILLINOIS. 
 
 S S Marshall, McLeansboro. 
 B Ficklin, Charleston. 
 W A Richardson, Quiucy. 
 R T Merrick, Chicago 
 Wm M Jackaon, Union. 
 J.»hn D Piatt, Warren. 
 I John H Turner, Chicago. 
 A M Herrington, Geneva 
 Allen Withers. Blo< mington. 
 K E Good ell, Joliet. 
 B S Prettyman, Pekiu. 
 R Holloway, Moi. mouth. 
 W HRollo'son, Dadas City. 
 James M Campbell u acomb. 
 Murry McConnell, Jacksonville- 
 Wm F Thornton, Shelbwille. 
 Aaron Shaw. Lawrenceville. 
 W F Linder, Chicago. 
 8 A Bu k master, Alton. 
 Z Casey, Mount Vernon. 
 W J Allen- Marion. 
 W H Green, Metropolis. 
 
 OHIO. 
 
 Geo W McCook, Steubenville. 
 
 Geo E Pugh, Cincinnati. 
 
 D P Rhodes, Cleveland. 
 
 Washington v cLean, Cincinnati. 
 i Henry B Bowman, Cincinnati. 
 | Charles Rule. Cincinnati. 
 
 Wesley M Cameron, Cincinnati. 
 
 William T Forrest. Cincinnati. 
 I A P Oilier, Hamilton. 
 
 George W Houk, Dayton. 
 
 Sabirc Scott, St Marys 
 
 Joshua Townse d, Greenville, Darke county. 
 
 Jimes B. Steedman, Toledo. 
 
 Wm Mungen, Findley. 
 
 J B Cocke ill, West Union. 
 
 T C Kennedy Baravia. 
 
 Durbin Ward, Lebanon. 
 
 W M Stark, Xenia 
 
 George Spence, Springfield. 
 
 R E Runkle, West Liberty, Logan county. 
 
 Edward F Dickinson Fremont, Sandusky Co. 
 
 Abuer M Jackson, Bucyrus. 
 
 Thomas McNally. Chilicotbe. 
 
 Wells A Hutchins Portsmouth. 
 
 Lot L Smith, Atnens. 
 
 E F Bingham, » c Arthur, Yinton county. 
 
 Wayne Griswold, Circleville. 
 
 Geo B Smythe, Newark. 
 
 Thomas W Bartley, Mansfield - 
 
 John Tiff!:, Norwalk. 
 
 J A Marehand. Wooster. 
 
 J P Jeffries, Wooster. 
 
 J G Stewart, Coshocton. 
 
 R H Xugen. Neweomerstown, Tuscarawas Co. 
 
 S R Hosmer, Zanesville. 
 
 W W Cones, Cincinnati. 
 
 J S Way, Woo isfield, Monroe county. 
 
 W Eaton, Morristown, Belmont county. 
 
 S Lahm, Canton. 
 
 S D Harris, Jr, Ravenna. 
 
 H B Payne, Cleveland. 
 
 J W Cray, Cleveland. 
 
 David Tod, Brier Hill. 
 
 D B Woods. Warren. 
 
 Thomas S Woods, New Lisbon. 
 
 B F Potts, Carrollton, Carroll county. 
 
 INDIANA. 
 
 E M Huntington, Terre Haute. 
 
 S H Buskirk Bloomington. 
 
 Robert Lowry, Goshen. 
 
 James B Foley. Greensburgh. 
 
 John S Gavitt, Evansville. 
 
 Smith Miller, Patoka. 
 
 J B Norman, New Albany. 
 
 S K Wolfe, Cory don. 
 
 P C Dunning, Bh.omi gton. 
 
 H W Harrington, Madison. 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 
 
 31 
 
 J V Bemusdafifer, Greenshnrgh. 
 
 John Audregjc, Lawrenoeburgh. 
 
 La^yette Devlin, Cambridge City. 
 
 E Iniund Johnson. Newcastle. 
 
 W li Talbott, Indianapolis. 
 
 J M Gregg. Dtnvllie. 
 
 E Read, Terre Haute. 
 
 II K Wilson, Sullivan. 
 
 I, I? Stockton, Lafayette. 
 
 Isaac C Blston, CrawfordsvilTe. 
 
 6 Hathaway, Laporte. 
 
 S A Hall. Logansport. 
 
 P Hoagland. Fort Wayne. 
 
 (; W MoConn -II. Angola. 
 
 Wm Garv-r, Noblesvitte. 
 
 John RCoffroth, Huntington. 
 
 MICHIGAN. 
 
 George V N Lothrop, Detroit. 
 Ciarles E Stuart Kalamazoo. 
 H h Riley, Constantine. 
 George W Peck. Lansing. 
 Benj Follett. Yp ilanti. 
 Fidus Livermore, Jackson. 
 
 John G Parkhurst.Coklwater. 
 Philo Wilson, Ganandaigua. 
 Franklin Muzzy. Niles. 
 Alex F Dell, Detroit. 
 Augustus C Baldwin. Pontiac. 
 William S Bancroft, Port Huron. 
 
 OREGON. 
 
 Lansing Stout, Washington, D C. 
 .1 K Larnerick, Jacksonville. 
 Isaac J Stevens. Washington, D 0. 
 Justus Steinberger, Washington. D C. 
 li B Metcalfe, Independence, Texas. 
 A P Dennison, The Dalles, Oregon. 
 
 CALIFORNIA. 
 
 J BMwell. Chico, BuUe county. 
 
 G W Patrick, Sonora, Tuolumne county. 
 
 Lewis K Bradley, Stockton. 
 
 Austin E Smith, San Francisco. 
 
 John A DreibelbJR, Shasta. 
 
 John S Dudley, Yreka. Siskiyou county. 
 
 John Rains, Los Angelos. 
 
 D S Gregory, Monterey. 
 
 FOURTH IDJ^^ST. 
 
 Thursday, April 26, 1860. 
 
 The Convention was called to order at 10 o'clock. 
 
 The proceedings were opened by prayer, by the Rev. Mr. Forrest. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Miller, of Indiana, the reading of the Journal of yesterday 
 was dispensed with. 
 
 The unfinished business of yesterday was called up. 
 
 The consideration of Mr. North's resolution not being called for by the 
 mover, wai passed over. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh, of Virginia, presented a series of resolutions, which were read 
 and referred to the Committee on Resolutions. The resolutions are as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That the rendition of fugitive slaves and other property by one 
 State to another is a right secured by the laws of nations, recognized by the 
 Colonies and the mother country previous to the Declaration of Independence 
 by the Courts of Great Britain and by the Supreme Court of the United 
 States, and by the law and courts of all civilized nations, and a fortiori is 
 the duty of the States of this Confederacy under the Constitution and laws. 
 
 Resolved, That the refusal of the Governors of the several States to deliver 
 up fugitives from justice and fugitive slaves, is an open and palpable viola- 
 tion of the above natural and international law and the Constitution and 
 laws of the United States, constituting official perjury by such Governors as 
 have evaded or refused to perform this duty, and if persevered in, must lead 
 to the severance of the Union. 
 
 Mr. Hughes, of Pennsylvania, presented a resolution, which was read and 
 referred to the Committee on Platform. The resolution was as follows : 
 
 Resolved,, That while recognizing the doctrine that the General Govern- 
 ment has no power to create in, or exclude from, by legislation, any species 
 of property in any State or Territory, yet we maintain that it is the duty of 
 that Government to provide the Courts with ample process and ministerial 
 officers for the protect on and enforcement of any existing right, or the cor- 
 rection of any wrong, over which said Government, under the Constitution, 
 has jurisdiction. 
 
 Mr. Waterbury, of New York, moved to accept the invitations received 
 from the several Institutions of the city of Charleston, to visit the same, 
 and that the President of the Convention return the thanks of the Conven- 
 tion for such invitations — which motion was carried. 
 
 Mr. Browne, of Pennsylvania, moved the following : 
 
 Resolved, That the citizens of the several States, when emigrating into a 
 Federal Territory, retain the right to slave and other property which they 
 
32 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 take with them, until there is some prohibition by lawful authority ; and 
 that, as declared by the Supreme Court, Congress cannot interfere with such 
 right in a Territory, nor can a Territorial Legislature do so, until authorized 
 by the adoption of a State Constitution ; and that the attempted exercise of 
 such a function by a Territorial Legislature is unconstitutional, and dangerous 
 to the peace of the Union. 
 
 The resolution, alter having been read, was referred to the Committee on 
 Platform. 
 
 Mr. Walker, of Alabama. As a pendent to the resolution of the gentle- 
 man from Pennsylvania, I offer the following : 
 
 Resolved, That it is the duty of the Federal Government, in all its depart- 
 ments within their constitutional sphere, to afford adequate protection and 
 equal advantage to all descriptions of property recognized as such by the 
 laws of any of the States, as well within the Territories as upon the high 
 seas, and every place subject to its exclusive power of legislat on. 
 
 Mr. Browne. I de-ire to say I accept that very cheerfully as an amend- 
 ment, if it is intended as such. 
 
 Mr. Wall, of Tennessee, offered the following resolutions, being the 
 Platform advocated by that State : 
 
 Be it Resolved^ That we hereby re- affirm the principles announced in the 
 Platform of the Democratic part}' adopted in Convention at Cincinnati, in 
 June, 1856, and that we hold them to be a true exposition of our doctrines 
 on the subjects embraced. 
 
 Resolved, That the views expressed by the Supreme Court of the United 
 States in the decision of the case of" Dred Scott," are, in our opinion, a true 
 and clear exposition of the powers reposed in Congress upon the subject of 
 the Territories of the United States, and the rights guaranteed to the resi- 
 dents in the Territories. 
 
 Resolved, That the States of the Confederacy are equals in political rights ; 
 each State has the right to setle for itself all questions of internal policy ; 
 the right to have or not to have slaver} T is one of the prerogatives uf self- 
 government — the States did not surrender this right m the Federal Consti- 
 tution, and Tennessee will not now do so. 
 
 Resolved, That the Federal Government has no power to interfere with 
 slavery in the States, nor to introduce or exclude it from the Territo:ies, and 
 no duty to perform in relation thereto, but to protect the rights of the 
 owner from wrong, and to restore fugitives from labor ; these duties it cannot 
 withhold without a violation of the Constitution. 
 
 Resolved, That the organization of the Republican party upon strictly 
 sectional principles, and its hostility to the institution of slavery, which is 
 recognized by the Constitution, and which is inseparably connected with the 
 social and industrial pursuits of the Southern States of the Confederacy, is 
 war upon the principles of the Constitution and upon the rights of the States. 
 
 Resolved, That the late treasonable invasion of Virginia by an organized 
 band of Republicans, was the necessary result of the doctrines teachings, 
 and principles of that party; was the beginning of the a irrepressible conflict" 
 of Mr. Seward ; was a blow aimed at the institution of slavery by an effort to 
 excite servile insurrection ; was war upon the South, and as such, it is the 
 duty of the South to prepare to mainta n its rights under the Constitution. 
 
 Resolved, That if this war upon the Constitutional rights of the South is 
 persisted in, it must soon cease to be a war of words. If the Republican 
 party would prevent a conflict of arms, let them stand by the Constitution 
 and fulfill its obligations — we ask nothing more, we will submit to nothing less. 
 
 The resolutions were referred. 
 
 Mr. Wolfe, of Indiana, moved the following : 
 \ Resolved, That the Federal G-overnment has no power to interfere with 
 slavery in the States, nor to introdue or exclude it from the Territories, and 
 
Pro.cedinsrs at Charleston. 33 
 
 no duty to perform in relation thereto, but to faithfully enforce th< Fugitive 
 Slave Law, and all the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States in 
 regard to all the rights of the people of every State and Territory under the 
 Constitution of the United States. 
 
 The resolution was referred. 
 
 Mr. Glenn, of Mississippi, presented the following : 
 
 1. A citizen of any State in the Union may immigrate to the Territori.-s with his 
 property, whether it consists of slaves or any other subject of personal <> wnership. 
 
 2. So long as the Territorial condition exists, the relation of master and slave 
 is not to be disturbed by Federal or Territorial legislation ; and if so disturbed, 
 the Federal Government must furnish ample protection therefor. 
 
 3. Whenever a Territory shall be entitled to admission into the Vnion as a 
 State the inhabitants may, in forming their Constitution, decide fort emselve?, 
 whether it shall authorize or exclude slavery. 
 
 The resolution was referred. 
 
 Mr. Horn, of Wisconsin, offered the following : 
 
 Resolved, That the letter of President Buchanan, accepting the nomination at 
 Cincinnati, where he explains the Cincinnati Platform in relation to the power 
 of a Territorial Legislature on the subject of slavery is eminently sou* d, and is 
 hereby referred to the Committee on resolutions for their consideration. 
 
 The resolution was referred. 
 
 Mr. Mouton, of Louisiana, offered the following : 
 
 Resolved, That the Territories of the United States belong to tl e several 
 States as their common property, and not to the individual citizc s thereof, 
 that the Federal Constitution recognizes property in slaves, and as such the 
 owner thereof is entitled to carry his slaves into any Territory of tbe United 
 States and hold them as property. And in case the people of the Territories, 
 by inaction, unfriendly legislation or otherwise, should endanger the tenure of 
 such property or discriminate against it by withholding that protection given to 
 this species of property in the Territories, it is the duty of the General Gov- 
 ernment to interpose, by an active exertion of its Constitutional ] owers to 
 secure the rights of slaveholders. 
 
 The resolution was referred. 
 
 Mr. Greenfield, of Kentucky, offered the following : 
 
 Resolved, That it is the duty of the National Government to provid ) by law, 
 for paying for such fugitives from labor as, by the illegal interpi sition of 
 State authorities, the owners thereof may be prevented from receiv'ng under 
 the Fugitive Slave Law. 
 
 Keferred to the Committee on Platform. •* 
 
 Capt. Rynders, of New York. If the gentleman from Kentucky will 
 induce the Government to give the United States Marshals sufficiert power, 
 he may rest assured the South shall have all her fugitive slaves returned. 
 He was somewhat interested in that matter himself. [Applause.] 
 
 Mr. Bidwell, of California, moved the following : 
 
 Resolved, That our States and Territories on the Pacific, and the TVrritories 
 of the Great Basin, and of both slopes of the Rocky Mountains, demand the 
 early construction of a railroad to connect them with the internal navigation 
 and railway system of the Atlantic States ; and that on the ground < f postal 
 communication, protection of Territories and States, and of military defense, 
 the General Government has accepted authority under the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. Craig, of Missouri, offered the following : 
 
 Resolved, That the Democratic party are in favor of granting such consti- 
 tutional aid as will insure the speedy construction of a railroad connecting the 
 Atlantic and Pacific States. 
 
 Referred under the rule. 
 
 Mr. Stout, of Oregon, offered the following: 
 3 
 
34 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Resolved, That to preserve the Union, the equality of States must be main- 
 tained, and every branch of the Federal Government should exercise all their 
 Constitutional powers fur the protection of persons and property. 
 
 Referred. 
 
 Mr. McConnell, of Illinois, offered the following : 
 
 Resolved, That the Federal Government has no power to interfere with 
 slavory in the States, or to introduce it or exclude it from the Territories, 
 and has no duty to perform in relation thereto, except to secure the rights of 
 the owner by a return of the fugitive slave, as provided by the Constitution. 
 
 .Referred. 
 
 Mr. Seward, of Georgia, presented the following : 
 
 Resolved, That the Constitution of the United States extends to the several 
 States, and to every citizen, the full protection of persons and property in all 
 the States and Territories ; and that those rights, as declared and determined 
 by v,he Courts, under the Constitution, are to be respected and maintained 
 by ihe Government of the United States ; and that James Guthrie, of Ken- 
 tucky, be the nominee of the Democratic party for President of the United 
 States, on this platform. 
 
 The motion was referred. 
 
 Mr. Cessna, of Pennsylvania, offered the following : 
 
 Resolved, That the convictions of the Democratic party of the country 
 remain unshaken in the wisdom and justice and adequate protection of r-on, 
 con I, wool, and the other great staples of our country, based upon the neces- 
 sities of a reasonable revenue system of the General Government ; and 
 approving of the views of President Buchanan upon the subject of specific 
 duties, we earnestly desire our Representatives in Congress to produce such 
 modifications of the existing laws as the unwise legislation of the Republican 
 pa ty in 1857 renders absolutely necessary to the prosperity of the great inter- 
 est ■? of the country. 
 
 Mr. Pugh moved that after disposing of such resolutions as are now before 
 th ! Convention, all further resolutions offered be referred to the Committee 
 or Platform without being read before the Convention. 
 
 This resolution was carried. 
 
 Resolutions were then presented by Messrs. Brooks, of Alabama, West, of 
 Connecticut, Dudley, of California, Green, of North Carolina, Rosser, of Min- 
 nesota, O'Fallon, of Missouri, Tarlton, of Louisiana, and Read, of Indiana; 
 al of which were referred to the Committee on Platform. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, moved that the Convention adjourn until 4 o'clock 
 P M. 
 
 Mr. Montgomery, of Pennsylvania, stated that the Convention had before 
 it a resolution undetermined, and asked to have a vote taken upon it, and de- 
 si ed Mr. Stuart to withdraw his motion for that purpose. 
 
 Mr. Stuart withdrew his motion. 
 
 Mr. Ingersoll, of Connecticut, renewed the motion to adjourn, upon 
 v\ hich a vote was taken, and the motion to adjourn was lost. 
 
 Mr. Montgomery, of Pennsylvania, called up the resolution heretofore 
 ( ffered by him, and modified it so as to read as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That the Committee appointed to frame rules and regulations for 
 t he future action of our Executive National Committee, shall not report until 
 p fter the nomination of candidates for President and Yice President. 
 
 Mr. Bigler offered as an amendment, the following : 
 
 "And they shall report as members of the National Committee, such per- 
 sons as shall have been selected for that purpose by the respective State 
 delegations for their respective States." 
 
 Mr. Seward, of Georgia, moved to refer the resolutions to the Committee 
 ordered yesterday, and called for the previous question. 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 35 
 
 '.-> 
 
 The call for the previous question was seconded, and the main question 
 ordered. 
 
 The two propositions were committed to the Committee heretofore ordered. 
 
 The Convention then, on motion of Mr. Wright, of Mass., took a recess 
 till 4 oYlcok P. M. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. Sayles, of Rhode Island, offered the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the Committee on Resolutions be instructed to report forth- 
 with to this Convention, the platform adopted by the Cincinnati Convention, 
 wi'h the following additional resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That we recognize to the fullest extent, the principle that to pre- 
 serve the Union the equality of the States must be maintained, the decisions 
 of the Courts enforced ; and that every branch of the Federal Government 
 shall exercise all its Constitutional powers in the protection of persons and 
 property both in the States and Territories ; and upon that moved the previ- 
 ous question. 
 
 Mr. Bocock, of Virginia, raised a point of order, and insisted upon the reso- 
 olutions goinsc to the Committee on Platform without debate. 
 
 The Prksident sustained the point of order. 
 
 Mr. Mitchell, of Alabama, offered a resolution of inquiry, as to whether 
 the Committee had agreed upon a platform. 
 
 Mr. Bowie, of Maryland, offered as an amendment, the following : 
 
 Ordered, that the Committee on Resolutions be requested to report to this 
 Convention the result of its deliberations, to-morrow at 10 o'clock. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, moved that the Convention adjourn ; which 
 motion was carried, and the Convention adjourned till to-morrow at 10 A. M. 
 
 The following is the Committee elected by the States to report rules and 
 regulations for the guidance of the next National Executive Committee : 
 
 Committee on Rules and Regulations — Maine. Henry A. Wyman ; New Hampshire, Ansel Glover ; 
 Vermont, Lucius Robinson; Massachusetts, W. C.N. Swift; Rhode Isiand, Edward F. Newton; 
 Connecticut, Janes T. Pratt : New York, Marshall B. Champlin ; New Jersey, Geo. F. Fort ; Penn- 
 sylvania, Jo.Mah Randall; D-laware, John B . Pennington : Maryland C. S Stansbury; Viiginia, W. 
 F Thompson; No>th Carolina, Samuel Hargrave ; South Carolina, Franklin Gaillarfl; Georgia 
 John A. Jones; Florida, ihomasJ Eppes ; Alabama, Thomas J Burnett; Louisiana, E. Lawrence 
 A'ississippi, J. M. Thompson; Tex; 8, W. H Parsons; Arkansas. John J. Sturman ; Missouri, J. 
 M. Krum ; Tennessee, W E. B. Jones; Kentucky, D. P. White: Ohio, Wells A. Hutchins; Indiana, 
 John B. Norman; Illinois, Samuei S. Marshall; Michigan Fidus Livermore ; Wisconsin, J. H.. 
 Earnest; Iowa, Wm. H. Merritt; Minnesota. A. hi. Fridley; California, G. W. Patrick; Oregon, 
 Justus Steinberger. 
 
 Friday, April 27, 1860. 
 
 The Convention was called to order at 10 o'clock A. M., by Gen. Caleb: 
 Cushing, President of the Convention, and he introduced to the Convention 
 the Rev. Mr. Smythe, of Charleston, who offered up prayer. 
 
 Mr. Butterworth, of New York, moved to suspend the reading of the 
 Journal. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. Cochran presented the following communication from the working 
 men of New York, Brooklyn, and Greenport, which was referred to the 
 Committee on Resolutions : 
 
 New York, April 20, 1860. 
 To the National Democratic Convention : 
 
 At a meeting of the representatives of the working men of the different 
 Wards of this City, Brooklyn, and Green Point, held on the evening of the 
 16th instant, at Union Hall, 195 Bowery, it was 
 
 Resolved, That the officers of the meeting be instructed to address the 
 National Democratic Convention, to assemble at Charleston, and respectfully 
 request the Convention to dec'a r e itself opposed to all further traffic in the 
 
36 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 public lauds of the United States, and in favor of laving them out in farml- 
 and lots for the free and exclusive use of actual settlers. 
 
 We see this singu'ar condition of affairs — that while the wealth of our 
 country is rapidly accumulating — while internal improvements of every de- 
 scription are fast increasing — and while machinery has multiplied the powers 
 of production to an immense extent ; yet, with all these material advanta- 
 ges, the compensation for useful labor is getting less and less-. 
 
 We seek the cause of this anomaly, and we trace it to the monopoly of 
 the land, with labor at the mercy of capital. We, therefore, desire to abolish 
 the monopoly, not by interfering with the conventional rights of persons 
 now in possession, but by averting the further sale of all land not yet appro- 
 priated as private property, and by allowing these lands, hereafter, to be 
 freely occupied by those who may choose to settle on them. 
 
 We propose that the public lands hereafter shall not he owned, but occupied 
 only — the occupant having the right to sell or otherwise dispose of his or her 
 improvements to any one not in possession of other lands; so that, by pre- 
 venting any individual from becoming possessed of more than a limited quan- 
 tity, every one may enjoy the right. Respectfully, 
 
 Benjamin Hague, Secretary. HENRY BEENY, Chairman. 
 
 The unfinished business of yesterday being called up, the resolution of 
 Mr. Mitchell, of Alabama, was consid red in order ; but it being under- 
 stood that the Committee on Platform and Resolutions were ready to report 
 the Platform, Mr. Mitchell withdrew his resolution. 
 
 The President here requested the Select Committee heretof- re appointed 
 under Mr. Pugh's resolution, to assemble in front of the stand fur the pur- 
 pose of consultation. 
 
 Gov. King, of Missouri, offered a resolution, which was received and read 
 by the Clerk, and which was on motion of Mr. Spinola, of New York, 
 referred to the Select Committee. The resolution is as follows : 
 
 Whereas, the Democracy of the Territory of Kansas have sent to this 
 Convention Delegates to cast herein the votes of Kansas in the event of her 
 admission into the Union ; and whereas, the times indicate that before the 
 meeting of the next National Convention, Kansas will be a sovereign State, 
 and with the view of enabling the proposed State to have upon the next Exec- 
 utive Committee of the party a representative, be it, therefore, by this Con- 
 vention, 
 
 Resolved, That the Delegation here representing the Democracy of Kansas, 
 
 be, and they are hereby, empowered to select one member for the National 
 
 Committee, which person thus selected shall be placed upon the National 
 
 ■ Demo ratio Committee as a member thereof, upon the admission of Kansas 
 
 into the Union as a sovereign State. 
 
 Mr. Ochiltkee, of Texas, offered a series of resolutions, which were 
 referred to the Committee on Platform and Resolutions without reading. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, moved that the Convention take a recess of 
 one hour. 
 
 Mr. Wardlaw, of Florida, moved to amend by substituting the follow- 
 ing, viz : "That the Convention suspend proceedings for one hour;" which 
 amendment was accepted by Mr. Stuart, and the question on suspending 
 business was put and carded. 
 
 The hour for a recess having expired, the President called the Conven- 
 tion to order at twenty minntes past eleven o'clock. 
 
 Mr. W. W. Avery, of North Carolina, Chairman of the Committee on 
 the Platform and Resolutions, made a report, and asked leave to make an 
 -explanation, which was granted. 
 
 The following is the Report on Platform and Resolutions offered by Mr. 
 Avery. 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 37 
 
 I am instructed, as Chairman of the Committee on Resolution:*, to report 
 to the Convention the Platform of Resolutions which they have adopted. 
 I am further instructed by the Committee to state that entire unanimity did- 
 not prevail as to several of the resolutions. 
 
 The first and third resolutions in reference to slavery in the Territories,- 
 and the duty of the General Government to protect the rights of persons and 
 property, were adopted by a majority of the Committee. 
 
 The second resolution, in relation to the fugitive slave law, and the fourth 
 resolution, in regard to our foreign born citizen?, w T ere unanimously adopted ; 
 and the fifth resolution, in reference to the acquisition of Cuba, was adopted 
 without division. 
 
 The last resolution of the series, in regard to the Pacific Railroad, was 
 adopted by a majority. 
 
 The Committee on Resolutions, by their Chairman, Mr. Avery, submits the 
 following report. W. W. AVERY, Chairman. 
 
 PLATFORM.— MAJORITY REPORT. 
 
 Resolved, That the Platform adopted at Cincinnati be affirmed, with the 
 following resolutions : 
 
 1. Besolved, That the National Democracy of the United States hold' 
 these cardinal principles on the subject of Slavery in the Territories : First, 
 That Congress has no power to abolish slavery in the Territories. Second, 
 That the Territorial Legislature has no power to abolish slavery in any Ter- 
 ritory, nor to prohibit the introduction of slaves therein, nor any powe - to 
 exclude slavery therefrom, nor anv power to destroy or impair the right of 
 property in slaves by any legislation whatever. 
 
 2. Besolved, That the enactments of State Legislatures to defeat the 
 faith'ul execution of the Fugitive Slave Law are hostile in character, subver- 
 sive of the Constitution, and revolutionary in their effect. 
 
 3. Besolved, That it is the duty of the Federal Government to protect, 
 when ne.:essary, the tights of persons and property on the high seas, in the 
 Territories, or wherever else its Constitutional authority extend^. 
 
 4. Besolved, That the Democrac. of the Nation recognize it as the imper- 
 ative duty of this Government to prote t the naturalized citizen in all his 
 rights, whether at home or in foreign lands, to the same extent as its iiative- 
 born citizens. 
 
 5. Besolved, That the National Democracy earnestly recommend the ac- 
 quisiti n of the Island of Cuba at the earliest practicable period. 
 
 Whereas, That one of the greatest nee ssities of the age, in a political, 
 commercial, postal and military point of view, is a speedy communication 
 between the Pacific and Atlantic coasts. Therefore, be it 
 
 Besolved, That the National Democratic party do hereby pledge them- 
 selves to use every means in their power to secure the passage of some b 11 
 for the construction of a Pacific Railroad from the Mississippi River to the 
 Pacific Ocean, at the earliest pr icticab e moment. 
 
 Mr. Avery, after miking his report, proceeded to address the Convention, 
 but ou request, yielded the floor for the purpose of receiving the Minoiity 
 Report of the Committee on Resolutions and Platform. 
 
 Mr. Payne, of Ohio, a member of the Committee on Plaform and Reso'u- 
 tions, offered a Report and Resolutions from a minority of said C mmittee, 
 which he moved as a substitute for the Majority Report made by Mr. Avery, 
 which Report and Resolutions offered by Mr. Payne areas follows, viz : 
 
 MINORITY REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON RESOLUTIONS. 
 
 The undersigned, a minoritv of the Committee on Resolutions, regretting 
 their inability to concur with the report of the majority of your Oommitt e, 
 
38 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 f<el constra'ned to submit the following as their Report, and recommend its 
 adoption as a Mil stitute for the report of the majority. 
 Respectfully submitted. 
 
 AMOS ROBERTS, Delegate from Maine. 
 \V. BURNS. Delegate from New Hampshire. 
 E. M. BROWN, Delegate from Vermont. 
 C. S. BRADLEY, Delegate from Rhode Island. 
 A. G. HAZZARD, Delegate from Connecticut. 
 BEN J. WILLIAMSON, Delegate from New Jersey. 
 \ H. B. PAYNE Delegate from Ohio. 
 *P. C. DUNNING. Delegate from Indiana. 
 0. B. FICKLIN, Delegate from Illinois. 
 G. V. X. LOTHROP, Delegate from Michigan. 
 A. S. PALMER, Delegate from Wisconsin. 
 . BEN. M. SAMUELS, Delegate from Iowa. 
 J AS. M. CAVANAUGH, Delegate from Minnesota. 
 HENDRICKB. WRIGHT, Delegate from Pennsylvania. 
 In compliance with the wish of the New York Delegation, I concur with 
 this Report as far as it goes. 
 
 EDWIN CROSWELL, Delegate from New York. 
 
 1. Resolved, That we, the Democracy of the Union, in Convention assem- 
 bled, hereby declare our affirmance ot the Resolutions unanimously adopted 
 and declared as a Platform of Principles by the Democratic Convention at 
 Cincinnati, in the year 1856, believing that Democratic principles are un- 
 changeable in their nature, when applied to the same subject matters ; and 
 we lecommend as the only further resolutions the following : 
 
 2. Resoved, That all questions in regard to the . rights of property in 
 States or Territories, arising under the Constitution of the United States, are 
 judicial in their character ; and the l>emocratic party is pledged to abide by 
 and faithfully carry out such determination of these questions as has been or 
 may be made by the Supreme Court of the United States. 
 
 3. Resolved, That it is the duty of the United States to afford ample and 
 complete protection to all its citizens, whether at home or abroad, and 
 whether native or foreign born. 
 
 4. Resolvei ', That one of the necessities of the age, in a military, commer- 
 cial, and postal point of view, is speedy communication between the Atlantic 
 and Pacific States ; and the Democratic party pledge such Constitutional Gov- 
 ernment aid as will insure the construction of a Railroad to the Pacific coast, 
 at the earliest practicable period. 
 
 5. Resolved, That the Democratic party are in favor of the acquisition of 
 the Island of Cuba, on such terms as shall be honorable to ourselves and just 
 to Spain. 
 
 6. Resolved, That the enactments of State Legislatures to defeat the faithful 
 execution of the Fugitive Slave Law, are hostile in character, subversive of 
 the Constitution, and revolutionary in their effect. 
 
 Mr. Butler, of Massachusetts, a member of the Committee on Platform and 
 Resolutions, offered another Report as a Minority Report, which he moved be 
 received as a substitute for the resolutions reported by Mr. Avery and Mr. 
 Payne. The following are the resolutions reported by Mr. Butler : 
 
 Resolved, That we, the Democracy of the Union, in Convention assembled, 
 hereby declare our affirmance of the Democratic Resolutions unanimously 
 adopted and declared as a Platform of Principles at Cincinnati, in the year 
 1856, without addition or alteration, believing that Democratic principles are 
 unchangeable in their nature, when applied to the same subject matter, and 
 we recommend as the only farther resolution the following : 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 3V) 
 
 Resolved, That it is the duty of the United States to extend its protection 
 alike over all its citizens, whether native or naturalized. 
 
 A minority of your Committee have agreed to report the above as the sol e 
 resolutions upon the subject of the principles of the party. 
 
 In behalf of a minority of the Committee. * B. F. BUTLELi. 
 
 Mr. Cochran, of New York, offered an amendment to the amendmen t 
 offered by Mr. Butler, of Massachufetts, by substituting therefor the following : 
 
 Resolve I, That the several States of this Union are, under the Constitutior, 
 equal, and that the people thereof are entitled to the free and undisturbed pos . 
 session and enjoyment of their rights of person and v.roperty in the common 
 Territories ; and that any attempt by Congress or a Territorial Legislatuie to 
 annul, abridge or discriminate against any such equality or rights, would bo- 
 unwise in policy and repugnant to the Constitution ; and that it is the duty of 
 the Federal Government, whenever such rights are violated, to afford i hj 
 necesvsary, proper, and constitutional remedies for such violations. 
 
 Resolved, That the Platform of Principles adopted by the Convention held 
 in Cincinnati, in 1856, and the foregoing resolutions, are hereby declared to 1 e 
 the Platform of the Democratic party. 
 
 The President. The Chair will state the condition of the question for the 
 purpose of determining the question of order. The report of the Committee 
 presented by Mr. Avery, of North Carolina, is the first question before the 
 Convention. To the resolutions presented by the gentleman from North Caro- 
 lina, Mr. Payne, of Ohio, offers a series of resolutions as a substitute or as an 
 amendmeut in gross. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Butler) moves 
 an amendment to the amendment. In the opinion of the Chair, amendments 
 can go no farther, the proposition of the gentleman from New York being ;tn 
 amendment in the third degree. 
 
 Mr. Cochran. I give notice, then, that I will offer the amendment I have 
 indicated, as soon as the amendment last offered is disposed of. 
 
 Mr. Whitney, of Massachusetts. I wish to state that I shall call for a divi- 
 sion of the report of the majority, so that the sense of the Convention may be 
 taken separately upon each resolution. I also desire to move an amendment, 
 which, with the permission of the gentleman from North Carolina, I will have 
 read. 
 
 Objection was made to the reading of the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Avery. On behalf of the majority of the Committee on Resolutions, 1 
 am instructed to say that it is with profound regret we have appeared be l ore 
 this Convention to present a report that has not met the sanction of the emir \ 
 Committee whom I have the honor to represent upon this occasion ; anl I 
 de»ire, before proceeding, to inquire of the gentleman from Ohio, who repre • 
 sents a branch of the minority, whether he represents a greater numb^i H 
 States than are affixed to the report which he has made upon this occasion. 
 
 Mr. Payne. I read the names of the delegates. 
 
 Mr. Avery. I understood the gentleman fiomOhio to say that he re| te 
 seated only thirteen States of this Feueral Union, in the report which he h is 
 made. 
 
 Mr. Payne. Fifteen States are represented. I explained that apon tie 
 printed copy of the report the names of two States, New York and Penn>\ 1- 
 vania, were omitted, which have been supplied. 
 
 Mr. Avery. I did not understand the explanation of the gentleman ft. m 
 Ohio, or I should not have made the inquiry. 
 
 Mr. Avery then proceeded to address the Convention, and occupied his .till 
 hour. • 
 
 Mr. Payne, of Ohio, followed Mr. Avery in an address to the Convention. 
 
 Mr. B. F. Butler, of Massachusetts, obtained the floor, and addressed ihe 
 Convention for the time allotted him under the rule. 
 
•iO Democratic National Convention. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Barksdale, of Mississippi, the Convention then adjourned 
 until ft ur o'clock P. M. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The Convention was called to order by the President, at 4 o'clock P. M., when 
 
 Mr. Sayles, of Rhode Island, offered the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the Committee to whom has been referred the subject of the 
 t me aid place of holding the next Convention, appointment of National Com- 
 n ittee, &c, be requested to consider the propriety of fixing the number of 
 D^lega.es for whom seats shall be provided in the next National Convention, 
 tc be li nited to the number of Senators and Representatives to which such 
 S< ate is entitled in the Congress of the United States. The resolution was read 
 ai d adapted, and referred to the Committee. 
 
 The President then proceeded to remark as follows : 
 
 The President gave notice that for the convenience of members of the 
 Convention, assuming that most of them were by this time known to the offi- 
 cei i at the door, he had given orders to the officers to admit them henceforth 
 with or without tickets. He al&o desired to say to the Convention that it had 
 thus far proceeded in its delibeiations with much decorum and with proper 
 attention to parliamentary rules. The Chair confidently believed that the 
 Corvention would so continue to act to the last ; and now having arrived at 
 that stage of the proceedings which is of the highest importance, and when 
 much interest and excitement prevailed, he called upon them to preserve their 
 own dignity and self-respect, here, in the metropolis of the State of South 
 Carolina. 
 
 Mr. Barksdale, of Mississippi, then addressed the Convention. 
 
 M r. Ki ng, of Missouri, then obtained the floor, and addressed the Conven- 
 tion for an hour. 
 
 Mr. Yancy, of Alabama, then proceeded to the stand ; and, on motion of 
 Mr. Samuels, of Iowa, the time for Mr. Yancy's remarks was extended to one 
 hour and a half. 
 
 Mr. Pugh, of Ohio, next obtained the floor, and the same courtesy which 
 } ad been extended to Mr. Yancy was extended to him, and he proceeded to 
 addiess the Convention. Before Mr. Pugh concluded his remarks, it was 
 suggested that the Convention adjourn for one hour ; but before any motion 
 w as made, 
 
 Mr. Whitney, of Massachusetts, gave notice that he would to-morrow 
 ,5:\H up his motion which he had to-day asked to have read. 
 
 A motion was then made that the Convention adjourn for one hour. 
 
 Mr. Hatch, of Louisiana, moved that the Convention do now adjourn. 
 
 The question being: taken first on Mr. Hatch's motion to adjourn, was lost. 
 
 A vote was then taken on the motion to adjourn for one hour, which mo- 
 tion was carried. 
 
 The hour having expired, the Convention was called to order by the Presi- 
 dent. 
 
 Mr. SriNOLA, of New York, offered a resolution that a final vote be t ken 
 on the resolutions and amendments thereto, which are now before the Con- 
 vention, at 12 o'clock to-morrow. 
 
 Mr. Clark, of Mississippi, objected, and 
 
 Mr. Pugh, of Ohio, resumed and concluded his address. 
 
 Mr. Cochran, of New York, again offered his amendment, and claimed that 
 t he friends of a measure had a right to perfect it before any amendments were 
 made. 
 
 M r. Clark, of Missouri, asked if the gentleman was a friend of the Majority 
 Report. 
 
 M r. Cochran. If the amendment I proposed to make is adopted, I shall be. 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 41 
 
 \r> 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, raised the point of order that while the right 
 claimed by the gentleman from New York existed to a certain extent, his 
 alteration was, in fact, to entirely change the whole proposition. 
 
 Mr. Clark raised a point of order, and stated that the proposition of Mr. 
 Cochran took the shape of an amendment, and was not in order. 
 
 The President decided the motion of Mr. Cochran to be out of order. 
 
 Mr. Bishop, of Connecticut, demanded the previous question on the reso- 
 lutions. 
 
 Before the demand for the previous question was seconded, 
 
 Mr. Clark, of Mississippi, moved that the Convention adjourn, and upon 
 this motion, 
 
 Mr. Samuels, in behalf of the State of Iowa, called for a vote by States. 
 
 The vote was taken, and the motion to adjonrn was decided in the affirma- 
 tive. The vote was as follows : 
 
 
 Yeas 
 .. 8 
 
 Nays 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 5 
 35 
 
 19 
 
 carrk 
 
 Yeas. 
 
 North Carolina 10 
 
 South Carolina, 8 
 
 Georgia .10 
 
 Florida 3 
 
 Alabama 9 
 
 Louisiana 6 
 
 Mississippi 7 
 
 Texas 4 
 
 Arkansas... 4 
 
 Missouri.. 3 
 
 Tennessee 12 
 
 Kentucky 12 
 
 d and the Convention 
 
 Nays.i 
 
 ' Onio 
 
 Yeas. Navs. 
 23 
 
 New Hampshire 
 
 
 13 
 
 ! Illinois 
 
 . 5 6 
 
 
 .. 7 
 
 6 
 
 Rhode Island 
 
 
 5 
 
 Connecticut... 
 
 New York 
 
 New Jersey 
 
 ... 1 
 
 '."." 7 
 .. S 
 
 j Iowa 
 
 | Minnesota 
 
 ! California 
 
 i Oregon 
 
 6 ! 
 
 adjourned. 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 Delaware 
 
 MarvUnd 
 
 Virginia 
 
 So the motion 
 
 ... 3 
 ... 8 
 ...15 
 
 was 
 
 158}£ 144 
 
 SIZTH JD-A.-5r. 
 
 Saturday, April 28, 1860. 
 
 The Convention met and was called to order by the President, and no 
 clergyman being present, the Convention proceeded to business without 
 prayer. 
 
 The President made some remarks, and admonished the members of the 
 Convention of the necessity of preserving order in their deliberations. 
 
 Mr. Bigler, of Pennsylvania, was proceeding to make some remark?, when 
 
 Mr. Bishop, of Connecticut, arose to a point of order and claimed the floor. 
 
 John Cochran, of New York, spoke upon the question of order. 
 
 Mr. Randall, of Pennsylvania, claimed that when the Convention ad- 
 journed last night he had the floor, and was now entitled to it. 
 
 The President decided that as the previous question had not been 
 seconded when the Convention adjourned, the motion for the previous ques- 
 tion fell with the adjournment. 
 
 Senator Bigler, of Pennsylvania, then moved that the majority and minor- 
 ity reports be recommitted to the Committee, with instructions to report in 
 an hour the following resolutions : 
 
 Resolved, That the Platform adopted by the Democratic party at Cincin- 
 nati be affirmed, with the following explanatory resolutions : 
 
 Resolved, That the Government of a Territory, organized by an act of Con- 
 gress, is provisional and temporary, and, during its existence, all citizens of 
 the United States have an equal right to settle in the Territory, without 
 their rights, either of person or property, being destroyed or impaired by Con- 
 gressional or Territorial legislation. 
 
 R-solved, That the Democratic party stands pledged to the doctrine that 
 it is the duty of Grovernment to maintain all the constitutional rights of 
 propertv of whatever kind, in the Territories, and to enforce all the decisions 
 of the Supreme Court in reference thereto. 
 
42 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Resolved, That it is the duty of the United States to afford ample and 
 complete protection to all its citizens, whether at home or abroad, and 
 whether native or foreign. 
 
 Resolved, That one of the necessities of the age, in a military, commercial, 
 and postal point of view, is speedy communication between the Atlantic and 
 Pacific States ; and the Democratic party pledge such Constitutional Govern- 
 ment aid as will insure the construction of a railroad to the Pacific coast at 
 the earliest practicable period. ^ 
 
 Resolved, That the Democratic party are in favor of the acquisition of 
 the Island of Cuba, on such terms as shall be honorable to ourselves and just 
 to Spain. 
 
 Resolved, That the enactments of State Legislatures to defeat the faithful 
 execution of the Fugitive Slave Law. are hostile in character, subversive of 
 the Constitution, and revolutionary in their effect. 
 
 He moved the previous question. 
 
 Mr. Cochran, of New York, submitted, as a question of order, that the 
 previous question, if sustained, would operate on the resolutions reported by 
 the Committee, as well as on the motion to recommit. He hoped, therefore, 
 the gentleman from Pennsylvania would withdraw the motion for the pre- 
 vious question, and in this connection he (Mr. C.) would move to amend the 
 proposed instructions by adding to the series the resolutions which he had 
 offered to the Convention yesterday. 
 
 Mr. Eichardson, of Illinois, raised a question upon a point of order and 
 stated it. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, made some suggestions to the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Cochran made further remarks upon his point of order. 
 
 Mr. Stuart now made a point of order. 
 
 The President decided ihat Mr. Cochran's question was not properly one 
 of order ; that it was an inquiry for information, and could not be entertained 
 by the Chair while the gentleman from Pennsylvania was upon the floor. 
 
 Senator Bigler believed that his motion was understood, and, thereiore, 
 insisted on the demand for the previous question. 
 
 Mr. Phillips, of Pennsylvania, addressed the Chair, and Mr. Stuart 
 called him to order. 
 
 Mr. Randall spoke upon a privileged question. 
 
 Mr. Marshall, of Illinois, rose to a point of order. 
 
 Mr. Montgomery, of Pennsylvania, moved to lay Mr. Bigior's motion on 
 the table. He did not regard as a compromise, a proposition for a Congressional 
 slave code and the re-opening of the African slave trade. 
 
 Mr. Phillips, of Pennsylvania, and several other delegates, inquired if the 
 effect of the adoption of Mr. Montgomery's motion would not be to lay the 
 whole subject on the table. 
 
 The President decided that that would be the effect of the motion. 
 
 Mr. Montgomery withdrew his motion. 
 
 Senator Bigler again insisted on his demand for the previous question. 
 
 Mr. Montgomery inquired whether the previous question, it sustained, 
 would not apply to the whole platform? 
 
 The President said that he could answer the question if it was the wish 
 of the Convention. [Cries of " Yes, yes."] 
 
 Mr. Miles, of Maryland, desired to know distinctly, from the Chair, 
 whether the previous question would cut off all debate upon the platform? 
 If so, as a representative of the slave district of Maryland, he should claim 
 the privilege of being heard by the Convention, to show that the gentleman 
 who had represented the State of Maryland on the Committee on Resolutions 
 had, by his course, denied his own record at home, and misrepresented the 
 State of Maryland. [Loud cheers.] 
 
 The President decided that debate was out of order. 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 43 
 
 Mr. Pratt, of Connecticut, raised the question of order, that the motion 
 of Mr. Bigler was only a particular form of offering an amendment in the 
 third degree, and was therefore not in order. 
 
 The President decided that although such miiiht be the effect of the motion, 
 the practice was perlectly well settled in the House of Representatives that 
 such a motion could be entertained. In reply to the interrogatories as to the 
 effect of the previous question, he stated that by an express rule of the House 
 of Representatives when the previous question was moved on a series of propo- 
 sitions, if seconded, it applied to the whole series. If now seconded, there- 
 fore, and the main question ordered, the question would be first on the motion 
 to commit ; if that failed, then upon the amendment in third order, and finally 
 upon the majority report of the Committee. 
 
 Mr. Pugh, of Ohio, inquired whether, if the previous question was 
 seconded and the main question ordered, it would then be in order to call for a 
 division of the question on the motion of the gentleman from Pennsylvania? 
 
 The President replied that, by an express rule of the House of Repre- 
 sentatives, it was in 01 der to call for a division of the question either before 
 or after the main question was ordered. 
 
 Mr. Walker, of Alabama, called for a division of the question, so that it 
 should first be taken on the motion to recommit, and then on the instructions. 
 
 The previous question was seconded. 
 
 Mr. Nelms, ot Georgia, rose to a question of privilege. The Convention, 
 by a resolution adopted on Wednesday, decided that in cases where the dele- 
 gations had not been otherwise instructed by their State Conventions, indi- 
 vidual members of such delegations should have the right to vote in opposition 
 to the vote of the majority. The Georgia State Convention had adopted the 
 following resolution : 
 
 " Besolved, That the delegates from this State to the Charleston Convention 
 be requested to cast the vote of Georgia as a unit." 
 
 It would be seen that the resolution was merely a request, appealing to their 
 discretion, and not an instruction. A portion of his delegation had differed 
 with the majority, and he now claimed it as a right that they should be repre- 
 sented in the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Jones, of Georgia, in behalf of the majority of that delegation, said 
 that the minority in this case was a minority small in numbers, not only in 
 their delegation here but in the State of Georgia. If the request of this State 
 Convention was a mere apptal to their discretion, w 7 here was the necessity of 
 the request? Was it supposed that any portion of the delegation would 
 prove so refractory as to require positive instructions? Requests of sovereign- 
 ties are the laws of subjects ; and when Kings, States, Conventions, and 
 especially Conventions of the Democracy, speak to their constituents by 
 requests, their requests are laws. 
 
 The question of order having been raised that no debate was in order, 
 
 The President decided that the previous question, having been seconded, 
 no debate was in order at this time. Whenever the question properly arose, 
 it must be decided in some way. 
 
 Several further inquiries were propounded, and answered by the President, 
 as to the effect of ordering the main question. 
 
 The State of Georgia demanded that the vote on the question before the 
 house should be taken by States. 
 
 The vote on the question — " Shall the main question be bow put ?" — was 
 then taken by State-, and the following is the result : — Yeas 302, Nays 1. 
 
 Mr. Horn, of Wisconsin, being temporarily in the Chair, announced the 
 result. So the main question was ordered. 
 
 The President again took the Chair, and Mr. John Cochran, of New 
 York, asked if the vote would not first be on his amendment to the instruc- 
 tions proposed by Mr. Bigler. 
 
44 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Mr. Ce-sna, of Pennsylvania, raised the question of order that no amend- 
 ment offered by Mr. Cochran was pending. The gentleman from Pennsyl- 
 vania moved to recommit with instructions, and demanded the previous 
 question on the motion. The gentleman from New York rose while the gen- 
 tleman from Pennsylvania was on the floor, and proposed his amendment, but 
 the gentleman from Pennsylvania being on the floor, it could not have been 
 received. 
 
 Mr. Cochran stated that the gentleman from Pennsylvania yielded for 
 that purpose. 
 
 Mr. Bigler said he did not yield the floor for that purpose. 
 
 Mr. John Cochran said he would withdraw his amendment. 
 
 Mr. Cessna demanded a division of the question, so that the vote should 
 first be taken on the motion to recommit, and then upon the instructions. 
 
 Mr. Cochran raised the question of order, that after the main question had 
 been ordered no division of the question could be entertaine 1. The rule of 
 the House, as recently amended, permits the call for a division of the ques- 
 tion either before or after the main question hts been seconded, but the rules 
 for the government of the Convention being those in force in the House of 
 Eepresentatives at the time of the Cincinnati Convention, expressly provide 
 that no call for a division can be entertained after the main question has 
 been ordered. 
 
 Mr. Bigler, of Pennsylvania, said the gentleman from New York was right 
 as to his question of order. He, however, had no objection to such a division 
 himself. 
 
 The President said that inasmuch as two members of the House had 
 stated with confidence that a division of the main question could not take 
 p'ace after the main question had been ordered, he would simply read the 
 rule of the House of Representatives on the subject : 
 
 "53. Any member may call for the division of a question before or after 
 the main question is ordered. — September 15 1837.'' 
 
 Mr. Walker, of Alabama, said he had called for a division of the question 
 before the m-vin question was ordered. 
 
 The President replied that he was aware of it, and would entertain the 
 call. 
 
 The question being first upon the first branch of the motion of Mr. Bigler 
 to commit the resolutions offered by the Committee on Resolutions, with the 
 amendments, back to the Committee. 
 
 Alabama demanded that the vote be by States. 
 
 The question was taken, and it was decided in the affirmative. Yeas 152, 
 nays 151, as fo lows : 
 
 Teas. Nays. 
 
 Maine 3 5 
 
 New Hampshire 5 
 
 Vermont.-. 5 
 
 Massachusetts 8 5 
 
 Rhode Island 4: 
 
 Connecticut \% 4% 
 
 New York 35 
 
 New Jersey 4 3 . 
 
 Ponusylvania 16 11 
 
 Delaware 3 
 
 Maryland' by z 2^ 
 
 Virginia 14 1 l Kentucky 12 | 
 
 So the proposed platforms were recommitted. 
 
 Mr. Phillips, of Pennsylvania, moved to reons : der the vote by which the 
 resolutions were recommitted, and also moved to lay the motion to recon- 
 s : der on the table. 
 
 Tae latter motion wa^ agreed to. 
 
 The question then recurred on the second branch of Mr. Bigler's motion, 
 
 Yeas. Nays, Yeas. Nays. 
 
 North Carolina 10 j Ohio 23 
 
 South Carolina S Indiana 13 
 
 Georgia 10 | Illinois 11 
 
 Florida -....3 | Michigan 6 
 
 Alabama 9 ! Wisconsin 5 
 
 Loui-ima 6 j Iowa , 4 
 
 Mississippi 7 \ Minnesota 1 3 
 
 Texas 4 ! California 4 
 
 Arkansas 4 j Oregon 3 
 
 Missouri 5 4 j 
 
 Tennessee II 1 i 152 151 
 
Proceeding's at Charleston. 45 
 
 which was to require the Committee to report the resolutions proposed by 
 him. 
 
 Mr. Bishop, of Connecticut, asked the Chair whether, if the proposition to 
 instruct was voted down, the Committee would be required to report in one 
 hour ? 
 
 The President said the question of instructions and time were distinct and 
 divisible. 
 
 Mr. Bigler proposed to modify his motion, so far as relates to time. 
 
 Mr. Samuels, of Iowa, objected. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, asked for a vote on each resolution separately, — 
 first, on the one instructing the affirmation of the Cincinnati platform. 
 
 Mr. Bayard oppos d any instructions. Let the whole matter be referred, 
 and the majority and minority each report a platform, and the Convention 
 vote distinctly on them. 
 
 Mr. Brooks, of Alabama, moved to lay the instructions on the table. 
 
 Mr. Bigler, proposed to modify his propositions so as to meet the sug- 
 gestion of the gentleman from Delaware. 
 
 Objection was made. 
 
 A Delegate raised the question that the motion to lay the instructions en 
 the table would carry the whole subject with it. 
 
 The President decided that inasmuch as the report of the Committee, 
 with the amendments, had been recommitted and were now not before the 
 Convention, the motion to lay on the table would simply apply to the 
 instructions, leaving the original matter in the hands of the Committee. 
 
 Gov. Winston, of Alabama, contended that the previous question not 
 bving exhausted, his colleague's motion was not in order. 
 
 The President decided the point not well taken. 
 
 Mr. Seward, of Georgia, again raised the question of privilege relative to 
 the right of individual delegates in the Georgia delegation to cast their own 
 vote. 
 
 The President repeated his former decision that the question could not 
 be entertained at this time. 
 
 The question was then taken on the motion of Mr. Brooks, and it was 
 decided in the affirmative, yeas 242^, nays 56)^, as follows : 
 
 Teas. Nays.f Teas. Nays. 
 
 North Carolina 10 
 
 South Carolina 8 
 
 Georgia 10 
 
 Florida 3 
 
 Alabama 9 
 
 Louisiana 6 
 
 Mississippi 7 
 
 Texas 4 
 
 Arkansas 4 
 
 vlissouri 4 5 
 
 Tennessee 11 
 
 ilentucky 5 7 
 
 So the instructions were laid on the table. , 
 
 When the State of Georgia was called, the Chairman of that delegation 
 announced the vote of the State in the affirmative. 
 
 Mr. Seward claimed the right to cast his vote in the negative. 
 
 Mr. Nelms, of Georgia, claimed the right to have two votes of the Georgia 
 delegation cast in the negative. 
 
 Mr. Lamar, of Georgia, called for the reading of the resolution adopted by 
 the Convention on the question of allowing individual members of the dele- 
 gation to vote. 
 
 The resolution was read as follows : 
 
 " That in any State which has not provided or directed by its State Con- 
 vention how its vote may be given, the Convention will recognize the right 
 of each delegate to cast his individual vote." 
 
 Teas. Nays 
 
 Maine 8 
 
 New Hampshire 5 
 
 Vermont 5 
 
 Massachusetts 12 % y 2 
 
 Rhode Island 4 
 
 Connecticut 5 1 
 
 NewTork 35 
 
 New Jersey 7 
 
 Pennsylvania 8 15 
 
 Delaware 3 
 
 Maryland b% 2k 
 
 Virgiuia 15 
 
 Ohio 
 
 .23 
 
 
 13 
 
 
 11 
 
 Michigan 
 
 *; 
 
 Wisconsin 5 
 
 Iowa 4 
 
 Minnesota 4 
 
 California. 3>2 iz 
 
 Oregon 3 
 
 242% mi 
 
46 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Mr. Nelms, of Georgia, said he had been informed that in the Georgia 
 Convention, the word "'instructed" was proposed and rejected. 
 
 Mr. Jones, of Georgia, explained that he, as a member of the Georgia 
 Convention, proposed to insert the word "instructed," but did not press the 
 motion, on the statement of the presiding officer that the word "requested" 
 would cover the whole ground. 
 
 Mr. Nelms contended that the request of the Georgia delegation to vote 
 as a unit was, he had stated before, simply an appeal to the discretion of the 
 delegation, and the minority were at liberty to cast their individual vote3. 
 
 Mr. Montgomery moved that in every instance where positive instructions 
 have not been given by the State Conventions, the individua 1 delegates be 
 permitted to cast their votes as they think proper. 
 
 Judge Meek, of Alabama, raised the question that the motion was out of 
 order. 
 
 The President decided the motion to be out of order. 
 
 Mr. Jackson, of Georgia, spoke in behalf of allowing the majority to cast 
 the vote of the State as a unit. 
 
 The President decided that, under the language of the rule adopted by 
 the Convention, the expression "provided or directed" was one of broader 
 import than merely an instruction. If the word "directed" had been alone 
 used, he would have held th-it the request of the Georgia Convention would 
 have been sufficient to require the delegation to vote as a unit ; but holding 
 the request came within the intent and meaning of the word "provided," as 
 used in the rule of the Convention, he would direct that the vote of the 
 State be received, as given by the Chairman of the delegation, as a unit. 
 
 Mr. Isaac H. Wright, of Massachasetts, moved that the Committee on 
 Platforms be instructed to report at 4 o'clock this afternoon. He moved the 
 previous question. 
 
 Hon. Willard Saulsburt, of Delaware, was about to speak against any 
 limitation upon the time when the Committee should report, when he was 
 ruled out of order, the previous question having been moved. 
 
 Mr. Jones, of Georgia, moved that the Convention adjourn until 10 o'clock 
 Monday morning. 
 
 Mr. Payve, of Ohio, asked and obtained leave for the Committee on Reso- 
 lutions to retire to their Committee room. 
 
 Mr. Burrows, of Arkansas, hoped that the Convention would adjourn. 
 
 Mr. Martin moved that the vote be taken by States. 
 
 The motion to adjourn was withdrawn. 
 
 The previous question being seconded and the main question ordered on 
 instructing the Committee on Resolutions to report a 4 o'clock, it was taken 
 and decided in the affirmative. 
 
 So the Committee were instructed to report at four o'clock, P. M. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Montgomery, of Pennsylvania, the Convention then 
 adjourned till 4 o'clock, P. M. 
 
 EVENING SESSION. 
 
 The Convention re- assembled at four o'clock P. M., and was called to 
 order by the President. 
 
 Mr Averv, of North Carolina, from the Committee on Resolutions, said 
 that a majority of the Committee were ready to report, but the minority 
 asked the indulgence of the Committ e for a few moments longer. 
 
 Mi-. Gittings, of Maryland, hoped that the Convention would adjourn over 
 until Monday morning at eleven o'clock, and he would mike that motion. 
 
 Mr. Gittings withdrew his motion to adjourn. 
 
 Mr. Avery, of North Carolina. I beg leave, on behalf of the Commit'ee 
 on Resolutions, to make a report. I will state that the Committee understood 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 47 
 
 that tlrs report embodies in substance the Bayard resolutions, and in substance 
 the resolutions ot the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Bigler), and in sub- 
 stance the resolutions offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
 Cochran), being modiBed in sueh shape as the Committee think will meet the 
 approbation of the Convention. 
 
 Resolved, That the platform adopted by the Democratic party at Cincin- 
 nati be affirmed, with the following explanatory revolutions. 
 
 1. That the government of a Territory organized by an act of Congress, 
 is provisional and temporary ; and, during its existence, all citizens of the 
 Unit d States have an equal right to settle with their pr tperty in the Terri- 
 t >ry without their rights, either of person or property, being destroyed or 
 impaired by Congressional or Territorial legislation. 
 
 2. That it is the duty of the Federal Government, in all its depart- 
 ments, to protect, when necessary, the rights of persons and property in the 
 Territories, and wherever el-e its constitutional authority extends. 
 
 3. That \vh n the settlers ii a Territory having an alequite popula- 
 tion form a State (Constitution, the right of sovereignty commences, and, 
 being consummated by admission into the Union, they stand on an equal 
 footing with the people of other States ; and the State thus organized ought 
 to be admitted into the Federal Union, whether its Constitution prohibits or 
 recognizes the institution of slavery. 
 
 4. L'hat the Democratic party are in favor of the acquisition of the 
 Island of Cuba, on such terms as sha'l be honorable to ourselves and just to 
 Spain, at the earliest practicable moment. 
 
 5. That the enactments of State Legislatures to defeat the faithful 
 execution of the Fugitive Slave Law, are hostile in character, subversive of 
 the Constitution, and revolutionary in their effect. 
 
 6. That the Democracy of the United Spates recognize it as the imper- 
 ative duty of t'lis Gr ivernment to pr tect the naturalized citizen in all his 
 right- 1 , whether at home or in foreign lands, to the same extent as its native- 
 born citizens. 
 
 Whereas, one of the greatest necessities of the age, in a political, comm°r- 
 cial, post d and military point of view, is a speedy communication between 
 the Atlantic and Pacific coasts ; therefore, be it 
 
 Resolved, That the Democratic party do hereby pledge themselves to use 
 every means in their power to secure the passage of some bill, to the extent 
 of the consitutional authority of Congress, for the construction of a Pacific 
 Railroad, from the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean, at the earliest 
 practicable moment. 
 
 Mr. Avery addressed the Convention upon the subject of his report. 
 
 Mr. Stevens, of Oregon, desired to present a few thoughts, but 
 
 The President decided that he was out of order, and that Mr. Avery had 
 the floor ; and Mr. Avery proceeded to address the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Samuels, of Iowa, submitted a report from a minority of the Commit- 
 tee, which he offered as a substitute for, and an amendment to, the majority 
 report made by Mr. Avery. The following is the 
 
 REPORT OF THE MINORITY OF THE COMMITTEE ON RESO- 
 LUTIONS, 
 As amended and reported back to the Convention, by Mr. Samuels. 
 1. Resolved, That we, the Democracy of the Union in Convention assem- 
 bled, herebr declare our affirmance of the resolutions unanimously adopted 
 and declared as a platform of principles by the Democratic Convention at 
 Cincinnati, in the year 1856, believing that Democratic principles are un- 
 changeable in their nature, when applied to the same subject matters ; and 
 we recommend as the only further resolutions the following : 
 
48 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 2. Inasmuch as difference of opinion exists in the Democratic p .rty as to 
 the nature and extent of the powers of a Territorial Legislature, and as to 
 the powers and duties of Congress, under the Constitution of the United 
 States, over the institution of slavery within the Territories, 
 
 Resolved, That the Democratic party will abide by the decision of the Su- 
 preme Court of the United States upon these questions of Constitutional law. 
 
 3. Resolved, That it is the duty of the United States to afford ample and 
 complete protection to all its citizens, whether at home or abroad, and whether 
 native or foreign born. 
 
 4. Resolved, That one of the necessities of the age, in a military, commer- 
 cial, and postal point of view, is speedy communication between the Atlantic 
 and Pacific States ; and the Democratic party pledge such Constitutional Gov- 
 ernment aid as will insure the construction of a Railroad to the Pacific coast, 
 at the earliest practicable period. 
 
 5. Resolved, That the Democratic party are in favor of the acquisition of the 
 Island of Cuba on such terms as shall be honorable to ourselves and just to Spain. 
 
 6. Resolved, That the enactments of the State Legislatures to defeat the 
 faithful execution of the Fugitive Slave Law, are hostile in character, sub- 
 versive of the Constitution, and revolutionary in their effect. 
 
 Mr. Samuels addressed the Convention upon the subject of his report. 
 
 Mr. Butler, of Massachusetts, then submitted a report from a minority of 
 the Committee, which he offered as a substitute for both of the reports 
 already submitted, which report of Mr. Butler is as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That we, the Democracy of the Union, in Convention assembled, 
 hereby declare our affirmance of the Democratic resolutions unanimously 
 adopted and declared as a platform of principles at Cincinnati, in the year 
 1856, without addition or alteration, believing that Democratic principles are 
 unchangeable in their nature, when applied to the same subject matter, and 
 we recommend as the only farther resolution, the following : 
 
 Resolved, That it is the duty of the United States to extend its protection 
 alike over all its citizens, whether native or naturalized. 
 
 A minority of your Committee have agreed to report the above as the sole 
 resolutions upon the subject of the principles of the party. 
 
 In behalf of a minority of the Committee. 
 . B. 7. BUTLER, Massachusetts. Mr. CAVANAUGH, Minnesota. 
 
 -P. C, DUNNING, Indiana. B.WILLIAMSON, N. Jtrsey. 
 
 Mr. Butler addressed the Convention on the subject of his report. 
 
 Mr. Stevens, of Oregon, Mr. Brent, of Maryland, and Mr. Burrows, of Arkan- 
 sas, addressed the Convention at length upon the subject of the platform. 
 
 Mr. Claiborne, of Missouri, demanded the previous question, and before 
 the demand was seconded, Mr. Jackson, of Georgia, moved that the Conven- 
 tion adjourn, and called in behalf of the State of Georgia for a vote by 
 States on his motion. 
 
 A vote was taken upon the question to adjourn with the following result : 
 
 Yeas. Nays.i Yeas. Nays., Yeas. Nays. 
 
 Maine 8 [North Carolina 10 Ohio 23 
 
 New Hampshire 5 [South Carolina 8 Indiana 13 
 
 Vermont _ 5 [Georgia ..10 
 
 Massachusetts 6} 6|[Florida 3 
 
 Rhode Island 4 'Alabama 9 
 
 Connecticut... 1 5 'Louisiana 6 
 
 New York 35 'Mississippi 7 
 
 New Jersey 4 iTexas 4 
 
 Pennsylvania 14 11 [Arkansas 4 
 
 Delaware 3 {Missouri 9 
 
 Maryland 5 3 [Tennessee 12 
 
 Virginia - 15 [Kentucky 6 6 
 
 Illinois 11 
 
 Michigan 6 
 
 Wisconsin 5 
 
 Iowa 4 
 
 Minnesota 4 
 
 California £4 
 
 Oregon 3 
 
 97 205 k 
 
 So the motion to adjourn was lost. 
 
 The demand for the previous question was then seconded. 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 
 
 49 
 
 Mr. Clark, of Mississippi, moved for a division of the first series of reso- 
 lutions, so that the vote may be taken on the third resolution separately. 
 
 Mr. Howard, of Tennessee, moved that the Convention adjourn, and called 
 for a vote by Sta'es. 
 
 A vote was taken on the motion to adjourn, and resulted as follows : 
 
 Yeas. Nays 
 
 Maine 
 
 Now Hampshire 
 
 Vermont 
 
 Massachusetts 5 
 
 Rhode Island 
 
 Connecticut 
 
 New York 
 
 Naw Jersey 7 
 
 Pennsylvania 13 
 
 Delaware 3 
 
 .Maryland 5$ 
 
 Virginia 14 
 
 Yeas. Nays.! Yeas. Nayn. 
 
 Ohio 23 
 
 Indiana 
 
 Illinois 
 
 Michignn 
 
 Wisconsin 
 
 Iowa 
 
 Minnesota 
 
 California 4 
 
 Oregon 3 
 
 North Carolina 10 
 
 South Carolina 
 
 Georgia 10 
 
 Florida 3 
 
 Alabama 9 
 
 Louisiana 6 
 
 Mississippi 7 
 
 Texas 4 
 
 Arkansas 4 
 
 Missouri 
 
 Tennessee 12 139 169 
 
 Kentucky 7i 
 
 Mr. Seward, of Georgia, moved to reconsider the vote on the question of 
 seconding the demand for the previous question. 
 
 The Chair decided Mr. Seward's motion to be out of order. 
 
 Mr. Jackson, of Georgia, moved to lay the whole proceedings on the 
 question upon the table, and upon that called for a vote by States. 
 
 The vote was taken on laying the whole subject on the table, and it was 
 lost by the following vote : 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 
 Maine 8 
 
 New Hampshire 5 
 
 Vermont 5 
 
 Massachusetts 4* 
 
 Rhode Island 
 
 Yeas. Nays 
 10 
 
 Vorth Carolina 
 
 South Carolina 
 
 Georgia 10 
 
 8-J .Florida 3 
 
 4 iAlabama 
 
 Connecticut.... 
 
 New York 
 
 New Jersey ... 
 Pennsylvania , 
 
 Delaware 
 
 Maryland 
 
 Virginia 
 
 6 i Louisiana .. 
 35 Mississippi. 
 
 Texas 
 
 Arkansas... 
 Missouri.... 
 Tennessee.. 
 Keatucky. 
 
 Ohio 
 
 Indiana 
 
 Illinois 
 
 Michigan ., 
 Wisconsin. 
 
 Iowa 
 
 Minnesota. 
 California., 
 Oregon 
 
 Yeas. Nayg. 
 i!3 
 13 
 11 
 
 20i 283* 
 
 Mr. Gittings, of Maryland, moved to adjourn, and called for a vote by 
 
 States, which was taken and resulted as follows : 
 
 Yeas. Na)8. 
 
 Maine 8 
 
 New Hampshire 5 
 
 Vermont .-... 5 
 
 Massachusetts 5^ 7 
 
 Rhode Island 8 
 
 Connecticut li 4| 
 
 New York 35 
 
 New Jersey 4 3 
 
 Pennsylvania H 13 
 
 Delaware 3 
 
 Maryland ....5* 2£ 
 
 Virginia 15 
 
 
 Yeas. N 
 10 
 
 ays. 
 
 5 
 % 
 
 Ohio 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 23 
 
 South Carolina.,.. 
 
 Georgia 
 
 Florida . 
 
 8 
 
 10 
 
 8 
 
 Indiana 
 
 13 
 
 11 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 6 
 
 Iowa 
 
 Minnesota 
 
 California 
 Oregon 
 
 4 
 
 Mississippi 
 
 Texas 
 
 7 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 1 3 
 
 4 
 
 - . 3 
 
 Missouri 
 
 Tennessee 
 
 Kentucky 
 
 4 
 
 12 
 
 Hi 
 
 126 178 
 
 Mr. Butterworth called for a division of the resolutions as reported by 
 the majority. 
 
 The President stated that the question now before the house is, " Shall 
 the main question be put ?" 
 
 Mr. Hunter, of Louisiana, desired to be heard, and moved that a vote be 
 taken, and that then the Convention adjourn till Monday morning. 
 
 Mr. Jackson, of Georgia, moved to lay the motion on the table. 
 
 Mr. Milton, of Florida, called on the South to do her part in this matter 
 manfully. She had been met fairly in argument, and listened to attentively. 
 She should not now offer factious opposition to the vote. 
 
 The question, " Shall the main question be now put ?" was voted on, and 
 the State of Georgia called for a vote by States, and the following is the 
 result : 
 
50 
 
 Democratic National Convention, 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 
 Maine 8 
 
 New Hampshire 5 
 
 Vermont 5 
 
 Massachusetts 13 
 
 Rhode Islaid 4 
 
 Connecticut 6 
 
 New York ..35 
 
 New Jersey 7 
 
 Pennsylvania 27 
 
 Delaware 3 
 
 Maryland 8 
 
 Virginia -.15 
 
 North Carolina.. 
 
 South Carolina 
 
 Georgia 
 
 Florida 8 
 
 Alahima 9 
 
 Louisiana 6 
 
 Mississippi 7 
 
 Texts 4 
 
 Arkansas 4 
 
 Missouri 5 
 
 Tennessee 3 
 
 Kentucky 7 2 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, moved to reconsider the vote last taken, and to 
 lay that motion on the table, which motion was carried, and then, on mot'on 
 of Mr. Stuart, the Convention adjourned. 
 
 Yeas. Nays.f Yeas. Nays 
 
 ....10 Ohio 23 
 
 8 Indiana 13 
 
 10 Illinois ....11 
 
 Michigan (i 
 
 .Wisconsin 5 
 
 Iowa 4 
 
 |Miun"8ota 4 
 
 California 4 
 
 Oregon 3 
 
 272 31 
 
 seventh r>^.^r. 
 
 Monday, April 30, 1860. 
 
 The Convention v as called to order at half-past ten. 
 
 Prayer was delivered by Rev. Mr. Dana, of the Central Presbyteriau Church. 
 
 Mr. Phillips moved the reading of the Journal of Saturday be dispensed 
 with. Agreed to. 
 
 The President. The Chair desires to say that on Saturday last, after a 
 warm debate and a protracted session, at the time of the adjournment some 
 little tendency to disorder occurred, which it became necessary for the Chair 
 to check. The Chair is perfectly conscious that in using peremptory language 
 to an assemblage composed of so many high-spirited gentlemen he may have 
 given umbrage, although not designed. His remarks had been rendered 
 necessary by the confusion that prevailed, but he deemed it proper to dis- 
 claim any intent to give offense to any member of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Pugh, of Ohio, rose and asked the indulgence of the Convention for a 
 personal explanation. 
 
 Mr. Barksdale, of Mississippi. As one of the members who have addressed 
 the Convention, in behalf of the Majority Eeport, I deem it proper to state, in 
 response to the gentleman from Ohio, that I did not understand his remarks 
 to have been used in $r offensive sense ; and I am gratified that, with his ac- 
 customed frankness and courtesy, he has disavowed such an intention. 
 
 The President. At the time of the adjournment, the Convention had 
 ordered that the main question be now put. A motion to reconsider and to 
 lay on the table' had been adopted. The question then was upon taking the 
 main question, which is a series of resolutions to be voted upon. 
 
 The majority of the Committee, through their Chairman, Mr. Avery, 
 reported the resolutions adopted by that majority. Thereupon Mr. Samuels 
 moved to jmend those resolutions by substituting the report of the minority. 
 Mr. Butle moved, in behalf of another portion of the minority, to substitute 
 their amc ndment by the adoption of the amendment of that minority. The 
 first ques Jon would be upon the amendment of Mr. Butler, then upon that of 
 Mr. Samue \ then, if both fail, upon the adoption of the majority report. 
 
 The quest n was then taken by States on the amendment of Mr. Butler, and 
 the same was ] ">st by the following vote : 
 
 ■± :as. Nays 
 
 Maine 3 5 
 
 New Hampshire 5 
 
 Vermont 5 
 
 Massachusetts 8 5 
 
 Rhode Island 4 
 
 Connecticut 254 »H 
 
 New York 35 
 
 New Jersey 5 2 
 
 Pennsylvania 16>£ 10>£ 
 
 Delaware . 3 
 
 Maryland 5K 2% 
 
 Virginia 12>f 2% 
 
 Yeas, fc 
 
 North Carolina 10 
 
 South Carolina 
 
 Georgia ..10 
 
 Florida 
 
 Alabama 
 
 Louisiana 
 
 Mississippi 
 
 Texas . 
 
 Arkansas 
 
 Missouri 4% 
 
 Tennessee 11 
 
 Kentucky 9 
 
 Ohio 
 
 Indiana 
 
 Illinois 
 
 Michigan.. 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 Iowa 
 
 Minnesota. 
 California.. 
 Oregon .... 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 23 
 13 
 11 
 6 
 5 
 4 
 
 2^ 
 4 
 
 iy 2 
 
 105 198 
 
Proceeding's at Charleston. 
 
 51 
 
 When the Stata of Georgia was called, Mr. Seward challenged the vote. 
 
 Mr. Floirnoy, on the State of Arkansas being called, gave notice that he 
 desired to explain the vote of that State at the proper time. 
 
 When New Jersey was called, Mr. Williamson, of New Jersey, called atten- 
 tion of the Chair to the fact that a difference existed amongst the Delegates as 
 to how the vote was to be cast. He read the resolutions of the State Conven- 
 tion, on instructing the Delegates to vote for William C. Alexander for Vice 
 President, and recommended them to cast their other votes as a unit. The 
 decision of the Chair on the Georgia case was held to prevent the individual 
 Delegates of his State from voting as they pleased. He held that the State 
 had not instructed or requested their Delegates to vote as a unit, in the resolu- 
 tions passed. Tne difference between the two resolutions snowed that no 
 instructions were intended except as related to the vote for Vice President. 
 
 Mr. O'Rafferty contended that the resolution was similar to the Georgia 
 resolution, and the Delegates were bound to vote as a unit. 
 
 Tne Cuair decided that the same rule applied to both cases, and that the 
 vote of New Jersey must be cast as a unit. 
 
 Mr. Williamson appealed from the decision of the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Phillips moved to lay the appeal on the table. 
 
 Mr. Cocukan raised the point of order, that pending an undebatable ques- 
 tion, the appeal must be taken without debate. 
 
 Michigan demanded the vote by States. 
 
 Mr. Ikying, of Alabama, raised the point of order that the question was out 
 of order during the calling of the roll. 
 
 The President. The question cannot be avoided now, as it affects the vote 
 of the State. 
 
 Tne vote on the motion to lay the appeal on the table was then taken, and 
 it was lost b} T the following vote : 
 
 Yeas Nays.; 
 
 Maine 
 
 New Hampshire 
 
 Vermont 
 
 Massachusetts 9 
 
 Rhode Island 
 
 Connecticut . 2£ 
 
 New York 
 
 New Jersey 
 
 Pennsylvania 17 
 
 Delaware 3 
 
 Maryland 5 
 
 Virginia -.14 
 
 Maine 
 
 New Hampshire — 
 
 Vermont 
 
 Massachusetts 7}- 
 
 Rhode Island 
 
 Connecticut 2 J- 
 
 New York 
 
 New Jersey. 
 
 Pennsylvania 17 
 
 Delaware 3 
 
 Maryland 5 
 
 Virginia 14 
 
 Yeas. Nays 
 ....10 
 
 Ohio 
 
 Indiana .. 
 
 Illinois . . . 
 
 Michigan. . 
 
 Wisconsin. 
 
 Iowa 
 
 Minnesota 
 
 California . 
 
 1 lOregon 
 
 41 
 1 [ 
 2 
 
 Yeas. Navs. 
 23 
 
 146 150 
 
 5 : North Carolina 
 
 5 South Carolina 8 
 
 5 Georgia 10 
 
 4 jFIorida 3 
 
 4 jAlabama 9 
 
 3£]Louisiana 6 
 
 35 Mississippi -.7 
 
 Texas „ 4 
 
 10 Arkansas 3 
 
 Missouri - 4J- 
 
 Tennessee 11 
 
 T-fKentucky 10 
 
 The President. The question before the house now is, " Shall the decision 
 of the Chair be sustained ?" 
 
 The vote was taken, and the result was as follows : 
 
 Yeas. Nays. | Yeas. Nays. 
 
 3 5 North Carolina 10 
 
 5 South Carolina 8 
 
 5 Georgia 10 
 
 5i' Florida 3 
 
 4 iAlabama 9 
 
 3^ Louisiana 6 
 
 35 Mississippi 7 
 
 Texas 4 
 
 10 Arkansas 3 1 
 
 Missouri.. 4} 4£ 
 
 8 Tennessee 11 1 
 
 lvfeentucky 10^ J/J 
 
 Mr. Stuaut moved to re-consider the vote on Mr. Butler's resolutions, and 
 to lay that motion on the table. 
 
 A Delegate raised the point of order that while under the operation of the 
 previous question — 
 
 Mr. Seward, of Georgia. Is the motion divisible ? 
 
 The President. It is not. 
 
 Ohio 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 23 
 
 Indiana 
 
 13 
 
 
 11 
 
 Michigan 
 
 6 
 
 Wisconsin 
 
 5 
 
 4r 
 
 Minnesota 
 
 4 
 4 
 
 Oregon 
 
 3 
 
 145 151 
 
52 
 
 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 The President read from the rules to show that the motion to re-consider 
 and lay on the table was in order. 
 
 After some further discussion by Messrs. Cochran and Skinner, 
 
 Mr. Bigler rose to speak to the point of order. 
 
 Mr. Spinola. The question has been decided, and no motion is before the 
 House. 
 
 The motion of Mr. Stuart was adopted. 
 
 Mr. Butler called for a division of the question on the next resolution in 
 order, being the minority report, so that the vote be first taken on that portion 
 re-enacting the Cincinnati Platform. 
 
 Mr. Phillips, of Pennsylvania, raised the point that the question was not 
 divisible, being a motion to strike out and insert. 
 
 Mr. Spinola raised the point of order that the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
 was not in bis place. 
 
 Mr. Phillips went to his -place and renewed his point of order. 
 
 The Chair referred to the rule that the motion to strike out and insert shall 
 be deemed indivisible, and decided the point well taken. 
 
 The question then being on the report of the minority presented by Mr. 
 Samuels — 
 
 Mr. B. F. Butler desired to make a motion. 
 
 The President. The gentleman from Massachusetts has a right to address 
 the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Butler. I desire to move to lay the whole subject of the Platform on 
 the table, in order to proceed to ballot for a Presidential candidate. 
 
 Mr. Winston raised the point of order that the House having ordered the 
 previous question to be taken now, all motions were out of order until the 
 question has been taken. 
 
 Mr. Hooker, of Mississippi, understood the motion to be to go into the 
 nomination for President. The rule adopted by t ie Convention prevented the 
 nomination until after the Platform had been adopted. It was, therefore, a 
 reversal of the rule, and <^ut of order. 
 
 Mr. Butler withdrew his motion to lay on the table. 
 
 The question was then upon the adoption of the Minority Report and Reso- 
 lutions, and a vote was called by States, and the following was the result of the 
 vote : 
 
 Teas. N 
 
 Maine 8 
 
 New Hampshire 5 
 
 Vermont. 5 
 
 Massachusetts 7 
 
 Rhode Island 4 
 
 Connecticut 6 
 
 New York 35 
 
 New Jersey 5 
 
 Pennsylvania 12 
 
 Delaware 
 
 Maryland 3£ 
 
 Virginia I 
 
 So the Minority Resolutions were adopted. 
 
 Mr. Stuart moved to re-consider the vote and to lay that motion on the 
 table. 
 
 Mr. Cochran raised the point of order, that the question could n ot be put 
 whilst the previous question was before the House. 
 
 The President decided that he would receive both motions of Mr. Stuart, 
 but that the question would not then be put, but would be put as soon as the 
 question on the resolutions had been taken. 
 
 Mr. Ashe, of North Carolina, made an earnest appeal to the North to pause 
 before consummating this action. It could but lead to a division and ruin, 
 for as a representative of North Carolina he could not remain in the Conven- 
 tion if this Platform was adopted. 
 
 ays. 
 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 10 
 
 Ohio 
 
 Yeas. Nays 
 °3 
 
 
 South Carolina ... 
 
 8 
 
 
 . 1^ 
 
 fi 
 
 Georgia 
 
 Florida 
 
 Alabama 
 
 Louisiana ... 
 
 Mississippi 
 
 Texas 
 
 10 
 
 3 
 
 9 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 Illinois 
 
 11 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 Minnesota 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 Ifi 
 
 Oregon 
 
 3 
 
 165 IS* 
 
 3 
 
 41 
 14 
 
 Missouri 
 
 Tennessee 
 
 Kentucky 
 
 4 5 
 
 1 11 
 
 2f 9* 
 
Proceeding's ot Charleston. 
 
 53 
 
 The question then being on the adoption of the report as amended, Mr. B. 
 F. Butler, of Massachusetts, moved for a division of the question, so as to 
 take the vote first on the proposition, as follows : 
 
 1. Resolved, That we, the Democracy of the Union in Convention assem- 
 bled, hereby declare our affirmance of the resolutions unanimously adopted 
 and declared as a platform of principles by the Democratic Convention at 
 Cincinnati, in the year 1856, believing that Democratic principles are un- 
 changeable in their nature, when applied to the same subject matters. 
 
 Mr. Seward, of Georgia, raised the point of order that the question was 
 not divisible. 
 
 The Chair decided that the report having been amended by the insertion 
 of the minority resolutions, the call for a division was in order on any sub- 
 stantive propositions that would make sense when standing alone. 
 
 A vote on Mr. Butler's proposition was then ordered, and the State of 
 Michigan demanded a vote by States, which was taken, and the resolution 
 was adopted by the following vote : 
 
 Yeas. Nays j Yeas. 
 
 North Carolina i0 
 
 South Carolina 
 
 Georgia 
 
 Florida. . . 
 
 Alabama 
 
 Louisiana 
 
 Mississippi 
 
 Texas 
 
 Arkansas 
 
 Missouri 7* 
 
 Tennessee 10* 
 
 HKentucky 12 
 
 Nays. 
 
 7 
 4 
 4 
 
 Yeas. 
 
 Ohio 2:3 
 
 Indiana 18 
 
 Illinois 11 
 
 Michigan 6 
 
 Wisconsin 5 
 
 Iowa 4 
 
 Minnesota 4 
 
 California % 
 
 Oregon 
 
 Nays. 
 
 Maine 8 
 
 New Hampshire 5 
 
 Vermont. 5 
 
 Massachusetts 13 
 
 Rhode Island 4 
 
 Connecticut.. 6 
 
 New York 33 
 
 New Jersey 7 
 
 Pennsylvania 27 Arkansas 4 Oregon 
 
 Delaware 2 
 
 Maryland 5 3Tennessee 10* l"| 237>£ 65 
 
 Virginia 14 
 
 Mr. Stuakt moved to reconsider the vote just taken, and to lay that mo- 
 tion upon the table. 
 
 This motion was received, but not voted upon. 
 
 Mr. Driggs, of New York, moved to lay the balance of the resolutions 
 upon the table. 
 
 Mr. Yancy, of Alabama, rose and made a point of order, that the previous 
 question was before the House, and that the previous question ran through 
 all the propositions before the House, and therefore a motion to lay on tlie 
 table was not in order. • 
 
 The President ruled that the motion to lay on the table was in order. 
 
 The question upon laying upon the table was then put, and a vote was 
 called for by States. The following was the result : 
 
 Yeas. Nays | Yeas. Nays. 
 
 Maine 
 
 New Hampshire 
 
 Vermont ,. 
 
 Massachusetts 8% 
 
 Khode Island 
 
 Connecticut 2 
 
 New York 
 
 New Jersey 5 
 
 Pennsylvania 16% 
 
 Delaware 2 
 
 Maryland 
 
 Virginia 11 
 
 The States of Florida 
 
 8 North Carolina 9 
 
 5 |South Carolina 8 
 
 5 Georgia 
 
 4>£iFk>rida 
 
 2 
 10^ 
 
 Alabama . . 
 Louisiana .. 
 Mississippi 
 Texas 
 
 Arkansas „ 
 
 .10* 
 
 4k 
 
 Yeas. 
 
 Ohio 
 
 Indiana 
 
 Illinois 
 
 Michigan 
 
 Wisconsin 
 
 Iowa 
 
 Minnesota 1 
 
 California 
 
 Oregon 
 
 Nays. 
 23 
 13 
 11 
 
 81 
 
 hree of the votes from Arkansas, after having 
 Leave was granted 
 
 Missouri 
 
 8 iTennessee 
 
 4 iKeutucky -. 
 
 Alabama, Mississippi, and 
 cast their vote on the last proposition, asked leave to withdraw the vote cast, 
 and the votes of said States were wilhdrawn. 
 
 Mr. Ewing, of Tennessee, called for a division of the question, so that a 
 vote might be had on the following preamble and resolution, viz : 
 
 2. Inasmuch as differences of opinion exist in the Democratic party as to 
 the nature and extent of the powers of a Territorial Legislature, and as to 
 the powers and duties of Congress, under the Constitution of the United 
 States, over the institution of slavery within the Territories : 
 
 Resolved, That the Democratic party will abide by the decision of the Su- 
 preme Court of the United States upon these questions of Constitutional law. 
 
M 
 
 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Mr. Brown, of North Carolina, addressed the Convention on the subject. 
 
 Mr. Richakdson, of Illinois- , rose, and was about to address the Convention 
 in response to Mr. Brown, but was called to order by Mr. Meek, and several 
 other gent'emen from Alabama and Mississippi. 
 
 Mr. Cochran, of New York, believed peace offerings were about to be 
 made, and called on the Convention to hear. 
 
 Mr. Meek insisted on his point of order, and a vote was then had on the 
 preamble and resolution as follows : 
 
 
 Yeas. N 
 
 ays. 
 
 8 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 13 
 
 North Carol] 
 South Carol 
 Georgia 
 
 
 Yeas 
 
 Nays. 
 10 
 
 5 
 
 12 
 
 8 
 
 Ohio 
 
 Yeas. 
 
 Nays* 
 23 
 
 New Hampshire.. 
 
 
 
 Indiana 
 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 Illinois 
 
 
 11 
 
 
 ".".".".'4 
 
 
 
 ft" 
 
 
 
 
 
 Wisconsin 
 
 Iowa 
 
 
 B 
 
 
 6 
 
 35 
 
 7 
 
 10 
 
 2 
 8 
 15 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 '"".'.% 
 
 MissUsippi . 
 Texas 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 New Jersey 
 
 Perm e yivauia. 
 
 Delaware 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 Oregon 
 
 21 
 
 3 
 
 Missouri ... 
 
 
 4 
 
 238 
 
 Virginia 
 
 
 Kentucky .. 
 
 
 4 
 
 The States of Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas, and Arkansas, deolined 
 voting. 
 
 So the preamble and resolution included in it was lost. 
 
 Mr. Ewing, of Tennessee, moved to reconsider the vote just taken, and to 
 lay this motion on the table — which motion was received but not voted upon. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, then called for a division of the remainder of 
 the resolutions, and a vote was demanded by States upon each. 
 
 A vote was then had upon the following resolution, viz : 
 
 Resolved, That it is the duty of the United States to afford ample and com- 
 plete protection to all its citizens, whether at home or abroad, and whether 
 native or foreign born. Which resulted as follows : 
 
 Maine 
 
 2s ew Hampshire 
 
 Vermont 
 
 Massachustrts... 
 
 Rhode Island 
 
 Connecticut 
 
 New Y^rk 
 
 New Jersey 
 
 Pennsylvania ... 
 
 Delaware 
 
 Maryland 
 
 Virginia 
 
 Yeas.) 
 
 SiNorth Carolina. 
 5iSouth Carolina., 
 
 Yeas. 
 
 Hi Ohio 
 
 fcjlndiana .... 
 
 10 Illinois 
 
 Michigan... 
 Wisconsin. 
 
 Iowa 
 
 Minnesota. 
 California, 
 tregon 
 
 Yeas 
 23 
 13 
 II 
 
 5 
 4 
 4 
 4 
 3 
 
 274 
 
 5 G orgir 
 
 13 Florida 
 
 4 Alabama 
 
 6 Louisiana 
 
 35 Mississippi 
 
 7 Texas 
 
 27 Arkansas 4 
 
 3 Missouri 9 
 
 8 Tennessee 12 
 
 15 Kentucky 12 
 
 The States of Florida, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, declined voting. 
 
 So the Resolution was unanimously adopted. 
 A vote was then taken upon the following resolution, viz : 
 Resolved, That one of the necessities of the age, in a military, commercial, 
 and postal point of view, is speedy communication between the Atlantic and 
 Pacific States ; and the Democratic party pledge such Constitutional Gov- 
 ernment ail as will insure the construciion of a Railroad to the Pacific coast, 
 at the earliest practicable period. Which resulted as follows, viz : 
 
 Yeas. Nays. Yeas. Nays. Yeas. Nays. 
 
 Maine 8 
 
 New Hampshire 5 
 
 Vermont , 5 
 
 Massachusetts 12| 
 
 Rhode Islaud , 4 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 "New York 35 
 
 New Jersey 7 
 
 Pennsylvania 27 
 
 Delaware 
 
 Maryland 7 
 
 Virginia 11 
 
 North Carolina 
 
 South Carolina 8 
 
 Georgia 10 
 
 Florida 
 
 Alabama 
 
 .Louisiana 
 
 (Mississippi 
 
 Texas.... 
 
 Arkansas 4 
 
 2 Missouri 9 
 
 1 Tennessee S£ 
 
 4 Kentucky 12 
 
 The States of Florida, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, declined voting 
 
 So the resolution was adopted. 
 
 lOOhio .^ 23 
 
 Indiana 13 
 
 Illinois 11 
 
 Michigan 6 
 
 Wisconsin 5 
 
 Iowa 4 
 
 Minuesota 4 
 
 California 4 
 
 Oregon 3 
 
 252 20i 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 
 
 55 
 
 North Carolina 
 
 Yeas. 
 
 lo 
 
 8 
 
 Ohio 
 
 Indiana 
 
 Illinois 
 
 Yeas. 
 
 23 
 
 13 
 
 Georgia , . . 
 
 
 10 
 
 11 
 
 ., 6 
 
 Alabama 
 
 Wisconsin 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 
 Minnesota 
 
 California 
 
 Oregon 
 
 .. . 4 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 P 
 
 12 
 
 12 
 
 3 
 
 Missouri ... 
 Tennessee .. 
 Kentucky .... 
 
 
 272 
 
 noting. 
 
 Mr. McCook, of Ohio, moved to reconsider, which motion was received. 
 
 A vote was then had on the following resolution, viz : 
 
 Resolved, That the Democratic party are in favor of the acquisition of the 
 Island of Cuba, on such terms as shall be honorable to ourselves and just to 
 Spain. 
 
 Mr. Mefk, of Alabama, moved that the vote upon the above resolution be 
 taken by acclamation, but a vote by States was insisted upon, and the vote 
 taken by States, and resulted as follows : 
 
 Yeas. 
 
 Maine 8 
 
 New Hampshire 5 
 
 Vermont o 
 
 Massachusetts..; 13 ' 
 
 Rhoih- Island 4 
 
 Connecticut , t> 
 
 New York 35 
 
 Mew Jersey 7 
 
 Pennsylvania 27 
 
 I eluvare 2 
 
 Maryland 8 Tenne 
 
 Virginia 15 
 
 Florida, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, declined 
 
 Resolution adopted unanimously. 
 
 A vote was then taken on the following resolution, viz : 
 
 6. Resolved, That the enactments of State Legislatures to defeat the faith- 
 ful execution of the Fugitive Slave Law, are hostile in character, subversive 
 of the Constitution, and revolutionary in effect. 
 
 The result was as follows : 
 
 Yeas.] Yeas. 
 
 Vaine 8 'North Carolina 10 
 
 New Hampshire 5 Jjonth Carolina 8 
 
 Vermont • 5 [Georgia 10 
 
 Massachusetts 13 j Florida 
 
 hhode Island 4 jAlabama 
 
 Connecticut 6 Louisiana 
 
 New York 35 .Mississippi 
 
 New Jersey 7 (Texas 
 
 Pennsylvania , 27 Arkansas 3 
 
 Delaware 2 Missouri 9 
 
 Maryland 8 JTennessee 12 
 
 Virginia 15 iKentucky 12 
 
 Florida Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, refused to vote. 
 
 Resolution adopted unanimously. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, moved to reconsider, and desired to make some 
 remarks. 
 
 Mr. Meek, of Alabama, rose to a point of order, and claimed that Mr. Stuart 
 could not speak to the question till the resolutions had been adopted in a body 
 as a whole. 
 
 The Chair decided Mr. Stuart to be in order, and Mr. Stuart proceeded to 
 address the Convention, when 
 
 Mr. Yancy begged leave to interrupt him for an explanation, which he made. 
 
 Several gentlemen rose to points of order, and 
 
 Mr. Stuart said he would not occupy the attention of the Convention if it 
 was not the desire of the Convention, and moved to lay his motion to recon- 
 sider on the table, but gave way to 
 
 Mr. Walker, of Alabama, who presented a written communication to the 
 Convention, under instructions from his Delegation, which communication is 
 as follows, viz : 
 
 To the Hon. Caleb Cashing, President of the Democratic National Convention, 
 now in session in the City of CJiarleston, South Carolina : 
 The undersigned Delegates, representing the State of Alabama in this 
 
 Convention, respectfully beg leave to lay before your honorable body, the 
 
 following statement of facts : 
 
 Yeas. 
 
 Ohio 23 
 
 Indiana 13 
 
 Iil.nois li 
 
 Uihigan 6 
 
 Wisconsin 5 
 
 Iowa 4 
 
 Minnesota -- 4 
 
 California 4 
 
 Oregon 3 
 
 272 
 
56 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 On the eleventh day of January, 1860, the Democratic party of the State 
 of Alabama met in Convention, in the City of Montgomery, and adopted, with 
 singular unanimity, a series of resolutions, herewith submitted. 
 
 RESOLUTIONS OF THE DEMOCRATIC STATE CONVENTION. 
 
 1. Resolved by the Democracy of the State of Alabama, in Convention 
 assembled, That holding all issues and principles upon which they have here- 
 tofore affiliated and acted with the National Democratic party to be inferior 
 in dignity and importance to the grea' question of slavery, they content 
 themselves with a general re-affirmance of the Cincinnati Platform as to such 
 issues, and also indorse said Platform as to slavery, together with the fol- 
 lowing resolutions : 
 
 2 Resolved farther, That we re-affirm so much of the first resolution of the 
 Platform adopted in Convention by the Democracy of this State, on the 8th 
 of January, 1856, as relates to the subject of slavery, to wit : "i'he unqual- 
 ified right of the people of the slave-holding States to the protection of their 
 property in the States, in the Territories, and in the wilderness, in which Ter- 
 ritorial Governments are as yet unorganized." 
 
 3. Resolved further, That in order to meet and clear away all obstacles to a 
 full enjoyment of this right in the Territories, we re-affirm the principle of 
 the 9th resolution of the Platform adopted in Convention by the Democracy 
 of this State, on the 14th of February, 1848, to wit : "That it is the duty of 
 the General Government, by all proper legislation, to secure an entry into 
 those Territories to all the citizens of the United States, together with their 
 property of every description, and that the same should remain protected by 
 the United States while the Territories are under its authority." 
 
 4. Resolved further, That the Constitution of the United States is a compact 
 between sovereign and co-equal States, united upon the basis of perfect 
 equality of rights and privileges. 
 
 5 Resolved further, That the Territories of the United States are common 
 property, in which the States have equal rights, and to which the citizens of 
 every State may rightfully emigrate wiih their slaves or other property recog- 
 nized as such, in any of the States of the Union, or by the Constitution of the 
 United States. 
 
 6. Resolved further, That the Congress of the United States has no power 
 to abolish slavery in the Territories, or to prohibit its introduction into any 
 of them. 
 
 7. Resolved further, That the Territorial Legislatures, created by the legis- 
 lation of Congress, have no power to abolish slavery, or to prohibit the 
 introduction of the same, or to impair by unfriendly legislation, the security 
 and full enjoyment of the same within the Territories, and such constitutional 
 power certainly does not belong to the people of the Territories in any capa- 
 city, before, in the exercise of a lawful authority, they form a Constitution 
 'preparatory to admission as a State into the Union ; and their action in the 
 exercise of such lawful authority, certainly cannot operate or take effect before 
 their actual admission as a State into the Union. 
 
 8. Resolved further, That the principles enunciated by Chief Justice Taney, 
 in his opinion in the Dred Scott case, deny to the Territorial Legislature the 
 power to destroy or impair by any legislation whatever, the right of property 
 in slaves, aud maintain it to be the duty of the Federal Government, in all of 
 its departments, to protect the rights of the owner of such property in the 
 Territories ; and the principles so declared are hereby asserted to be the rights 
 of the South, and the South should maintain them. 
 
 9. Resolved further, That we hold all of the foregoing propositions to con- 
 tain cardinal principles— -true in themselves — and just and proper, and neces- 
 sary for the safety of all that is dear to us, and we do hereby instruct our 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 57 
 
 Delegates to the Charleston Convention, to present them for the calm consid- 
 eration and approval of that body — from whose justice and patriotism we 
 anticipate their adoption. 
 
 10. Resolved further, That our Delegates to the Charleston Convention are 
 hereby expressly instructed to insist that said Convention shall adopt a plat- 
 form of principles, recognizing distinctly the rights of the South as asserted 
 in the foregoing resolutions ; and if the said National Convention shall refuse 
 to adopt, in substance, the propositions embiaced in the preceding resolutions, 
 prior to nominating candidates, our Delegates to said Convention are hereby 
 positively instructed to withdraw therefrom. 
 
 11. Resolved further, That our Delegates to the Charleston Convention 
 shall cast the voie of Alabama as a unit, and a majority of our Delegates shall 
 determine how the vote of this State shall be given. 
 
 1*2. Resolved further, That an Executive Committee, to consist of one from 
 each Congressional District, be appointed, whose duty it shall be, in the event 
 that our Delegates withdraw r from the Charleston Convention, in obedience to 
 the 10th resolution, to call a Convention of the Democracy of Alabama, to 
 meet at an early day to consider what is best to be done. 
 
 Under these resolutions, the undersigned received their appointment, and 
 participated in the action of this Convention. 
 
 By the resolution of instruction — the tenth in the series — we were directed 
 to insist that the Platform adopted by this Convention should embody, " in 
 substance," the propositions embraced in the preceding resolutions, prior to 
 nominating candidates. 
 
 Anxious, if possible, to continue our relations with this Convention, and 
 thus to maintain the nationality of the Democratic party, we agreed to accept, 
 as the substance of the Alabama Platform, either of the two reports submitted, 
 to this Convention by the majority of the Committee on Resolutions — this 
 majority representing not only a majority of the States of the Union, but 
 also the only States at all likely to be carried by the Democratic party in the 
 Presidential election. 
 
 We beg to make these Reports parts of this communication : 
 
 PLATFORM— FIRST MAJORITY REPORT. 
 
 Resolved, That the Platform adopted at Cincinnati be affirmed, with the 
 following resolutions : 
 
 1. That the National Democracy of the United States hold these cardinal 
 principles on the subject of slavery in the Territories : First, That Congress 
 has no power to abolish slavery in the Territories. Second, That the Terri- 
 torial Legislature has no power to abolish slavery in any Territory, nor to 
 prohibit the introduction of slaves therein ; nor any power to exclude slavery 
 therefrom, nor any power to destroy or impair the right of property in slaves 
 by any legislation whatever. 
 
 2. Resolved, That the enactments of State Legislatures to defeat the faith- 
 ful execution of the Fugitive Slave Law are hostile in character, subversive 
 of the Constitution, and revolutionary in their effect. 
 
 3. Resolved, That it is the duty of the Federal Government to protect, 
 when necessary, the rights of persons and property on the high seas, in the 
 Territories, or wherever else its constitutional authority extends. 
 
 4. Resolved, That the Democracy of the Nation recognize it as the imper- 
 ative duty of this Government to protect the naturalized citizen in all his 
 rights, whether at home or in foreign lands, to the same extent as its native- 
 born citizens. 
 
 5. Resolved, That the National Democracy earnestly recommend the acqui- 
 sition of the Island of Cuba at the earliest practicable period. 
 
 Whereas, That one of the greatest necessities of the age, in a political, 
 
58 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 commercial, postal, and military point of view, is a speedy communication 
 between the Pacific and Atlantic coasts. Therefore, be it 
 
 Resolved, That the National Democratic party do hereby pledge themselves 
 to use every means in their power to secure the passage of some bill for the 
 construction of a Pacific Railroad, from the Mississippi River to the Pacific 
 Ocean, at the earliest practicable moment. 
 
 SECOND MAJORITY REPORT. 
 
 Resolved, That the Platform adopted by the Democratic party at Cincin- 
 nati be affirmed, with the following explanatory resolutions : 
 
 1. That the Government of a Territory organized by an act of Congress is 
 provisional and temporary, and during its existence all citizens of the United 
 States have an equal right to settle with their property in the Territory, 
 without their rights, either of person or property, being destroyed or impaired 
 by Congressional or Territorial legislation. 
 
 2. That it is the duty of the Federal Government, in all its departments, 
 to protect, when necessary, the rights of persons and property in the Terri- 
 tories, and wherever else its constitutional authority extends. 
 
 3. That when the settlers in a Territory having an adequate population, 
 form a State Constitution, the right of sovereignty commences, and being 
 consummated by admission into the Union, they stand on an equal footing 
 with the people of other States, and the State thus organized ought to be ad- 
 mitted into the Federal Union, whether its Constitution prohibits or recog- 
 nizes the institution of slavery. 
 
 Resolved, That the Democratic party are in favor of the acquisition of 
 the Island of Cuba, on such terms as shall be honorable to ourselves and just 
 to Spain, at the earliest practicable moment. 
 
 Resolved, That the enactments of State Legislatures to defeat the faithful 
 execution of the Fugitive Slave Law, are hostile in character, subversive of 
 the Constitution, and revolutionary in their effect. 
 
 Resolved, That the Democracy of the United States recognize it as the imper- 
 ative duty of this Government to protect the naturalized citizen in all his 
 rights, whether at home or in foreign lands, to the same extent as its native- 
 born citizens. 
 
 Whereas, One of the greatest necessities of the age, in a political, 
 commercial, postal and military point of view, is a speedy communication 
 between the Pacific and Atlantic coasts. Therefore, be it 
 
 Resolved, That the National Democratic party do hereby pledge them- 
 selves to use every means in their power to secure the passage of some bill, 
 to the extent of the constitutional authority of Congress, for the construction 
 of a Pacific Railroad from the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean, at the 
 earliest practicable moment. 
 
 These reports received the indorsement, in the Committee on Resolutions, 
 of every Southern State, and had either of them been adopted as the Platform 
 of principles of the Democratic party, although, possibly, in some respects, 
 subject to criticise, we should not have felt ourselves in duty bound to with- 
 hold our acquiescence. 
 
 But it has been the. pleasure of this Convention, by an almost exclusive 
 sectional vote, not representing a majority of the States, nor a majority of the 
 Democratic electoral votes, to adopt a Platform which does not, in our opin- 
 ion, nor in the opinion of those who urge it, embody in substance the princi- 
 ples of the Alabama resolutions. 
 
 That Platform is as follows: 
 
 Resolved, That we, the Democracy of the Union in Convention assem- 
 bled, hereby declare our affirmance of the resolutions unanimously adopted 
 and declared as a platform of principles by the Democratic Convention at 
 
Proceedings at Charlesten. 59 
 
 Cincinnati, in the year 1856, believing that Democratic principles are un- 
 changeable in their nature, when applied to the same subject matters. 
 
 Resolved, That it is the duty of the United States to afford ample and 
 complete protection +o all its citizens, whether at home or abroad, and 
 whether native or foreign born. 
 
 Resolved, That one of the necessities of the age, in a military, commercial, 
 and postal point of view, is speedy communication between the Atlantic and 
 Pacific States ; and the Democratic party pledge such Constitutional Govern- 
 ment aid as will insure the construction of a railroad to the Pacific coast at 
 the earliest practicable period. 
 
 Resolved, That the Democratic party are in favor of the acquisition of 
 the Island of Cuba, on such terms as shall be honorable to ourselves and just 
 to Spain. 
 
 Resolved, That the enactments of State Legislatures to defeat the faithful 
 execution of the Fugitive Slave Law, are hostile in character, subversive of 
 the Constitution, and revolutionary in their effect. 
 
 The points of difference between the Northern and Southern Democracy 
 are: 
 
 1st. As regards the status of slavery as a political institution in the Terri- 
 tories, whilst they remain in the Territories, and the power of the people of a 
 Territory to exclude it by unfriendly legislation. 
 
 And 2d. As regards the duty of the Federal Government to protect the 
 owner of slaves in the enjoyment of his property in the Territories, so long as 
 they remain such. 
 
 This Convention has refused, by the platform adopted, to settle either of 
 these propositions in favor of the South. We deny to the people of a Terri- 
 tory any power to legislate against the institution of slavery, and we assert 
 that it is the duty of the Federal Government, in all its departments, to pro- 
 tect the owner of slaves in the enjoyment of his property in the Territories. 
 These principles, as we state them, are embodied in the Alabama Platform. 
 
 Here, then, is a plain, explicit and direct issue between this Convention and 
 the constituency which we have the honor to represent in this body. 
 
 Instructed, as we are, not to waive this issue, the contingency therefore, 
 has arisen when, in our opinion, it becomes our duty to withdraw from this 
 Convention. 
 
 We beg, sir, to communicate this fact through you, and to assure the Con- 
 vention that we do so m no spirit of anger, but under a sense of imperative 
 obligation — properly appreciating its responsibilities, and cheerfully submit- 
 ting to its consequences. 
 
 L. P, WaLKER, Chairman. F. G. NORMAN, 
 
 F. S. LYON J. 0. GUILD, 
 
 JOHN A. WINSTON, JULIUS C. B. MITCHELL. 
 
 H. D. SMITH, W. C. -HERROD, 
 
 JOHN ERWIN, G. G. GRIFFIN, 
 
 W. L. YANCY, J. T. BRADFORD, 
 
 D. W. BAINE, T. J. BURNETT, 
 
 N. H. R, DAWSON, A G. HENRY, 
 
 R M. PATT0N, WILLIAM M. BROOKS, 
 
 W. C. McIVER, R. CHAPMAN, 
 
 P.O. HaRPER, [Delegate appointed though not participating in 
 
 LEWIS L. CAT0, the Convention] 
 
 JOHN W. PORT IS, 
 
 ROBERT G SCOTT, THOS. B COOPER, 
 
 A. B. MEEK, PEYTON G. KING, 
 
 J. R BREARE. W. G. GARRETT. 
 
 A. W. DILLARD, M. J. BoLGER, ' 
 
 Judge Meek, offered the following resolution, which was unanimously 
 adopted: 
 
 Resolved, That in the evv-nt the Alabama delegation should withdraw from 
 the Convention, no delegate or any other person shall thenceforward have any 
 authority to represent Alabama upon the floor of the Convention, or to cast 
 
60 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 the vote of Alabama therein ; and that our Chairman be instructed so to in- 
 form said Convention. 
 
 And thereupon the delegation from Alabama withdrew from the Conven- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. Barry, of Mississippi, rose and stated that they would retire from the 
 Convention with the delegation from Alabama, and would have no further 
 connection with the Convention. That they had prepared a protest, but 
 were not in readiness to present it to the Convention. They protested against 
 any other persons being allowed to represent the State of Mississippi in the 
 Convention. 
 
 Mr. Mouton, of Louisiana, rose in behalf of the delegation from that 
 State, and stated that the majority of the delegation would no longer take a 
 part in the proceedingvS of the Convention. That two delegates still deter- 
 mined to remain in the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Simmons, of South Carolina, presented to the Convention a statement 
 in vriting, as follows ; 
 To the Eon. Caleb Cushing, President of the Charleston Convention : 
 
 We, the undersigned, delegates appointed by the Democratic State Con- 
 vention of South Carolina, beg leave respectfully to state, that according to 
 the principles enunciated in their platform at Columbia, the power, either of 
 the Federal Government, or of its agent, the Territorial Government, to abol- 
 ish or legislate against property in slaves, by either direct or indirect legisla- 
 tion, is explicitly denied ; and as the platform adopted by this Convention 
 palpably and intentionally pretermits any expression affirming the incapacity 
 of the Territorial Government so to legislate, they do not believe they would 
 be acting in good faith to their principles, or in accordance with the wishes 
 of their constituents, longer to remain in this Convention ; and they hereby 
 therefrom respectfully announce their withdrawal. 
 
 JAMES SIMMONS, JAMES PATTERSON, 
 
 S. McGOWaN, B.H.BROWN, 
 
 B. H. WILSON, Delegates from 3d Congressional District. 
 
 R. B. BOYLSTON, J A.METTS, 
 
 Delegates from the State at large. Delegate from 4th Congressional District. 
 JAS. H. WITHEKSBOOa, JOHNS. PRESTON, 
 
 E. W. CHARLES, FRANKLTN GAILLARD, 
 
 Delegates from 1st Congressional District. Delegates from 6th Congressional District. 
 G. N. REYNOLDS, Jr., 
 THOS. Y. SIMONS, 
 
 Delegates from 2d Congressional District. 
 
 And which he stated was signed by all the delegates but three. 
 
 Mr. Glenn, of Mississippi, addressed the Convention, and read a commu- 
 nication which is as follows : 
 To the President of the Democratic Convention : 
 
 Sir — As Chairman of the Delegation which has the honor to represent the 
 State of Mississippi on this floor, I desire to be heard by you and by the 
 Convention. 
 
 In common consultation we have met here, the representatives of sister 
 States, to resolve the principles of a great parly. While maintaining princi- 
 ples, we profess no spirit, save that of harmony, conciliation, the success of 
 our party, and the safety of our organization. But to the former the latter 
 must yield, for no organization is valuable without it, and no success is hon- 
 orable which does not crown it. 
 
 We came here simply asking a recognition of the equal rights of our State 
 under the laws and Constitution of our common Government ; that our right 
 to property should be asserted, and the protection of that property, when 
 necessary, should be yielded by the Government, which claims our allegiance. 
 We had regarded Government and protection as co-relative ideas, and that 
 so long as the one was maintained the other still endured. 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. til 
 
 After a deliberation of many days, it has been announced to us by a con- 
 trolling majority of Representatives of nearly one-half the States of this 
 Union, and that, too, in the most solemn and impressive manner, that our 
 demand cannot be met, and our rights cannot be recognized. While it is 
 granted that the capacity of the Federal Government is ample to protect all 
 other property within its jurisdiction, it is claimed to be impotent when 
 called upon to act in favor of a species of property recognized in fifteen sov- 
 ereign States. Within those States even Black Republicans admit it to be 
 guaranteed by the Constitution, and to be only assailed by a Higher Law ; 
 without them they claim the right to prohibit or destroy it. The controlling 
 majority of Northern Representatives on this floor, while they deny all power 
 to destroy, equally deny all power to protect ; and this, they assure us, is 
 and must, and shall be the condition of our co-operation in the next Presi- 
 dential election. 
 
 In this state of affairs our duty is plain and obvious. The State which 
 sent us here, announced to us her principles. In common with seventeen of 
 her sister States, she has asked a recognition of her Constitutional rights. 
 These have been plainly and explicitly denied to her. We have offered to 
 yield everything except an abandonment of her rights— everything except her 
 honor — and it has availed us nothing. 
 
 As the representatives of Mississippi, knowing her wishes — as honorable 
 men, regarding her commands, we withdraw from the Convention, and, as far 
 as our action is concerned, absolve her from all connection with this body, 
 and all responsibility for its action. 
 
 To you, sir, as presiding officer of the Convention while it h«s existed in 
 its integrity, we desire, collectively as a delegation, and individually as men, 
 to tender the highest assurances of our profound respect and consideration, 
 
 (Signed) D. C. GLENN, W. S. WILSON, 
 
 Chairman of the Mississippi Delegation. ISAAC ENLOE, 
 
 GEORGE H. GORDON, CH AS- EDWARD HO »KER, 
 
 JAMES DRANE, W. H. H TYSON. 
 
 BEVERLY MATHEWS, ETHELBERT BaRKSDaLE, 
 
 J. T. SIMMS, W. S BARRY, 
 
 JOS. R. DAVIS, J. M. THOMPSON. 
 
 Mr. Milton, of Florida, addresssd the Convention, and presented a com- 
 munication, as follows : 
 To the Hon. Caleb Cushing, President of the Democratic National Convention : 
 
 The undersigned, Democratic Delegates from the State of Florida, enter 
 this, their solemn protest, against the action of the Convention in voting down 
 the platform of the majority. 
 
 Florida, with her Southern sisters, is entitled to a clear and unambiguous 
 recognition of her rights in the Territories, and this being refused by the 
 rejection of the majority report, we protest against receiving the Cincinnati 
 Platform with the interpretation that it favors the doctrine of Squatter 
 Sovereignty in the Territories, which doctrine, in the name cf the people 
 represented by us, we repudiate. 
 
 T. J. EPPES, JOHN MILTON, C. F. DYKE, 
 
 B. F. WARDLAW, J B. OWENS, Delegates from Florida. 
 
 The delegates from Florida, before retiring, have adopted the following 
 resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That no person not a regularly appointed delegate has a right to 
 oast the vote of the State of Florida in this Convention. 
 
 JOHN MILTON, Chairman Delegation. 
 
 Mr. Bryan, of Texas, addressed the Convention, and presented a protest, in 
 writing, as follows : 
 Eon. Caleb Cushing, President of the Democratic National Convention : 
 
 The undersigned, Delegates from the State of Texas, would respectfully 
 
62 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 protest against the late action of this Convention, in refusing to adopt the 
 report of the majority of the Committee on Resolutions, which operates as 
 the virtual adoption of principles affirming doctrines in opposition to the 
 decision of the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott ca^e, and in conflict with the 
 Federal Constitution, and especially opposed to the Platform of the Demo- 
 cnuic party of Texas, which declares: 
 
 1st. That the Democratic party of the State of Texas re-affirm, and concur 
 in the principles contained in the Platform of the National Democratic Con- 
 vention, held at Cincinnati in June, 1856, as a true expression of political 
 faith and opinion, and herewith re-assert and set forth the principles therein 
 contained, as embracing the only doctrine which can preserve the integrity of 
 the Union and the equal rights of the States, "expressly rejecting any interpre- 
 tation thereof favoring the doetrine known as Squatter Sovereignty " and that we 
 will continue to adhere to and abide by the principles ard doctrines of the 
 Virginia and Kentucky resolutions of 1798 and 1799, and Mr. Madison's 
 report relative thereto. 
 
 2d. That it is the right of every citizen to take his property of any kind, 
 including slaves, into the common territory belonging equally to all the States 
 of the Confederacy, and to have it protected there under tne Federal Consti- 
 tution. Neither Congress nor a Territorial Legislature, nor any human 
 power, has any authority, either directly or indirectly, to impair these sacred 
 rights; and they, having been affirmed by the Supreme Court in the decision 
 of the Dred Scott case, we declare that it is the duty of the Federai Govern- 
 ment, the common agent of all the States, to establish such government and 
 enact such laws for the Territories, and so change the same from time to time 
 as may be necessary to insure protection and preservation of these rights, and 
 prevent every infringement of the same. The affirmation of this principle of 
 the duty of Congress to simply protect the right of property, is nowise in con- 
 flict with the heretofore established and well recognized principles of the 
 Democratic party, that Congress does not possess the power to legislate 
 slavery into the Territories, or to exclude it therefrom. 
 
 Recognizing these declarations of principles as instructions to us for our 
 government in the National Convention, and believing that a repudiation of 
 them by all of the Northern States except the noble States of Oregon and 
 California, the whole vote of which is more than doubtful in the ensuing 
 Presidential election, demand from us our unqualified disapproval. 
 
 The undersigned do not deem this the place or time to discuss the prac- 
 tical illustration that has been given of the irrepressible conflict between the 
 Northern and Southern States, that has prevailed in this Convention for the 
 last week. 
 
 It is sufficient to say, that if the principles of the Northern D emocracy are 
 properly represented, by the opinion and action of the majority of the del- 
 egates from that section on this floor, we do not hesitate to declare that their 
 principles are not only not ours, but, if adhered to and enforced by them, will 
 destroy this Union. 
 
 In consideration of the foregoing facts, we cannot remain in the Convention. 
 We consequently respectfully withdraw, leaving no one authorized to cast 
 the vote of the State of Texas. 
 
 GUY M. BRYAN, Chairman. H. R. RUNNELS. WM. H. PARSONS. 
 
 F. R. LUBBOJK. WM. P. OCHILTREE. R WARD. 
 
 F. S. STOCKDALE. M. W. COVEY. J. F. CROSBY, 
 E. GREER. 
 
 Mr. Burrows, of Arkansas, rose and addressed the Convention, -md presented 
 a communication, as follows : 
 Hon. Caleb Cushing, President of Charleston Convention : 
 
 The undersigned Delegates, accredited by the Democracy of Arkansas to 
 represent said Democracy in the Convention of the Democracy of the United 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 63 
 
 'O 
 
 States, assembled on the 23d of April, 1860, beg leave to submit the following 
 protest against certain actions of this Convention, and statement of the causes 
 which, in their opinion, require them to retire from > his Convention. 
 
 1st. The Convention of the Democracy of the State of Arkansas, convened 
 at Little Rock on the 2d day o( April, 1860, passed, among other things, the 
 following resolutions, viz : 
 
 1st. Resolved, We, the Democracy of Arkansas, through our representa- 
 tives in Convention assembled, proclaim our confidence in the virtue and 
 intelligence of the people, and unabated faith in the principles ol the 
 Democracy. 
 
 2-1. We re-affirm the political principles enunciated in the Cincinnati Plat- 
 fi rrn by the Democracy of the United States in June, 1856, and assert as 
 illustrative thereof, that neither Congress nor a Territorial Legislature, whether 
 by direct legislation or by legislation of an indirect and unfriendly character, 
 possesses the power to annul or impair the Constitutional rights of any citizen 
 of the United States to take his slave property into the common Territories, 
 and there hold and enjoy the same, and that if experience should at any time 
 prove that the judiciary and executive power do not possess the means to 
 insure protection to Constitutional rights in a Territory, and if the Territorial 
 Government should fail or refuse to provide the necessary remedies for that 
 piirpose, it will be the duty of Congress to supply the deficiency. 
 
 3d. That the representatives ol the Democracy ot Arkansas, in the 
 Charleston Convention, be instructed to insist upon the recognition by said 
 Convention of the purpose hereinbefore declared, prior to balloting for any 
 candidate for the Presidency, and if said Convention refuse to recognize the 
 rights of the South in the Territories of the United States, the representatives 
 of the Democracy of Arkansas be instructed to retire from said Convention, 
 and refuse' to aid in the selection of any candidate whomsoever by said 
 Convention. 
 
 4:h. That the unity of the Democratic party and the safety of the South 
 demands the adoption of the two-thirds rule by the Charleston Convention of 
 the Democracy of the United States, and that our delegates to said Conven- 
 tion be required to insist upon and maintain the adoption thereof as an indis-' 
 pensable necessity. 
 
 In accordance with the instructions contained in resolution 3d, above, one 
 of the undersigned had the honor, on the second day of the session of this 
 Convention, to offer to the consideration of this Convention the following 
 resolution, viz: "Resolved, That the Convention will not proceed to nominate 
 a candidate for the Presidency until the platform shall have been made," 
 which said resolution was passed by the Convention by great unanimity. 
 Subsequently the Committee on Resolutions and Platform, appointed by the 
 Convention, in accordance with the usages and custom of the Democratic 
 party of the United States, agreed upon and reported to this Convention a 
 platform of principles, recognizing the principle contained in the resolutions 
 of the Democracy of Arkansas, above cited, and fully asserting the equal 
 rights of the Southern States in the common Territories of the United Spates, 
 and the duty of the Federal Government to protect those rights when neces- 
 sary, according to the usages and customs of the Democracy of the United 
 States, as developed by the practice of said Democracy, assembled in Conven- 
 tions on former occasions, and in strict accordance, as is believed by the un- 
 dersigned, with the compact and agreement made by and between the Dem- 
 ocrats of the several States, upon which the Conventions of the Democracy of 
 the United States were agreed first to be founded, and assented to by the sev- 
 eral Southern States. The report and determination of the Committee on 
 Platform became and was henceforward as the platform of the Democracy of 
 the United States, and this Convention had no duty to perform in relation 
 
6-i Democratic National Convention, 
 
 thereto, but to receive, confirm and publish the same, and cause it to bi car- 
 ried into effect wherever in the respective States the Democracy were able to 
 enforce their decrees at the ballot box. 
 
 The undersigned are confirmed in this opinion by reference not only to the 
 history of the past, which shows that in all instances the sovereignty of the 
 States, and not the electoral votes of the States, has uniformly been repre- 
 sented in the Committee on Platform, and that the report of the Committee 
 .has invariably been registered as the supreme law of the Democratic party 
 by unanimous consent of the entire Conventions, without changing or in any 
 manner altering any part or portion thereof. It is asserted as a part of our 
 traditional learning, and confidently believed, that the Democracy of the 
 United States, by a peculiar system of checks and balances, formed after the 
 fashion of the Federal Government, were contracted and bound themselves 
 to fully recognize the sovereignty of the States in making the Platform, and 
 the population or masses of the States, in naming the candidate to be placed 
 on the Platform. That many States have been uniformly allowed to vote 
 the full strength of their electoral college in these Conventions, when it was 
 well known that said States had never heretofore, and probably would never 
 hereafter, give a single electoral vote at the polls to the candidate which 
 they had so large a share in nominating, cannot be accounted for on auy 
 othtr principle than that it was intended only as a recognition of the sover- 
 eignty and equality of said States. 
 
 Would it be right at this time for the numerical majority to deprive all the 
 Black Republican States represented on this floor by their representatives, 
 which by custom they have so long enjoyed, simply because it is now evident 
 that they are or will be unable to vote the Democratic ticket in the next 
 Presidential election ? 
 
 By common consent we say that a reckless numerical majority should not 
 be thus allowed to tread under foot the vested rights of those States, and the 
 well established usages and customs of the party. 
 
 If thus it be wrong for the numerical majority to deprive the Black Repub- 
 lican States of this long vested right, how much more unjust is it for the 
 numerical majority to deprive all the States of their vested right to make 
 and declare the Platform in the usual and customary manner ? And when 
 we call to mind that the numerical majority resides chiefly in the Black 
 Republican States, to whom the South has uniformly accorded so large a 
 privilege, in naming candidates who were alone to be elected by Southern 
 votes, we have much reason to believe that he to whom you gave an inch 
 seems emboldened thereby to demand an ell. 
 
 The undersigned beg leave to state that many patriotic States, Right Dem- 
 ocrats, in the South, have long contended that these Conventions of the 
 Democracy, representing in fact the whole consolidated strength of the Union, 
 acting through party sympathy upon the individual members of society, 
 would ultimate in a despotic, colossal centralism, possessed of power to over- 
 ride and destroy at its will and pleasure the Constitutions and reserved rights 
 of any and all the States. The South, however, has heretofore felt safe, 
 because of the checks and balances imposed upon the machinery of the Con- 
 ventions. The South felt that where she retained an equal power to write 
 the creed of faith, she could trust her Northern sisters, with their immense 
 populations, to name the candidate ; and all would alike support the creed 
 and the candidate. 
 
 The undersigned, well knowing the hostility of the Northern masses 
 towards the "peculiar institutions" of the South, and calling to mind the 
 relative numbers of the Northern and Southern States, assert with confidence 
 that no Southern State in the Union would ever have consented to surrender 
 so abjectly and hopelessly, all their fortunes to the numerical majority who 
 
Proceedings at Charleston, 65 
 
 ha^e just now voted to ?et aside the Platform, unless upon the full assurance 
 that the States were entitled by agreement to make and establish the creed 
 of faith and prescribe the rule of action. This violation of plighted faith on 
 the part of the numerical majority — this violation of the well established 
 usage and custom of the party— drive us to the conclusion that we cannot 
 longer trust the fortunes of the slaveholding States to the chances of a nu- 
 merical majority in a Convention, where all the Black Republicans, of the 
 Union, the immense populations of Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania 
 and Ohio, and other Northern States, are fully represented, on the one side, 
 against the small populations from the slave States on the other — had these 
 populations adhered strictly to the usages and customs of the party, longer 
 associations might have been practicable ; but annihilation is staring us in the 
 face, and we are admonished of our duty to stand upon our reserved rights. 
 
 We declare, therefore, that we believe our mission in this Convention at an 
 end : 
 
 1st. Because the numerical majority have usurped the prerogatives of the 
 States in setting aside the platform made by the States, and have thus unset- 
 tled the basis of the Convention, and thereby permanently disorganized its 
 Constitution. Its decrees, therefore, become null and void. 
 
 2d. Because we were positively instructed by the Democracy of Arkan- 
 sas, to insist on the recognition of the equal rights of the South in common 
 Territories, and protection in those rights by the Federal Government prior 
 to any nomination of a candidate, and as this Convention has refused to recog- 
 nize the principle required by the State of Arkansas, in her popular Conven- 
 tion first, and twice subsequently re-asserted by Arkansas, together with all 
 her Southern sisters in the report of Platform to this Convention, and as we 
 cannot serve two masters, we are determined first to serve the Lord our God, 
 we cannot ballot for any candidate whatever. 
 
 3d. In retiring, we deny to any person or persons any right whatever to 
 cast hereafter, in this Convention, either our vote or the vote of Arkansas on 
 any propositions which may or can possibly come up for consideration. The 
 delegates of Arkansas cannot take any part in placing a sound candidate on 
 an unsound platform, because it would disgrace any sound Southern man who 
 would consent to stand on such a platform ; and as a Squatter Sovereignty 
 platform has been adopted, we believe that good faith and honor requires that 
 the Chief of Squatter Sovereignty should be placed on it; we wish no part or 
 lot in such misfortune, nor do we believe that we can safely linger under the 
 shade of the upas tree this day planted certainly. 
 
 P. JORDAN, 
 
 N. B. BURROWS, 
 
 VAN H. MANNING. 
 
 Mr. Benning, of Georgia, asked leave of the Convention to withdraw for 
 consultation, and leave was granted. 
 
 Mr. Ivussell, of Virginia, addressed the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Bayard, of Delaware, addressed the Convention, and stated that he and 
 his colleagues would withdraw from the Convention. . 
 
 Mr. Saulsbury, of Delaware, also addressed the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Merrick, of Illinois, addressed the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Cochran, of New York, moved that the Convention adjourn till 10 
 o'clock to-morrow, which motion prevailed, and the Convention adjourned. 
 
66 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 EIGHTH DAY. 
 
 Tuesday, Mat 1, 1860. 
 The Convention was called to order soon after 10 o'clock. 
 Prayer by Rev. Mr Ingersoll. 
 
 On motion, the reading of the Journal was dispensed with. 
 The President stated the regular order of business to be, the motions to 
 reconsider, and the motions to lay the motions to reconsider on the table, by 
 which the various resolutions constituting the platform were adopted. Pend- 
 ing the determination of these questions, yesterday evening, the Chairmen of 
 several of the delegations rose to questions of privilege, under which their 
 delegations retired from the hall. When the Convention adjourned the gen- 
 tleman from Illinois (Mr, Merrick) was upon the floor. 
 
 Mr. Benning, of Georgia, rose to a question of privilege, and stated that 
 after retiring yesterday, the delegation from Georgia came to the conclusion 
 to present to the Convention two resolutions, which are as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That upon the opening of the Convention this morning, our 
 Chairman be requested to state to the President that the Georgia delegation, 
 after a mature deliberation, have felt it to be their duty, under existing cir- 
 cumstances, not to participate further in the deliberations of the Convention, 
 and that therefore the delegation withdraw. 
 
 Resolved, That all who acquiesce in the foregoing resolution sign the same, 
 and request the Convention to enter it on their records. 
 (Signed) JUNIUS WINGFIELD, HENRY L. BENNING, 
 
 HENRY R. JACKSON, P. TRACY, 
 
 J. M. CLARK, JEFFERSON N. LAMAR, 
 
 WM. M. SLAUGHTER, EDMOND J. McGEHEE, 
 
 JOHN A. JONES, GEORGE HILLYER, 
 
 DAVID C. BARROW, MARK JOHNSTON, 
 
 JAS. J. DIMOND, EDWARD R. HARDEN, 
 
 A. FRANKLIN HILL, JOHN H. LUMPKIN, 
 
 EDW. L. STROECKER, G. G. FAIN, 
 
 0. C. GIBSON, JAMES HOGE, 
 
 HENRY 0. THOMAS, W. J. JOHNSON. 
 
 The undersigned, delegates from Georgia, having voted in the meeting of 
 the delegation against withdrawing from the Convention, yet believe, under 
 the instructions contained in the resolution of the Georgia Convention, that 
 the vote of the majority should control our action, and we therefore with- 
 draw with the majority. 
 
 ISAIAH T. IRWIN, JULIAN HARTRIDGE, 
 
 WILLIAM H. HULL, L. H. BRISCOE. 
 
 This paper is signed by twenty-six out of the thirty-six delegates in that 
 Convention from the State of Georgia. 
 
 I have now, Mr. President, discharged the duty which has been entrusted 
 to me by my delegation. 
 
 The majority of the Georgia delegation then retired from the hall. 
 Mr. Johnson, of Arkansas, addressed the Convention. 
 Mr. Terry, of Arkansas, then read the following paper to the Convention : 
 To the Hon. Caleb Gushing, President: 
 
 The undersigned, delegates from Arkansas, ask permission to make the fol- 
 lowing statement : 
 
 We have, thus far, abstained from taking any active part in the measures 
 which were consummated on yesterday, in this Convention, by the with- 
 drawal, in whole or in part, of several Southern States. We have counseled 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 67 
 
 'O 
 
 our Southern friends to patience and forbearance ; and, while we were con- 
 scious of causes sufficient to induce them to this step, yet we still hoped that 
 some more auspicious event would transpire that would avert its necessity. 
 Nothing has occurred to palliate these causes. Hence we cannot hesitate in 
 our course, and therefore ask permission to withdraw and surrender to our 
 State the high trust reposed in us. To you, sir, who have with so much 
 ability presided over our deliberations, and meted out justice with an even 
 hand, we part with sorrow. Hoping that the cloud which now hangs over 
 our beloved country may be dispelled, and her counsels directed by some 
 statesmanlike yuurself— able, honest, just, and true. 
 
 FRANCIS TERRY, Vice President. ; 
 
 J. P. JOHNSON, Chairman of Delegation. 
 
 Charleston, May 1, 1860. F. W. HOADLEY, Secretary. 
 
 The Tennessee delegation asked and obtained leave to retire for consulta- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. Glass, of Virginia, asked leave of the Convention for the Virginia 
 delegation to retire for consultation, and leave was granted. 
 
 A portion of the delegations from Kentucky, from North Carolina, and 
 from Maryland, also had leave to retire for consultation. 
 
 Mr. Cohen, of Georgia, addressed the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Flournoy, of Arkansas, addressed the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Goui.den, of Georgia, addressed the Convention, and stated his reasons 
 for remaining in it. 
 
 Mr. McCook, of Ohio. I move the adoption of the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That at 2 o'clock P. M. of this day, the Convention will proceed 
 by a call of the States to nominate a candidate for the Presidency, and imme- 
 diately thereafter a candidate for the Vice Presidency. 
 
 The time given by this resolution will afford the State which asks the long- 
 est time the period they request for her deliberations, and upon the motion 
 which I now submit I ask the previous question. 
 
 Voices. Say 4 o'clock. 
 
 Mr. Pugh, of Ohio, suggested to his colleague that several States had had 
 leave to retire, and it seemed to him that they ought not to ask a vote on this 
 resolution till they returned. 
 
 Mr. Van Arsdale, of New Jersey, submitted a protest against the decision 
 of the Convention yesterday that the delegation from New Jersey should not 
 be required to give the vote of that State as a unit. The protest was as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 The undersigned, delegates from the State of New Jersey to the Demo- 
 cratic National Convention at Charleston, and representing a large majority 
 of the Democracy of that State, in view of the decision made by the said 
 Convention on the morning of the 30th April, 1860, denying to the majority 
 of said delegates the right of representing their State in the manner provided 
 by their State Convention, held on the 28th of March, 1860, in the following 
 words, to wit : 
 
 11 Resolved, That we recommend to the representatives of this State to the 
 Charleston Convention to cast on all occasions that may arise in the Conven- 
 tion a united vote" — do hereby solemnly and earnestly protest against such 
 decision, for the following reasons : 
 
 1st. Because it is the duty of the representatives to obey the will and carry 
 out the wishes of their constituents. 
 
 2d. Because a rule of the National Convention, depriving all delegations 
 whose manner of voting may have been provided for by their respective State 
 Conventions from casting individual votes. 
 
 3d. Because, under the above rule, and in obedience to its requirement, the 
 
68 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 delegates of the State of Georgia, by the unquestioned ruling of the Presi- 
 dent of the Convention, were deprived of the privilege of voting according 
 to their individual judgment. 
 
 4th. Because the consistent ruling of the President of the Convention was 
 overruled by a majority of the votes of delegations who were themselves 
 under the constraint of provisions made by their respective State Contentions. 
 
 Therefore, the undersigned hold that the rights ol the sovereign State of 
 New Jersey have been infringed to its great wrong and detriment, aud solemnly 
 protest against the same. 
 
 Done at Charleston this first day of May, in the year one thousand eight 
 hundred and sixty. 
 
 J. VAN ARSDALE, JOHN HUYLER, 
 
 For 5th Congressional District. DAVID NAAR, 
 
 WA1 WRIGHT, S. DOUGHTY, 
 
 JOHN C. RAFFERTY, SAMUEL HANNA. 
 
 A, R. SPEER, 
 
 Mr. Cochran, of New York, moved to amend the resolution of the gen- 
 tleman from Ohio (Mr. McCook) by inserting four o'clock instead of "two." 
 He said that several States were now hi consultation, and he wished to give 
 them time. 
 
 Mr. Pugh inquired if it would be in order to take the vote now upon Mr. 
 MeCook's resolution, during the absence of those delegations who had ob- 
 tained leave of the Convention to retire ? 
 
 The President stated that in his construction of the rules, the Convention 
 having given unanimous consent to the temporary retirement of the delega- 
 tions of the several States for the purpose of consultation, it had, by that 
 very act, decided that it would not divide upon any material questions until 
 those delegations had had notice to return. 
 
 Mr. Richardson, of Illinois. Suppose the Convention should give leave 
 to a delegation to retire, and it should not return, were the Convention then 
 not to proceed ? 
 
 The President said he could make no decision upon that question until it 
 should arise. He only decided upon the question as to the several delega- 
 tions who had express leave of the Convention to retire for the purpose of 
 deliberation. 
 
 Mr. Richardson was not in favor of proceeding into any important busi- 
 ness during the absence of any of the delegations. 
 
 Mr. McCook withdrew the demand for the previous question. 
 
 Mr. Bidwell read resolutions of California concerning the slavery ques- 
 tion, and explained his vote on the minority platform, taking what was good 
 and rejecting what was bad. The California resolutions were as follows : 
 
 1. Resolved, That the platform adopted by the Cincinnati Convention in 
 1856 is hereby affirmed. 
 
 2. Resolved, That to entitle a Territory to form a Constitution for admis- 
 sion into the Union as a sovereign State, it should contain a reasonable num- 
 ber of inhabitants, which should not be less than the number required for a 
 representative in Congress. 
 
 3. Resolved, That the true interpretation of the Cincinnati Platform is 
 hereby declared to be that the right to hold slaves in a Territory rests upon 
 the same ground, and is entitled to the same protection, as other property. 
 
 4. Resolved, That any infraction of the rights of property in a Territory 
 would be a judicial question, and that it is the duty of Congress to pass such 
 laws as may be necessary to secure the faithful execution of the mandates of 
 the Courts. 
 
 5. Resolved, That Congress has the power at any time to change or repeal 
 any Territorial organic act, and to revise or annul any Territorial law con- 
 flicting therewith. 
 
Indiana. 
 
 Illinois II 
 
 Michigan 6 
 
 Wisconsin... o 
 
 Iowa 4- 
 
 Minnesota H 2£ 
 
 California 3 1 
 
 Oregon 3 
 
 92 159 
 
 Proceedings at Charleston. 69 
 
 He concluded by moving the previous question on behalf of Mr. McCook. 
 
 Mr. McCook again withdrew his call for the previous question. 
 
 Messrs. Krum, of Missouri, Seward, of Georgia, Holden, of North Caroli- 
 na, Richardson, of Illinois, Perry, of South Carolina, Howard, of Tennessee, 
 and Caldwell, of Kentucky, addressed the Convention. 
 
 Mr. McCook renewed his demand for the previous question. 
 
 Mr. Caldwell, of Kentucky, moved that the Convention do now ad- 
 journ, and a vote by States was demanded, and resulted as follows : 
 
 Yeas. Nays. Yeas. Nays. Yeas. Nays. 
 
 Maine, 2 6 North Carolina 8| H Ohio 23 
 
 New Hampshire... 5Souih Carolina 1 
 
 Vermont . fi Georgia 
 
 Massachusetts 8 51 Florida 
 
 Khode Island 4 Aiabama 
 
 Connecticut 2 4 Louisiana... 
 
 >ew York 35 Mississippi - 
 
 New Jersey. 5 2 Texas 
 
 Pennsylvania. 12 13 Arkansas 1 
 
 Delaware 2 Missouri 4J 4£ 
 
 Maryland 4 4Tennessee 9 3 
 
 Virginia.. 15 Kentucky 114 ± 
 
 The States of Florida, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, declined voting. 
 
 And the motion to adjourn was lost. 
 
 When the State of Georgia offered to vote on the last question, 
 
 Mr. Horn, of Wisconsin, objected to the vote of Georgia being cast by the 
 potion present, the State having withdrawn. 
 
 Mr. Cohen, of Georgia, explained that Georgia was represented here by 
 ten delegates who refused to withdraw. The delegates were requested by 
 their State to cast their votes in Convention as a unit. The act of withdrawal 
 had been done by the majority out of the Convention, not in it. He claimed 
 the right of the remaining delegates to cast the vote of the State. 
 
 The President decided, that as the State had ordered the majority of the 
 delegates to vote, and as that majority had officially represented to the Con- 
 vention that they had concluded to withdraw, the minority had no right to 
 represent the State. 
 
 Mr. Holden, of Georgia, appealed from the decision of the Chair. He said : 
 Whom the Gods would destrov they first make mad. The decision of the 
 Chair is most suicidal and destructive. It destroyed the rights of the State. 
 He came here to represent the Democracy of his District. He held that the- 
 bolters and seceders did not represent she Democracy of the State; that they 
 did not follow their duty to their State. They came here with instructions 
 to vote, not to bolt. Those who remain, remain to vote — remain with, and 
 act with the Democratic Convention, and they called upon its members to sus- 
 tain them. 
 
 Mr. King, of Missouri, took the floor. 
 
 The President. The Chair begs to remind the gentleman that the ques- 
 tion is not debateable, and that the Chair only allowed discussion on the part 
 of the gentleman from Georgia as an act of courtesy. 
 
 Mr. King. If I am not in order I do not desire to occupy the floor. 
 
 Mr. Samuels. I desire to know whether the decision of Chair is that the 
 majority of the delegation from Georgia having withdrawn, therefore, the re- 
 maining delegates have no right to represent the State. 
 
 The President. And for the further reason that the delegation have re- 
 ported to the Convention that a majority have given notice that the delegates 
 have decided to withdraw. 
 
 After further debate, the decision of the Chair was sustained by 148 ayes 
 to 100 nays. 
 
 Mr. Srward, of Georgia, protested against the act of injustice to the State, 
 and withdrew from the Convention. 
 
70 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 The previous question on the motion of Mr. Howard was then seconded. 
 
 The Chair declared the former motion for adjournment lost. 
 
 Mr. Owen, of Maine, moved to adjourn till 5 o'clock, and Mr. Randall till 
 the usual hour to-morrow. 
 
 Mr. Cochran discussed the point of order, as to which motion had prece- 
 dence. 
 
 The Convention adjourned to meet at five o'clock P. M. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The President asked to lay before the Convention a written communica- 
 tion which had been handed to him. 
 
 It was a communication irom the Delegation of the State of Louisiana, and 
 is as follows: 
 
 Charleston, April 30, 1860. 
 To the Hon. Caleb CusJinig, President of the Democratic Convention : 
 
 Sir : The undersigned, delegates from the State of Louisiana, in withdraw- 
 ing from the Convention, beg leave to make the following statement of facts: 
 
 On the 5th day of March, 1860, the Democracy of Louisiana assembled in 
 State Convention at Baton Rouge, and unanimously adopted the following 
 declaration of their principles : 
 
 Resolved, That the Territories of the United States belong to the several 
 States as their common property, and not to individual citizens thereof; that 
 the Federal Constitution recognizes property in slaves ; and as such, the 
 owner thereof is entitled to carry his slaves into any Territory in the United 
 States ; to hold them there as property; and in case the people of the Terri- 
 tories by inaction, unfriendly legislation or otherwise, should endanger the 
 tenure of such property, or discriminate against it by withholding that pro- 
 tection given to other species of property in the Territories, it is the duty of 
 the General Government to interpose, by the active exertion of its constitu- 
 tional power, to secure the rights of the slaveholder. 
 
 The principles enunciated in the foregoing resolution are guaranteed to us 
 by the Constitution of the United States, and their unequivocal recognition 
 by the Democracy of the Union we regard as essential, not only to the integ- 
 rity of the party, but to the safety of the States whose interests are directly 
 involved. They have been embodied in both of the series of resolutions pre- 
 sented to the Convention by a majority of the States of the Union, and have 
 been rejected by a numerica 1 vote of the delegates. 
 
 The Convention has, by this vote, refused to recognize the fundamental 
 principles of the Democracy of the State we have the honor to represent, and 
 we feel constrained, in obedience to a high sense of duty, to withdraw from 
 its deliberations, and unanimously to enter our solemn protest against its 
 action. 
 
 We ask that the communication may be spread upon the minutes of the 
 Convention, and beg leave to express our appreciation of the justice and dig- 
 nicy which have characterized your action as its presiding officer. 
 
 (Signed) A. MOUTON, JOHN TARLTON, 
 
 RICHARD TAYLOR, EMILE LaSERE, 
 
 F. H. HATCH, E. LAWRENCE, 
 
 A. TALBOT, B. W. PEARCE, 
 
 R. A. HUNTER, D. D. WITHERS. 
 
 The undersigned, in explanation of their position, beg leave to annex the 
 following statement, viz : 
 
 Whilst we took the same view with our colleagues, that the platform of 
 principles, as adopted by this Convention, was not what was expected by 
 Louisiana, and desired by ourselves, as sufficient to guard the rights of that 
 State, and of the whole South, under the Constitution, are now unwilling 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 
 
 71 
 
 precipitately to retire from the Convention, until all hope of accommodation 
 shall have been exhausted, and until the last moment had arrived, at which, 
 in justice to our own honor, and the interest and dignity of our State, we 
 would be forced to retire. W?, tlierefore, were opposed to the retirement of the 
 de 7 egation at the time it was made; but believing that the other members of the 
 delegation were actuated by the same high motives which governed our own 
 opinions, and desiring our State to present a firm, undivided front, we being 
 in the minority of the delegation, were willing to yield, and did "yield, our 
 opinions to the judgment of the majority. J. A. McBATTON", 
 
 Charleston, S. C, May 1, 1860. CHARLES JONES. 
 
 Mr. Howard, of Tennessee, asked to state a question of privilege, and of- 
 fered a resolution, which is as follows, viz : 
 
 Resolved, That the President of the Convention be and is hereby directed 
 not to declare any person nominated for the office of President or Vice Pres- 
 ident unless he shall have received a number of votes equal to two-thirds of 
 the votes of all the Electoral Colleges. 
 
 Mr. McCook, of Ohio, called up his resolution, the previous question hav- 
 ing been seconded, that the main question should now be put. 
 
 The President stated that it was his duty now to call on the House to 
 determine whether the main question must now be put. 
 
 Mr. Howard raised a point of order, viz : that the time fixed in Mr. Mc- 
 Cook's resolution had passed. 
 
 The President. The time named in the resolution cannot affect its pas- 
 sage, and if adopted the effect would be to take the House to a vote instanter. 
 
 Mr. Russell, of Virginia, called for a vote by States. 
 
 And the question was then put, — l< Shall the main question now be 
 
 put ?" and the vote on such question was as follows, viz : 
 
 Teas. In ays 
 
 North Carolina 10 
 
 South Carolina . 
 
 Georgia 
 
 Florida 
 
 Alabama 
 
 Louisiana 
 
 Mississippi 
 
 Texas 
 
 Arkansas 1 
 
 Missouri 4% *H 
 
 Tennessee 1 11 149 102 
 
 Kentucky 12 
 
 So the question was decided in the affirmative. 
 
 The main question was then put, and Mr. McCook's resolution was adopted. 
 
 Mr. Stuart moved to reconsider the vote by which the resolution was 
 agr ;ed to, and to lay the motion on the table. 
 
 The President. The motion would be entered. 
 
 Mr. Howard called up his resolution, and the Chair decided it to be in order. 
 
 Mr. Richardson, of Illinois, moved to lay the resolution of Mr. Howard 
 on the table ; and upon this motion, 
 
 Mr. Russell, of Virginia, called for a vote by States. 
 
 The vote on Mr. Richardson's resolution to lay on the table was as follows: 
 
 Yeas. Nays. Teas Nays. 
 
 North Carolina 10 Ohio ....23 
 
 South Carolina Indiana 13 
 
 Georgia 
 
 Florida 
 
 Alabama 
 
 Louisiana 
 
 .Mississippi 
 
 L'exas 
 
 vrkansas 1 
 
 vlissouri 4^ 4!£ 
 
 Tennessee 1 11 111* 141 
 
 Kentucky 12 
 
 Maine 
 
 New Hampshire . . 
 
 Vermont 
 
 Massachusetts ... 
 
 Teas. Nays 
 ... . 5 3 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 6 7 
 
 4 
 
 
 3 ? 2 , 
 
 New York 
 
 New Jersey 
 
 35 
 
 7 
 
 10^ 16 1 4 
 
 
 2 
 
 Maryland 
 
 Virginia 
 
 3 5 
 
 15 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 Teas. Nays. 
 ^3 
 
 Indiana 
 
 Illinois 
 
 Michigan 
 
 Wisconsin 
 
 13 
 
 11 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 Minnesota 
 
 California.. 
 
 Oregon 
 
 2^ \X 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 Teas Nays. 
 
 Maine 5 '3 
 
 N e w H:\mpshire 5 
 
 Vermont 5 
 
 Mas-achusetts .. 4>£ 8)4 
 
 Rho.ie Island 4 
 
 Connecticut 3% 2V 
 
 New Tork 35" 
 
 N-w Jersey \\ b\ 
 
 Pennsylvania 10 16>£ 
 
 Delaware 2 
 
 Maryland 2 fi 
 
 Virginia 15 
 
 Illinois ,... 11 
 
 Michigan 6 
 
 Wisconsin 5 
 
 Iowa -- 4 
 
 Minnesota 2% 1>£ 
 
 California 4 
 
 Oregon 3 
 
 So the motion to lay on the table was lost. 
 
72 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, contended that the resolution was not in order. 
 The effect of it was to change the rules of this Convention, and it must there- 
 fore lie over for one day. He would read the rule of the Convention upon 
 this subject: 
 
 " Resolved, That two-thirds of the whole number of votes given shall be 
 necessary to a nomination of a candidate for President and Vice President by 
 this Convention." There was the rule, that two-thirds of the votes given 
 shall be necessary. 
 
 Was there a gentleman here prepared to admit the doctrine that at any future 
 Convention a minority of the voters, by merely refusing to vote, could break up 
 their deliberations ? The mere statement of the question itself was its own 
 best answer. The language of the rule was — "two-thirds of the votes given." 
 Given for what ? Why, given for a candidate for President of the United 
 States. 
 
 Mr. Stuart would not detain the Convention further with the discussion of 
 this question of order. He asked whether gentlemen were prepared to set a 
 new precedent, which would in future times enable one-third of the gentle- 
 men attending a National Convention to break it up by refusing to vote ? 
 
 Mr. Phillips, of Pennsylvania, submitted the question of order, that the 
 gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stuart) was too late in making his point. The 
 resolution of the gentleman from Tennesee had been introduced by unani- 
 mous consent, and was in the full possession of the Convention. He would 
 submit that, according to all parliamentary rules, the gentleman from Michi- 
 gan was too late in making his point of order. 
 
 The President. The gentleman from Michigan has raised the point of 
 order, that the motion of the gentleman from Tennessee will constitute a 
 change of the rule of the Convention, as adopted at its present session, in 
 accordance with the rule of the Convention of 1852. The gentleman from 
 Pennsylvania (Mr. Phillips) objects that it is too late to make this question of 
 order. As the Chair entertains a different opinion upon the question, he 
 desires to state that opinion. The resolution of the Convention of 1852 is in 
 substance, as the gentleman from Michigan has stated it, that two-thirds of - 
 the whole number of votes given shall be necessary to a nomination of can- 
 didates for President and Vice President. Now, it is true that, in a rigorous 
 construction of this order, it applies to a nomination of candidates for 
 President and Vice President by this Convention. 
 
 Thus far the Chair concurs with the gentlemanfrom Michigan. The Chair 
 is not prepared to determine what is the force of the words "votes given.'' 
 A prima facia impression of the words might be "votes cast" in a ballot in 
 tiie Convention, but the rule does not say so. It uses the absolute independ- 
 ent phrase "votes given." The gentleman from Michigan objects to that 
 construction on the ground of alleged inconvenience, that of having the 
 nomination of a Convention prevented by the secession of one-third of the 
 States in that Convention. The Chair can see that the argument of inconve- 
 nience is sufficiently strong, if not stronger upon the other side. . A Conven- 
 tion of this sort has no legal authority. Its sole authority is its moral 
 authority, as the representative of the opinion of the party whose members 
 constitute i ts party. It seems to the Chair that the inconvenience of assum- 
 ing that the nomination by a fractional party of the Convention, although it 
 may be that of two-thirds, constitutes a binding nomination upon the people 
 or' the United States, is a vastly greater inconvenience than that which would 
 arise from the fact that a secession of one-third of the members would 
 prevent a nomination. A nomination to be made by the Convention is a 
 constitutional necessity. It is a formal recommendation to the constituents 
 of the Convention. That recommendation, in order that it should have 
 moral authority with the persons to whom it is addressed, should be the act 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 73 
 
 "o 
 
 of all the States of the Union. (Applause.) The Chair, therefore, is not 
 prepared to adopt the construction of the gentleman from Michigan of the 
 rule of 1>52 ; and, therefore, the Chair is of the opinion that the resolution 
 of the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Howard) does not constitute such a 
 modification of the standing rules of the Convention as shall require it to lie 
 over for one day. 
 
 Mr. Stuart. I trust it is not necessary for me to say that, in taking an 
 appeal from the decision of the Chair, it is in consequence of no want of 
 respect for the occupant of the Chair. I contend that the construction given 
 by the Chair to the words "votes given," as relating to the place where given, 
 can never receive the sanction of logic. Can this Convention give a vote 
 anywhere else than here ? 
 
 " Resolved, That two thirds of the votes given here" is not that super- 
 erogation ? All votes are given here, and they can be given nowhere else. 
 f l he rule, therefore, is plain and palpable. Two-thirds of the votes given on 
 a question. I beg gentlemen to remember that the nomination of a candidate 
 for President and Vice President is the only question we can make before 
 thi* body ; that, in its business, requires a two-third vote. Now, I say with 
 the utmost respect for the presiding officer, that the construction of these 
 words to the place where given cannot bear the test of investigation, for we 
 can give a vote nowhere else unless we adjourn somewhere else. It is of 
 the utmost importance that this Convention should decide rightly. Let u* 
 meet every question upon the broad principles of right — do not let us com- 
 promit our honor in doing a thing we do not believe to be right. 
 
 The President. The question now is, " Shall the decision of the Chair 
 stand as the judgment of the Convention ?" 
 
 Michigan demanded a vote by States. 
 
 The question was then taken with the following result: 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 
 Maine... .3 5 
 
 New Hampshire 1 4 
 
 Vermont 5 
 
 Massachusetts 51 31 
 
 Rhode Island 4 
 
 Connecticut 21 3 
 
 New York 35 
 
 New Jersey. 51 11 
 
 Pennsylvania 171 91 
 
 Delaware 2 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 
 North Carolina 10 
 
 South Carolina 1 
 
 Georgia 
 
 Florida 
 
 Alabama 
 
 Louisiana 
 
 Mississippi 
 
 Texas 
 
 Arkansas 
 
 Mis-ouri 41 41 
 
 1 
 
 Ohio ..* 
 
 Yeas. Nays- 
 l z3 
 
 Indiana 
 
 13 
 
 11 
 
 Michigan 
 
 Wisconsin 
 
 a 
 
 — 5 
 
 4 
 
 Minnesota. 
 
 California 
 
 Oregon 
 
 1 21 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 144 108 
 
 Maryland 6 2 iTennessee 11 1 
 
 Virginia 15 (Kentucky -.111 
 
 ^o the de ision of the Chair was sustained. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, offered the following amendment to the resolu- 
 tion : 
 
 "And that every delegate voting for a candidate will be bound to abide by 
 the result of the nomination." 
 
 Mr. Howard, of Tennessee, simply desired to know who had invested the 
 gentleman from Michigan with the rower to bind the consciences of those 
 who were his peers. 
 
 Mr. Butler, of Massachusetts, inquired if the amendment was germane to 
 the principal question. 
 
 Mr. Klssell, of Virginia, desired to say that as long as the delegation from 
 Virginia continued in this Convention and participated in its proceedings, she 
 expected to be bound by every nomination, by every act that was done. 
 
 Mr. Stuart ^aid that the suggestion he wished to make was this : that the 
 resolution of the gentleman from Tennessee, instructing the Chair not to de- 
 clare auy man nominated unless he had received two-thirds of the votes which 
 constituted this body. "What he proposed to add was that the result, when 
 declared, should be binding upon every gentleman who participated in the 
 proceedings of the body. 
 
74 
 
 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 The President decided the amendment of the gentleman from Michigan 
 not to be in order. 
 
 The previous question upon the adoption of the resolution was moved, 
 seconded, and the main question ordered. 
 
 Ohio demanded a vote by States. 
 
 The question was then taken upon Mr. Howard's resolution with the fol- 
 lowing result : 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 
 Maine 3 5 
 
 New Hampshire 5 
 
 Vermont 5 
 
 Massachusetts 8^ 4% 
 
 Rhode Island 4 
 
 Connecticut 2% 3% 
 
 NewYork 35 
 
 New Jersey 5^ 1% 
 
 Pennsylvania 17>£ 9>£ 
 
 Delaware 2 
 
 Maryland 6 2 
 
 Virginia 15 
 
 Yeas. Nays 
 
 North Carolina 10 
 
 South Carolina 1 
 
 Georgia 
 
 Florida •.... 
 
 Alabama 
 
 Louisiana 
 
 Mississippi 
 
 Texas 
 
 Arkansas 1 
 
 Missouri 2i 2y 
 
 Tennessee ... 11 1 
 
 Kentucky .11 1 
 
 Ohio 
 
 Indiana 
 
 Illinois .. 
 Michigan , 
 Wisconsin 
 
 Iowa 
 
 Minnesota 
 California 
 Oregon 
 
 Yeas. 
 .. 
 ... 
 ... 
 .... (I 
 .. 
 .... (» 
 
 -- H 
 
 .... 4 
 
 Nayi 
 2i 
 13 
 11 
 6 
 
 112 
 
 And the resolution of Mr. Howard was declared to be adopted. 
 
 Mr. Bigler, of Pennsylvania, moved to reconsider the vote just taken, and 
 to lay that motion on the table, and Mr. Bigler's motion was adopted. 
 
 Mr. McCook, of Ohio, now demanded that the Convention now proceed to 
 v*)te by States for President of the United States. 
 
 Mr. King, of Missouri. Do I understand that nominations are now in 
 order ? 
 
 The President. The Chair understands it now to be in order to call on 
 the several States to vote. 
 
 Mr King. I put in nomination, before this Convention, as a candidate for 
 the office of President of the United States, Stephen A. Douglas. (Ap- 
 plause.) 
 
 Mr. Caldwell, of Kentucky. I am instructed by the delegation from 
 Kentucky unanimously to nominate for the office of President, Kentucky's 
 favorite son and incorruptible statesman, James G-tjthrie. (Applause.) 
 
 Mr. Bidwell, of California. I desire to put in nomination Daniel S. 
 Dickinson, of New York, "the noblest Roman of them all." (Applause. ) 
 
 Mr. Russell, of Virginia. By the unanimous direction of the delegation 
 from Virginia, I offer to this Convention the name of Robert M. T. Hunter, 
 of that State. (Applause.) 
 
 Mr. Ewing, of Tennessee. I put in nomination the name of the Hon. 
 Andrew Johnson, of Tennessee. (Applause.) 
 
 Mr. Stout, of Oregon. I desire to place in nomination General Joseph 
 Lane, of Oregon. (Applause.) 
 
 The Convention then proceeded in the execution of its order to vote by 
 States for a candidate for the Presidency. 
 
 FIRST VOTE FOB PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire — Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont — Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 51, Hunter 6, Davis 1|. 
 
 Rhode Island — Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3J, Toucey 2%. 
 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey— Guthrie 7. 
 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9, Guthrie 9, Dickinson 2, 
 
 Hunter 3, Lane 3, Pearce 1. 
 Del awara— Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland— Douglas 2, Dickinson 1, Hunter 5. 
 Virginia— Hunter 15. 
 North Carolina — Douglas 1, Hunter 9. 
 South ( :arolina — Hunter 1. 
 Arkansas — Hunter 1. 
 
 Missouri — Douglas 4K, Guthrie 4}£. 
 Tennessee — J >hnson 12, 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 Indiana — Douglas 13. — 
 Illinois — Doughis 11. 
 Michigan — Douglas 6. 
 Wisconsin — Douglas 5. 
 Iowa — Douglas 4. 
 Minnesota — Douglas 4. 
 California— Dickinson 4. 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 
 Whole number of electoral votes, 303 — Neces- 
 sary to a choice, under the decision of thr Chair, 
 202. Douglas 145>£, Guthrie 35, Dickinson 7, 
 Hunter 42, Johnson 12, Lane 6, Davis lr a , toucey 
 2Y a , Pearce J. 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 
 
 lb 
 
 The Chair decided there was no choice, and the 
 Convent hm proceeded to a 
 
 SECOND VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine — Douglas 6, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont— Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 6%, Hunter 5%. 
 
 Rhode Island — Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3>£, Toucey 2#. 
 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 
 Pennsylvania — Douglas 9%, Guthrie 10, Hunter 3, 
 
 Dickinson l>a, Lane 3. 
 Delaware — Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland— Douglas 2 Hunter 5, Dickinson ft. 
 Virginia— Hunter 15. 
 North Carolina— Douglas 1, Hunter 9. 
 South Carolina — Hunter 1. 
 Arkansas — Hunter 1 
 Missouri — Douglas 4>£, Guthrie 4>£. 
 Tennessee— Johnson 12. 
 Kentucky — Guthrie 12. 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 Indiana — Douglas 18. ~~~ 
 Illinois — Douglas 11. 
 Michigan — Douglas 6. 
 Wisconsin — Douglas 5. 
 Iowa — Douglas 4. 
 Minuesota — Douglas 4. 
 California — Dickinson 4. 
 Oregon — Lane 3. 
 
 Whole number of votes, 303 — Necessary to a 
 choice under the ruling of the Chair, 202. Douglas 
 147, Guthrie 30&, Hunter 41^, Davis 1. Toucey 
 2%, Dickinson 6 fe, Johnson 12, Lane 6. 
 
 The' Chair decided that no choice had been 
 made, and the Convention proceeded to a 
 
 THIRD VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine — Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire — Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont — Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts — Douglas 6$, Hunter 5|. Davis 1, 
 
 Rhode Island — Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut — Douglas 3i, Guthrie 2}. 
 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey — Douglas 11-2, Guthrie 5 1-2. 
 
 Pennsylvania— I'ouglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 91-2, Dick- 
 inson 1 1-2, Hunter 3 1-2, Lane 3. 
 
 Delaware — Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland— Guthrie 2, Dickinson 1, Hunter 5. 
 
 Virginia— Huuter 15. 
 
 North Carolina — Guthrie 1, Hunter 9 
 
 Arkansas — Dickinson 1. 
 
 Missouri— Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennesee — Johnson 12. 
 
 Kentucky — Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana — Douglas 13. - 
 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan — Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa — Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota — Douglas 4. 
 
 California— Dickinson 4. 
 
 Oregon — Lane 3. 
 
 Whole number of electoral votes, 303 -Neces- 
 sary to a choice, under th.- ruling of the Chair 202 
 
 Douglas 148 1-2. Guthrie 42. Dickinson 6 1-2, Hun- 
 ter 36, Johnson 12, Lane 6, D „vis 1. 
 
 Under such ruling there being no choice, the 
 
 Convention proceeded to a 
 
 FOURTH VOTB FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Vaine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3, 
 
 New Hampshire — Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont— Douglas 5 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 7, Hunter 5 Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island — Douglas 4 
 
 Connecticut— D >uglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey — Douglas 1 1-2; Guthrie 5 1-2. 
 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas fll-2 ; Guthrie 9 1-2, Hun- 
 tor 4 1-2, Lane 3, Dickinson 1-2. 
 
 Delaware — Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland— Douglas 2, Guthrie 1-2, Hunter 5, 
 Dickinson 1-2. 
 
 Virginia— Hunter 15. 
 
 North Carolina— Douglas 1, Huuter 9. 
 
 Arkansas — Hunter 1. 
 issouri — Douglas 4 12, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennessee— Johnson 12. 
 
 Kentucky — Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 
 "llinois — Douglas H. 
 
 Michigan — Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa — Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 4. 
 
 California — Dickinson 4. 
 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 Whole number of votes cast, 252 — Necessary to a 
 
 choice, under the ruling of the Chair 202. Dou- 
 glas 149, Guthrie 37 1 2, Hunter^l 1-2, Da\is 1, 
 
 Lane 6, Dickinson 5, JohDson 12. 
 
 There being no eliction, the Convention pro- 
 ceeded to a 
 
 FIFTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine — Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont — Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts — Douglas 7. Hunter 5, Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Isiand— Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3 1-2 Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 New York — Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey — Douglas 1 1-2. Guthrie 5 1-2. 
 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 9 1-2. Dick- 
 inson 1, Hunter 4, Lane 3. 
 
 Delaware — Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland— Douglas 2 1 -2, Guthrie 1-2, Hunter 5 . 
 
 Virginia— Hunter 15 
 
 North Carolina — Guthrie 1, Hunter 9. 
 
 Arkansas — Hunter I. 
 
 Missouri— Douglas, 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2, 
 
 Tennessee— Johnson 12. 
 
 Kentucky — Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio — Doug'as 23. 
 
 Indiana — Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois — Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan— Douglas <>. 
 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa — Doug'as ;. 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 4. 
 
 California— Dickinson 4. 
 
 Oregon — Lane 3. 
 
 Whole number of votes cast, 252 — Necessary to 
 
 a choice under the ruliDg of the Chair 202. Dou- 
 glas 149 1-2, Guthrie 37 1-2, Dickinson 5, Hunter 
 
 41, Johnson 12, Lane b, Davis 1. 
 
 There being no election, the Convention pro- 
 ceeded to a 
 
 SIXTH VOTE FOR PRES1DJLNT. 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 Vermont — Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Donglas 7, Hunter 5, Lane 1. 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. 
 Connecticut— Donglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 New Jersey— Douglas 1 1-2, Guthrie 5 12. 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 12, Dick- 
 inson 1, Hunter 4. Lane 3. 
 Delaware— Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland— Douglas 2 12, Guthrie 1-2, Hunter 5. 
 Virginia— Hunter 15. 
 North Carolina— Douglas 1. Hunter 9. 
 Arkansas — Hunter 1. 
 Missouri - Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2, 
 Tennessee— Johnson 12, 
 
76 
 
 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Keutucky— Guthrie 12. 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 Illinois— Douglas n. 
 
 Michigan — D mglas »">. 
 Wisconsin — D itlglaa 5. 
 Iowa — Douglas 4. 
 Minnesota — Douglas 4. 
 California— Guthrie 2, Dickinson 2. 
 Oregon — Laue 3. 
 
 Whole number of votes cast 252 — Necessary to a 
 choice, under the ruling of the Chair, 202. Dou- 
 glas 140 12 Guthrie 39 1-2, Dickinson 3, Hunter 
 41, Johnson 12. Lane 7. 
 There being no election, the Convention pi - o- 
 veded to a 
 
 SEVENTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5. Guthrie 3. 
 New Hampshire — Douglas 5. 
 Vermont— Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts — Douglas 7, Hunter 5, Davis 1. 
 Rhode Island — Douglas 4. 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 Mow York— Dooglas 35. 
 New Jersey— Douglas 1 f-2, Guthrie 5 1-2. 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie In 1-. , Hun- 
 ter 4. Lane 3. 
 Ddaware— -Hunter 2. 
 Maryland— Douglas ! 
 Virginia— Hunter 15. 
 North Carolina— Douglas 1, Hunter 9. 
 Arkansas— Hunter 1. 
 Missouri— D >uglas 4 i-2, Guthrie 4 1-2 
 Tennessee— Douglas 1, Johnson 11. 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 Ohio- -Douglas 23. 
 Indiana— D mglas 13. 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 Michigan- -Douglas 6. 
 Wisconsin- --Douglas 5. 
 Iowa-— Douglas 4. 
 
 "innesota—Douglas 4. 
 California— Dickinson 4. 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 
 Whole number of votes 252. Dousrlas 150 1-2. 
 Guthrie 38 1 2, Dickinson 4, Hunter 41, Johnson 
 
 11, Lane ft. Davis 1. 
 
 Ann* under the ruling of the Chair, there being 
 no choice, the Convention proceeded to an 
 
 EIGHTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 N T ew Hampshire Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts Douglas 7 1-2, Hunter 4 1-2, 
 
 Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie2 1-2. 
 
 New York Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey D mglas 1 1-2. Guthrie 5 1-2. 
 
 Pennsylvania Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 10 1-2, 
 
 Hunter 4. Lane 8 
 
 Del aware H un ter 2 . 
 
 Maryland Douglas 2, Guthrie 1-2, Dickinson 
 
 1-2. Hunter 5 
 
 Virginia Hunter 15. 
 
 North Carolina Douglas 1, Hunter 9. 
 
 Arkansas Hunter 1. 
 
 iMissouri Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 |Teunessee D mglas 1, Johnson 11. 
 
 1-2, Guthrie 1-2, Hunter 5. Kentucky Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana Douglas 13, 
 
 Illinois Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan D mglas 6 
 
 Wisconsin Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa Douglas 4 
 
 Minnesota Douglas 4 
 
 California Dickinson 4. 
 
 jOregon Lane 3. 
 
 | Whole number of votes 252. D mglas 150 1-2, 
 jGuthrie 38 1-2, Dickinson 4 1-2, Hunter 40 1-2, 
 'Johnson 11. Lane 6, Davis 1. 
 
 Before the annoncement of the result of the eighth vote, 
 
 Mr. Stevens, of Massachusetts, arose and stated that one of the delegates 
 from Massachusetts having been ill, had substituted his alternate to cast his 
 vote, and had instructed him to vote for Stephrn A. Douglas. That he 
 had violated his instructions, and that the principal had been brought into 
 the Convention and desired to cast his own vote, and wanted the vote of Mas- 
 sachusetts changed one-fealf vote. 
 
 The Prksident decided that the principal had the right at any time before 
 the vote was announced, to control his vote, and the vote of Massachusetts 
 would be changed according to the wishes of the gentleman, and was so 
 changed before the announcement of the vote. 
 
 Under the ruling of the Chair, there being no choice, the Convention pro- 
 ceeded to a 
 
 NINTH VOTE FOR PRKSIDENT. 
 
 Maine Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont Douglas 5. 
 
 Massaehustts....... Douglas 7, Hunter 4, Davis 1 1-2 
 
 Rhode Island Douglas4 ' 
 
 Connecticut Doug'as 31-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 New York Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey Douglas 1 1-2, Guthrie 512. 
 
 Pennsylvania Douglas 91-2, Guthrie 10 1-2, 
 
 Hunter 4, Lane 3. 
 
 Delaware Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland Douglas 2 12, Guthrie 1-2, Hunter 4 
 
 Virginia Hunter 15. 
 
 North Carolina Douglas 1, Hunter 9. 
 
 Arkansas Hunter 1. 
 
 Before the 9th vote was announced, 
 
 Mr. Edgeeton, of Minnesota, arose and desired to make a change of one 
 
 Missouri Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennessee Douglas 1, Johnson 11. 
 
 Kentucky Guthrie \l. 
 
 Ohio Douglas 23 
 
 Indiana Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota Douglas 3, Johnson 1. 
 
 California Guthrie 3, Dickinson I. 
 
 Oregon Lane 3. 
 
 Whole number of votes 252. Douglas 150 1-2, 
 Guthrie 41, Dickinson 1, Hunter 39 1-2, Johnson 
 12, Lane 6, Davis 1. 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 
 
 77 
 
 vote from Minnesota, taking it from Mr. Douglas and giving it to Mr. John- 
 
 Mr. Gorman objected, stating that a resolution had been adopted in their 
 delegation directing him, as chairman, to cast the whole vote of Minnesota for 
 Stephen A. Douglas, so long as he should consider it of advantage to Mr. 
 Douglas. 
 
 Mr. Samuels, of Iowa, arose to a point of order : that the State Conven- 
 tion of Minnesota had passed resolutions, which, according to the decision of 
 the President of this Convention, would be considered instructions, and that 
 the delegation was bound to vote according to those instructions. 
 
 The President decided that the delegates of Minnesota had the right to 
 cast their votes as their consciences should dictate to them, and that the reso- 
 lution of the Minnesota State Convention did not go so far as to amount to 
 instructions, and that the vote of Minnesota could be changed, and was ac- 
 cordingly changed before the 9tU vote was announced, Mr. Edgerton and Mr. 
 Fridley voting for Mr. Johnson. 
 
 Uniier the decision of the Chair, there being no Kentucky — Guthrie 12. 
 choice, the Convention proceeded to a O hio— - 1 'oughts 23. 
 
 tenth vote for PRESIDENT 1 ndiana—Dougla* 13. 
 
 ,, . x. r „ i ■ Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 
 Maine— Douglas o. Guthrie 3. jMicuigan —Douglas fi. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. i Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont- Douglas 5. 'iowa— Douglas 4. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 7, Hunter 4 1-2, Davis H. Minnesota— Douglas 3, Johnson 1. 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. California -Dickinsou 4. 
 
 Connecticut — Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 12. Oiegon— Lane 3- 
 
 New York — Douglas 'io. 
 New Jeivey— Douglas 1 1-2, Guthrie 5 1-2, 
 
 Whole number of votes, 
 
 Douglas 
 
 Pennsylvania — Douglas 9 1-2, Guthr 
 
 Hunter 3 1-2. Lane 2 1-2. 
 Delaw are — Hunter 2. 
 .Maryland— Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 1-2, 
 Virginia— Hunter 15 
 North Carolina— Douglas 1, Hunter 9. 
 Arkansas— Hunter 1. 
 Missouri— Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 Tennessee — Douglas 1, Johnson 11. 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 ludiana — Douglas 13. 
 Illinois — Douglas II. 
 Michigan — Douglas 6. 
 Wisconsin — Douglas 5. 
 Iowa — Douglas 4. 
 Minnesota -Douglas 3, Johnson 1 
 California — Dickinson 4. 
 Oregon — Lane 3. 
 
 11 1-2 ^u'h'ie 39 1-2. Dickinson 4, Hunter jS, J 
 
 150 1-2. 
 ■ hnson, 
 [12, Lane 6 1-2, Davis 1 1-2. 
 
 After the announcement of the Eleventh Vo'e, 
 Huater 4 a motion was niade to adjourn, and was put and 
 " lost. 
 
 There being no choice, the Convention pro- 
 ceeded to a 
 
 TWELFTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT- 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3 . 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5, 
 
 Vermont —Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 7, Hunter 4 1-2, Davis 
 
 1 1-2. 
 Rhode Island—Douglas 4. 
 Connecticut — Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 New Jersey— Douglas 1 1-2, Guthrie 5 1-2. 
 Pennsylvania--- Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 11 1-2, 
 
 Hunter 3 1-2, Lane 2 1-2 
 
 Whole number of votes, 252— Douglas 150 1-2 'Delaware— Hunter 2. 
 Guthrie 39 1-2, Dickinson 4, Hunter 39, Johnson Maryland -Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 1-2, 
 
 1 8. Lane 5 1-2. Davis 1 1-2. 
 
 Under the ruling of the Chair there being no 
 choice, the Convention proceeded to a 
 
 ELEVENTH VOTE FOR PRt-SIDENT. 
 
 Maine — Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 New Hampshire — Douglas 5. 
 Vermout— Douglas 5. 
 Massachusetts — Douglas 
 
 1 1-2. 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. 
 Connecticut- D< uglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 New Jersey— Douglas 1 1-2, Guthrie 5 1-2. 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 11 1-2, 
 
 Huuter 3 1-2. Lane 2 1-2. 
 Delaware — Hunter 2. 
 Maryland— Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 
 
 ter 4. 
 Virginia— Hunter 15. 
 North Carolina— Douglas 1, Hunter 9, 
 Arkansas— Lane 1. 
 Missouri— Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2 
 Tennessee — Douglas 1, Joni son II, 
 
 Hun- 
 
 ter, 4. 
 Virginia — Hunter 15. 
 .North 'arolina— Douglas 1, Hunter 9. 
 Arkansas--Lane 1. 
 
 Missouri— Douglas 4 1-2. Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 Tennessee—Douglas 1, Johnson 11. 
 Ken ucky- -Guthrie 12. 
 
 hio --Dougla- 23. 
 
 Hunter 4 1-2, Davis Indiana— Douglas 1 
 Illinois—Douglas 11 
 chigan — Douglas 6 
 
 [-2, Hun 
 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 
 Jowa- Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesoa-- Douglas 3, Johnsm 1. 
 
 California— Dickinson 4. 
 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 
 Total number of votes, 252. Douglas, 150 1 'J 
 Guthrie 39 12, Dickinson 4, Hunter 38, Johnson 
 12, Lane 6 1-2, Davis 1 1-2. 
 
 The Chair decided that there had been no 
 choice made, and on motion of Mr. Richardson, 
 of Illinois, the Convention adjourned until ten 
 o'clock to-morrow morning. 
 
78 
 
 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Wednesday, Mat 2, 1860. 
 
 The Convention, after having been entertained by Gilmore's Brass Band, 
 of Boston, was called to order by the President at half- past 10 A. M. 
 
 The proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Kendrick. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Atkin t s, of Tennessee, the reading of the Journal of 
 yesterday was dispensed with. 
 
 The Convention then resumed the execution of its order to vote for a can- 
 didate for the office of President. 
 
 THIRTEENTH VOTE FOR PRE8IDEICT. 
 
 Maine-- Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont— Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 7, Hunter 4 1-2, Davis. 
 11-2. 
 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4 
 
 Connecticut-— Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey— Douglas 11-2, Guthrie 5, Lane 1-2. 
 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 12, Hun- 
 ter 3, Lane 2 1-2. 
 
 Delaware -Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland— Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 1-2, Hunter 4. 
 
 Virginia— Hunter 15. 
 
 Nortn Carolina— Lane 10. 
 
 Arkansas— Lane 1. 
 
 Missouri— Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennessee— Douglas 1, Johnson 11. 
 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio- Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois — Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan— Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa— Douglas 4 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3, Johnson 1. 
 
 California— Dickinson 1, Lane 3. 
 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 
 Whole number of votes, 252— Douglas 1401-2. 
 Guthrie 39 1-2, Dickinson 1. Hunter 281-2. John- 
 son 12, Lane 20, Davis 1 1-2. and under the rul- 
 ing of the Chair there was no choice, and the 
 Convention proceeded to the 
 
 FOURTEENTH VOTE FOR PRE8IDBNT. 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire — Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont— "ouglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 7, Guthrie 2, Hunter 3, 
 
 Oavis 1. 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3}£, Guthrie 2%. 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2, Guthrie 4)4, Lane )4. 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9J£, Guthrie 12, Hunter 3. 
 
 Lane 2%. 
 Delaware— Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland— nouglas 3%, Guthrie )4, Hunter 4. 
 Virginia— Hunter 15. 
 North Carolina— Lane 10. 
 Arkansas— Lane 1. 
 Missouri— Douglas 4X, Guthrie 4%. 
 Tennessee— Douglas 1, Johnson 11. 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 Michigan— Douglas 6, 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 Iowa— Douglas 4. 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3, Johnson 1. 
 California— Dickinson )4, Lane 3%. 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 
 Whole No. of votes 252— Douglas 150, Guthrie 41, 
 Dickinson X A, Hunter 27, Johnson 12, Lane 20M 
 Davis 1. 
 
 There being no choice, the Convention proceeded 
 to the 
 
 FIFTEENTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont — Douglas 5. 
 
 M assachusetts— Douglas 7. Guthrie i)4. Hunter 2)4, 
 
 Davis 1. 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3%, Guthrie 2)4. 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2. Guthrie 4)4, Lane Jg. 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9)4, Guthrie 12, Hunter 3, 
 
 Lane2K. 
 
 Delaware— Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland— Douglas 3%, Guthrie )4, Hunter 4. 
 
 Virginia— Hunter 15. 
 
 North Carolina— Lane 10. 
 
 Arkansas— Lane 1. 
 
 Missouri— Douglas 4%, Guthrie 4%. 
 
 Tennessee— Douglas 1, Johnson 11. 
 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan— Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 
 Towa— Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3. Johnson 1. 
 
 California— Dickinson )4, Lane 3%. 
 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 
 Whole number of votes 252— Douglas 150, Guth- 
 rie 41)4, Dickinson )4, Hunter 26)4. Johnson 12, 
 Lane 20%, Davis 1. Necessary to a choice under 
 the decision of the Chair, 203. There being no 
 choice, the Convention proceeded to the 
 
 SIXTEENTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont— Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 7, Guthrie 2)4, Hunter 2)4, 
 
 Davis 1. 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3, Guthrie 2)4. 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2. Guthrie 4)4. Lane )4. 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9)4, Guthrie 12%, Hunter 
 
 2)4. Lane 2)4. 
 Delaware— Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland— Douglas 3%, Guthrie % Hunter 4. 
 Virginia— Hunter 15. 
 North Carolina— Lane 10. 
 Arkansas— Lane I. 
 Missouri— Douglas 4)4, Guthrie 4)4. 
 Tennessee— Douglas 1, Johnson 11. 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 Michigan— Douglas 6. 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 Iowa— Douglas 4. 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3, Johnson 1. 
 California— Dickinson )4, Lane 3%. 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 
 Whole No. of votes 252— Douglas 150, Guthrie 48, 
 Dickinson )4, Hunter 26, Johnson 12. Lane 203*. 
 Davis 1. Necessary to a choice, under the decision 
 of the Chair, 202. There being no choice, the Con- 
 vention proceeded to the 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 
 
 79 
 
 SEVENTEENTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine— DouglU 5, Outline 3. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas fc 
 
 Vermont -Douglas B. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 7, Guthrie 2A, IJunter 2A, 
 
 Davis I. 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. 
 Connecticut— Douglas *A. Guthrie 2%. 
 New York— Douglas 86. 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2, Guthrie 4><. Lane A. 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9>i, Guthrie IzA, Hunter 
 
 21-2. Lane 2 1-2. 
 Delaware— Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland— Hondas 3 1-2, Guthrie, 1-2, Hunter 4. 
 Virginia— Hunter 15. 
 North Carolina— Lane 10. 
 Arkansas— Lane 1. 
 
 Missouri— Douglas 4 1-2. Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 Tennesee— Douglas 1. Johnson 11. 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 Ohio— '»ouglas2». 
 Indiana— Douglas 13.- 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 Michigan— Douglas 6. 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 Iowa— Douglas 4. 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3, Johnson 1. 
 California— Dickinson 1-2, Lane 3 1-2. 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 
 Whole No. of votes 252 -Douglas 150, Guthrie 42, 
 Dickinson 1-2, Hunter 26. Johnson 12. Lane 20 1-2, 
 Davis 1. Necessary to a choice 202. No election, 
 and the Convention proceeded to the 
 
 EIGHTEENTH VOTE FOR PR' SIDF ST. 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 8. 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 Vermont— Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 7, Guthrie 2 1-2, Hunter 
 2 1-2. Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2, Guthrie 4 1-2. Lane 1-2. 
 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 12, Dickin- 
 son i-2. Hunter 2 1-2, Lane 2 1-2. 
 
 Delaware— Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland— Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 1-2, Hunter 4 
 
 Virginia— Hunter 15. 
 
 North Carolina— Lane 10. 
 
 Arkansas— Lane 1. 
 
 Missouri— Douglas 4 1-2. Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennessee— n ouglas*l. Johnson 11. 
 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio— Doudas 23. 
 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. - 
 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan— Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa— Douglas 4." 
 
 Minnesota— Doudas 3, Johnson 1. 
 
 California— Dickinson A, Lane SA. 
 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 
 Whole No. of votes 252— Douglas 150, Guthrie 41 K, 
 Dickinson 1. Hunter 26, Johnson 12, Lane 20 1-2, . ,. 
 Davis 1. Required for an election. 2(2. No choice, M">saun Douglas 4 1 -2, Guthrie 4 1-2 
 
 Michigan— Douglas 6. 
 v\ Isconsin— Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa— Douglas l. 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 8, Johnson 1. 
 California— Dickinson A Lane 3 A- 
 i regon— Lane 3. 
 
 Whole No. of votes cast, 252— Douglas 150, Guth- 
 rie 11 "o. Dickinson 1, Hunter 26. Johnson 12. Lane 
 2V l 4, Davis 1. No choice having been made, the 
 Convention proceeded to the 
 
 TWENTIETH BALLOT FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont — Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 7, Guthrie 2A, Hunter 2A . 
 
 Davis 1. 
 Rhode Tsland— Douglas 4. 
 Connecticut— Douglas S'A, Guthiie 2A. 
 New York— Douglas '«5. 
 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2, Guthrie 4A, Lane K 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas $A, Guthrie 12>2, Hunter 
 
 2H. Lane 2 A. 
 Delaware— Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland— Douglas 3A, Gutbne A, Hunter 4. 
 Virginia— Hunter 15. 
 North Carolina— Lane 10. 
 Arkansas— Lane 1. 
 Missouri— Douglas 1A, Guthrie 4A. 
 Tennessee— Douglas 1, Johnson 11. 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 Michigan— Douglas 6. 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 Iowa— Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3, Johnson 1. 
 Cali f ornia— Dickinson A, Lane 3 A. 
 < 'regon— Lane 3. 
 
 Whole number of votes cast, 252— Douglas 150, 
 Guthrie i2. Dickinson 'A, Hunter 26, Johnson 1? 
 Lane 20 A, Davis 1, There being no choice, the 
 Convention proceeded to the 
 
 TWENTY-FIRST VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine Douglas 5, Guthrie 3, 
 
 New Hampshire Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts Douglas 7, Guthrie 2 1-2, Hunter 
 
 2 1-2; Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 21-2. 
 
 New York Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey Douglas 2, Guthrie 4 1-2, Lane 1-2 
 
 Pennsylvania Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 12 1-2 
 
 Hunter 2 1-2, Lane 2 1-2. 
 
 Delaware Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland Douglas 4, Hunter 4. 
 
 Virginia Hunter 15. 
 
 North Carolina Lane 10. 
 
 Arkansas Lane 1. 
 
 and the President directed the Convention to pro- 
 ceed to the 
 
 NINETEENTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine— Doud as 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont— Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 7. Guthrie 2A, Hunter 2A, 
 
 Davis 1. 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3A. Guthrie 2%. 
 New Vork— Douglas 35. 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2. Guthrie 4%, Lane A. 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9A, Gutbrie 12, Dickinson 
 
 A, Hunter 2A, Lane 2A. 
 Delaware— Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland— Douglas dA, Guthrie A, Hunter 4. 
 Virginia— Hunter 15. 
 North Carolina— Lane 10. 
 Arkansas— Lane 1. 
 Missouri— Douglas 4J^, Guthrie 4 A. 
 Tennessee— Douglas 1. Johnson 11. 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 
 Tennessee Douglps 1. Johnson 11. 
 
 Kentucky Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois Dougias 11. 
 
 Michigan Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin Douglas 4. 
 
 Iowa Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota Dou°rlas3, Johnson 1. 
 
 California Dickinson 1-2, Lane 3 1-2. 
 
 Oregon Lane 3. 
 
 Douglas 150 1-2, Gnthrie 41 1-2, Dickinson 1-: 
 Hunter 26, Johnson 12, Lane 20 1-2. Davis 1. 
 
 Whole number of votes 252. Necessary to a 
 choice, under the decision of the Chair 202. No 
 choice having been made, the Convention went 
 into the 
 
 TWENTT-SECOND VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine . .Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont Douglas 5. 
 
80 
 
 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 .Massachusetts Douglas 7; Guthrie 21-2, Hun-, Tennesee Douglas 1, Johnson 11. 
 
 ter 2 1-2, Dav.s 1. ,Kentucky Guthrie 12. 
 
 Rhode Island L)ouglas4. . • jOhio Douglas 23 
 
 Connecticut Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. Ilndiaua Douglas 13. 
 
 New York Douglas 35. Illinois DougiaB 11. 
 
 New Jersey Douglas 2, Guthrie 4 1-2, Lane 1-2. [Michigan Douglas 0. 
 
 Pennsylvania Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 12 1-2^ Wisconsin Douglas 5. 
 
 Hunter 21-2, Lane 2 1-2. Iowa Douglas4. 
 
 Delaware Hunter 2. JMinntsota Douglas 3. Johnson 1. 
 
 Maryland Doulgas 4, Hunter 4. [California Dickinson 1-2, Lane 3 1-2 
 
 Virginia Hunter 15. Oregon Lane 3. 
 
 Non h Carolina Lane 10. ! Douglas 16i» 1-2, Guthrie 41 1-2, Dickinson 1-2. 
 
 Arkansas Lane 1. Hutjter20, Johnson 12, Lane 20 1-4, lavisl. 
 
 Missouri Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. Whole numher of votes 252. No choice. 
 
 The Convention then proceeded to the 23d vote for Pres'dent. 
 
 When Virginia was called upon to vote, Mr. LIussell, Chairman of the 
 Virginia delegation, rose to a question of privilege, asking the instruction of 
 the Chair as to his duty in announcing the vote of Virginia. The practice 
 of the Virginia delegation of casting their vote as a unit iu National Demo- 
 cratic Conventions had been continued so long that it had become common 
 law for that delegation. He understood that a resolution was introduced into 
 the Virginia State Convention instructing the delegation from that State to 
 vote as a unit in this body, but was withdrawn on the statement that the 
 practice had become so thoroughly established that there was no need of any 
 instruction to that effect. The delegates were not elected by the State Con- 
 vention, but in the Congressional Districts from which they came. 
 
 After meeting here the delegation unanimously voted to cast the vote of 
 the State as a unit upon the nominations. Two gentlemen, however, stated 
 at the time that they would not hold themselves bound so to vote whenever, 
 in their judgment, the interests of the party required them to cast a different 
 vote. He, however, had stated at the same time that whenever they sought 
 to vote differently he should bring the matter before the Convention. These 
 gentlemen now having the right to cast one vote, desired to cast that vote 
 lor a candidate not recommended by the majority of the delegation from 
 Virginia. In his opinion, under the circumstances, they had no right to sep- 
 arate their vote. 
 
 Mr. Moffitt, of Virginia, said this was not the first time the vote of the 
 State has not been cast as a unit. They had divided on other questions as 
 important as the present since the meeting of this Convention. He repre- 
 sented the Tenth Legion of Virginia, which would hold him accountable to 
 them, and he intended to redeem the pledges he had made to his people, 
 who were entitled to be heard through him. 
 
 Mr. Russell said that, under the rules of this Convention and the common 
 law of the Democratic party of Virginia, the majority of the delegation were 
 entitled to cast the vote of that State. In 1852, the National Convention re- 
 fused to allow the minority to separate their vote from that of the majority. 
 
 Mr. Moffitt replied that this Convention had established a rule on the 
 subject for its own guidance. 
 
 Mr. Yost, of Virginia, had cast his vote for Mr. Hunter as long as he could 
 do so with any advantage to him ; he was now disposed to vote as his con- 
 stituents desired, for Stephen A. Douglas. 
 
 The President decided that unless instructions had been given by a State, 
 each individual delegate had a right to cast his own vote. 
 
 The result of the vote was then announced as follows : 
 
 TWENTY-THIRD VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine Douglas 5, Guthrie3. 
 
 New Hampshire Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 7, Guthrie 2 1-2, Hunter 
 2 1-2, Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 New York Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey Douglas 2, Guthrie 4 1-2. Lane 1-2 
 
 Pennsylvania Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 12 1-2, 
 
 Hunter 2, Lane 2 1-2. 
 
 Delaware Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland Douglas 4. Hunter 4. 
 
 Virginia Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 
 North Carolina Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 
Proceeding's 
 
 at Charleston. 
 
 8i 
 
 Arkansas Lane 1. 
 
 Missouri Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennessee Douglas 1. Johnson 11. 
 
 Kentuekj Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa Douglas 4 
 
 Minnesota Douglas 3. Johnson 1. 
 
 California Dickinson 1-2, Lane 3 1-2. 
 
 Ore. on Lane 3. 
 
 Douglas 152 12. Guthrie 41 1-2, Dickinson 1-2. 
 Hunter 25, Johnson '2. Lane 19 1-2, Davis I. 
 
 Whole vote 252. No choice, and the Convention 
 proceeded to the 
 
 TWKNTY- FOURTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine Douglas 5, Guthrie 3 
 
 New Hampshire Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts Douglas 7, Guthrie 2 1-2, Hun- 
 ter 2 1-2, Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island Douglas 4 
 
 Connecticut Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 New York Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey Douglas 2, Guthrie 4 1-2, Lane 1-2 
 
 Pennsylvania Donglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 12 1-2 
 
 Hunter 2 1-2. Lane 2 12. 
 
 Delaware Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland Douglas 4, Hunter 4. 
 
 Virginia Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 
 North Carolina Lane 10 
 
 Arkansas Dickinson I. 
 
 Missouri Douglas 4 1-2. Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennesee Douglas 1, Johnson 11. 
 
 Kentucky Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio Dousdas 23. 
 
 Indiana Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota Douglas 3, Johnson 1. 
 
 California Dickinson 1-2, Lane 31-2. 
 
 Oregon Lane 3. 
 
 Douglas 151 12, Guthrie 41 12, Dickinson 1 1-2 
 
 Hunter 25, Johnson 12, Lane 19 1-2, Davis 1 
 Whole vote 252. No choice being made, the 
 
 Convention proceeded to a 
 
 TWENTY-FIFTH VOTE FOB PBESIDENT. 
 
 Maine Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts Douglas 7, Guthrie 2 1-2, Hun- 
 ter 2 1-2, Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 New York Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey Douglas 2. Guthrie 4 1-2, Lane 1-2 
 
 Penns\lvania Douglas 91-2, Guthrie 12 1-2, 
 
 Hunter 2 1-2, Lane 2 1-2, 
 
 Delaware Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland Douglas 4, Hunter 4. 
 
 Virginia Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 
 North Carolina Hunter 10. 
 
 Arkansas Dickinson 1. 
 
 Missouri Douglas 4 1-2. Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennessee Douglas 1, Johnson 11. 
 
 Kentucky Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana Douglas 13. 
 
 Dlinois Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota Donglas 8, Johnson 1. 
 
 6 
 
 California Dickinson 1-2, Lane 3 1-2. 
 
 regou Lane 3. 
 
 Dovg as 151 1-2, Guthiie41 1-2, Dickinson 1 1-2* 
 Huntei M5. Johnson 12, Lane 9 1-2, Davis 1. 
 
 Whole number of votes 252. No choice being 
 made, the Convention proceeded to the 
 
 TWENTY-SIXTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont— Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 7, Guthrie 234, Hunter 234, 
 
 Davis 1. 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. 
 Connecticut— Douglas 334, Guthrie 234. 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2. Guthrie 434, Lane 34. 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 934, Guthrie 12)4, Hunter 
 
 2H, Lane 2)4. 
 Delaware— Hunter 2. 
 Maryland— Douglas 4, Hunter 4, Lane 1. 
 Virginia— Hunter 14. 
 North Carolina— Dickinson 10. 
 Arkansas— Dickinson 1. 
 Missouri— Louglas 4)4. Guthrie 434. 
 Tennessee — Douglas 1, Johnson 11. 
 Kentucky — Guthrie 12. 
 
 'hio— Douglas 23. 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 Michigan— Douglas 6. 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 Towa— Douglas 4. 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3, Lane 1. 
 California— Dickinson 1, Lane 3. 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 
 Total number of votes cast, 252— Douglas 15134. 
 Guthrie 4134, Dickinson 12, Hunter 25, Johnson 12, 
 Lane 9, Davis 1. So there was no choice. 
 
 Mr. Brown, of North Carolina, in casting the vote 
 of North Carolina on this ballot, said she would 
 vote for that distinguished statesman, incorruptible 
 patriot, and National Democrat, Daniel sf. Dickin- 
 son, of New York. 
 
 The Convention then proceeded to take the 
 
 TWENTY-SEVENTH VOTE FOB PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont — Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 7, Guthrie 234, Hunter 234, 
 
 Davis 1. 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. 
 Connecticut— Douglas 334, Guthrie 234. 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2, Guthrie 4!^, Lane 34. 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 934, Guthrie 1234, Hunter 
 
 2)4. Lane 2^. 
 Delaware — Hunter 2. 
 Maryland— Douglas 4, Hunter 4. 
 Virginia— Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 North Carolina— Dickinson 10. 
 Arkansas— Dickinson 1. 
 Missouri— Douglas 434, Guthrie 434. 
 Tennessee— Douglas 1, Johnson 11. 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 Michigan— Douglas 6. 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5, 
 Iowa— Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3, Johnson 1. 
 California— Guthrie 1, Dickinson 1, Lane 2. 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 
 Total vote 252— Douglas 15134, Guthrie 4234, Dick- 
 inson 12, Hunter 25, Johnson 12, Lane 8, Davis 1. 
 No choice, and the Convention proceeded to the 
 
 TWENTY-EIGHTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont— Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 7, Guthrie 234, Hunter 234, 
 
 Davis 1. 
 Rhode Island— Dougjas 4. 
 Connecticut— Douglas 334, Guthrie 2%. 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2, Guthrie 434, Lane 34. 
 Pennsylvania -Douglas 9)4, Guthrie 13, Hunter 2% 
 
 Lane 2. 
 Delaware— Hunter 2. 
 
82 
 
 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Maryland— Douglas -1, Hunter 4. 
 Virginia— Douglas L. Hunter H. 
 
 North Carolina— Dickinson 10. 
 
 Arkansas — Dickinson 1. 
 
 Missouri— Douglas 4>£, Guthrie 414. 
 
 Tennessee— Douglas 1, Johnson 11. 
 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois — Douglas 11, 
 
 Michigan— Douglas 6. 
 
 u iscohsin— Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa— Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3, Johnson 1. 
 
 California— Dickinson 1%, Lane 2X. 
 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 
 Total vote 252— Douglas 151)^, Guthrie 42, Dickin 
 son 12^, Hunter 25, Johnson 12, Lane 8, Davis 1, 
 No choice, and the Convention proceeded to the 
 
 TWENTY-NINTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts Douglas 7, Guthrie 2 1-2, Hun 
 
 ter 2 1-2, Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 N w York Dougias 35. 
 
 New Jn-sey Douglas 2, Guthrie 41-2, Lanel-2 
 
 Pennsylvania Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 13, Hun 
 
 ter 2 1-2. Lane 2. 
 
 Delaware Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland Douglas 4, Hunter 4. 
 
 Virginia Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 
 North Carolina Dickinson 10. 
 
 Arkansas Dickinson 1. 
 
 Missouri Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennessee Douglas 1 , Johnson 11. 
 
 Kentucky Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio Douglas 28. 
 
 Indiana Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin Doutflas 5. 
 
 Iowa Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota Douglas 3, Johnson 1, 
 
 California Dickinson 2, Lane 2. 
 
 Oregon Lane 3. 
 
 Douglas 151 1-2, Guthrie 42, Dickinson 13, Hun 
 ter 25, Johnson 12, Lane 7 i-2, Davis 1. 
 
 Total vote 252. No choice, and the Convention 
 proceeded to the 
 
 THIRTIETH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts Douglas 7, Guthrie 2 1-2, Hunter 
 
 2 1-2, Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 New York Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey Douglas 2, Guthrie 4 1-2, Lane 1-2 
 
 Pennsylvania Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 15, Huntei 
 
 Delaware Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland Douglas 4, Hunter 4. 
 
 Virginia Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 
 North Carolina Dickinson 10. 
 
 Arkansas Dickinson 1. 
 
 Missouri Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennessee Douglas 1, Guthrie 1, Johnson 10. 
 
 Kentucky Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa Douglas 4, 
 
 Minnesota Douglas 3, Johnson 1. 
 
 California Dickinson 2, Lane 2. 
 
 Oregon Lane 3. 
 
 Douglas 151 1-2, Guthri- 45, Dickinson 13, Hun" 
 ter 25. Johnson 11, Lane 5 1-2, Davis l- 
 
 Total vote 252. No choice, and the Convention 
 proceeded to the 
 
 THIRTY FIRST VOTE FoR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont Do glas 5. 
 
 Massachu-ett* Douglas 7, Guthrie 2 1-2, Hun- 
 ter 2 1-2, Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut Douglas 8 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 New York .... Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey Douglas 2, Guthrie 4 1-2, Lane 1-2. 
 
 Pennsylvania Douglas 9 12, Guthrie i7 1-2. 
 
 De aware. Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland Douglas 4, Hunter 4. 
 
 Virginia Doug as 1, Hunter 14. 
 
 North Carolina Hunter 10. 
 
 Arkansas Dickinson 1. 
 
 Missouri Douglas 4 12, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennessee Douglas 1. Guthrie 1 Johnson 10. 
 
 Kentucky Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio Douglas 23 
 
 Indiana Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota Douglas 3, Johnson 1. 
 
 California Dickinson 2, Lane 2. 
 
 Oregon Lane 3, 
 
 Douglas 1511-2, Guthrie 47 1-2, Di kinson 3, 
 
 Hunter 32 1-2, Johnson 11, Lane 5 1-2, Davis 1. 
 Total vote 252. No choice, and the Convention 
 
 proceeded to the 
 
 THIRTY-SECOND VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts Douglas 7, Guthrie 2)£, Hunter 
 
 2%, Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut Douglas 3^. Guthrie 2£. 
 
 New York Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey.... Douglas 2, Guthrie 4>2, Lane y 2 , 
 
 Pennsylvania Douglas 93 2 , Guthrie 17%. 
 
 Delaware Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland Douglas 4, Hunter 4. 
 
 Virginia Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 
 \orth Carolina Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 
 Arkansas Dickinson 1. 
 
 Missouri Douglas 4%, Guthrie 4%. 
 
 Tennessee Douglas 1, Guthrie 1, Johnson 10. 
 
 Kentucky Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio Douglas 23 
 
 Indiana Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa Diuglas4. 
 
 Minnesota Douglas 3, Johnson 1. 
 
 California Dickinson 2, Lane 2. 
 
 Oregon Lane 3. 
 
 Douglas 152 >o, Guthrie 47>^, Dickinson 3, Hun 
 ter 22i, Johnson 11, Lane 14)£. Davis 1. 
 
 Total vote 252. No choice, and the Convention 
 proceeded to the 
 
 THIRTY-THIRD VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts Douglas 7, uGthrie 2%, Hunter 
 
 2i,Davisl. 
 
Proceedings at 
 
 Charleston. 
 
 83 
 
 Rhode Island Douglas 4. 
 
 Con' ecticut Douglas a, 1 ,, Guthrie 2)4. 
 
 New York Dougla-, 85. 
 
 Now Jersey Douglas 2, Guthrie 4»a, Lane J£. 
 
 Pennsylvania Douglas 9 1-2, (Juthrie 17 1-2. 
 
 Delaware Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland Douglas 4, Hunter 4. 
 
 Virginia Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 
 North Carolina Douglas 1, Lane9. 
 
 Arkansas Dickinson 1. 
 
 Missouri Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennessee Douglas 1. Guthrie 1, Johnson 10. 
 
 Kentucky Guthrie 12. 
 
 Uhio Douglas 2J. 
 
 Indiana Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois Douglas 11 
 
 Michigan Dougias 6. 
 
 Wisconsin Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota Douglas 3, Johnson 1. 
 
 California Dickinson 2, Lane 2. 
 
 Oregon Lane 3. 
 
 Douglas 152 1-2, Guthrie 47 1-2, Dickinson 3, 
 Hunter -2 1-2, Johnson II, Lane 14>$, Davis 1. 
 
 Total vote 252. No choice, and the Convention 
 pruceeded to the 
 
 Vermont Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts Douglas 7, Guthrie 2%, Hunter 
 
 2j.„ Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut Douglas 3*4, Guthrie 2%. 
 
 Now York Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey Douglas 2, Guthrie 4 l 4, Lane >«. 
 
 Pennsylvania Douglas oy 2 , Guthrie 17*. 
 
 Delaware Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland Douglas 4. Hunter 4. 
 
 Virginia Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 
 North Caroliia Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 
 Arkansas Dickinson 1. 
 
 Missouri Douglas 4*, Guthrie 41- 
 
 Teni.essee Douglas I, Guthrie 1, Johnson 10. 
 
 Kentucky Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota Douglas 3, Johnson 1. 
 
 California Dickinson 4. 
 
 Orrgon Lane 3. 
 
 Douglas 152*, Guthrie 47*, Dickinson 5, Hunter 
 22*, Johnson 11, Lane 12*, Davis 1. 
 
 Total number no votes 252. No choice. 
 
 THIRTY-FOURTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire Douglas 5. 
 
 Mr. Krum, of Missouri. Mr. President, I rise to a privileged question. My 
 attention has been called to the proceedings of the City Council of Charles- 
 ton in respect to the Hall occupied by this Convention. The very magnani- 
 mous and liberal action of the Council seems to render it proper that it 
 should meet with an appropriate response from this Convention. I,therefore r 
 move the adoption of the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the thanks of the Convention be returned to the City 
 Council of Charleston for the liberal appropriation made by said Council to 
 defray the expense of the Hall of the South Carolina Institute, in which the 
 sessions of this Convention have been held. 
 
 The resolution was unanimously adopted. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Ashe, of North Carolina, the Convention then took a 
 r ecess till 5 o'clock P. M. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The Convention re-assembled at 5 o'clock, and the roll of States was at 
 once called for the thirty-fifth ballot, with the following result : 
 
 THIRTVFIFTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont— Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 6X, Guthrie 3%, Hunter 2, 
 
 Davis 1. 
 Rhode Tsland— Douglas 4. 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3>£, Guthrie 2M. 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2, Guthrie 4}<, Lane %. 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9>£, Guthrie 17^. 
 Delaware— Hunter 2. 
 Maryland— Douglas!, Hunter 4. 
 Virginia— Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 North Carolina— Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 Arkansas— Dickinson 1. 
 
 Mr. G-ittings, of Maryland, moved that after next ballot, the Convention 
 adjourn to meet in the city of Baltimore on the first Monday of June next. 
 
 Mr. Ludlow, of New York, raised the question of order, that the motion 
 was not in order while the Convention was in the execution of its order, 
 adopted under the previous question. 
 
 Mr. Randall, of Pennsylvania, wanted to address the Convention, but 
 wa- decided to be out of order. 
 
 Missouri— Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 'I ennesee — Douglas 1, Johnson 11. 
 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan— Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa— Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota — Douglas 3, Johnson 1. 
 
 California — Dickinson 3 1-2. Lane 1-2, 
 
 Oregon — Lane 3. 
 
 Whole No. of votes 252— Douglas 152, Guthrie 47J^ 
 Dickinson 4%, Hunter 22, Johnson 12, Lane 13, 
 Davis 1. No election. 
 
84 
 
 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 The President decided that a motion to name a time and place of meet- 
 ing was, by the rules and practice of the House of Representatives, 
 always in order. 
 
 Mr. John Cochran, of New York, said the motion to fix the time of 
 adjournment was a privileged question, but when the matter of place was 
 added, the question became one not of privilege. 
 
 Mr. Gittings said, at the suggestion of gentlemen around him, he would 
 withdraw the motion, to renew it at some subsequent time. 
 
 The thirty- sixth vote was then taken and announced as follows : 
 
 THIRTY-SIXTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglaso. 
 
 Vermont— Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 6, Guthrie 4, Hunter 2, 
 
 Davis 1. 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2, Guthrie 4 1-2, Lane 1-2. 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 17X. 
 Delaware— Hunter 2. 
 Maryland— Douglas 4, Hunter. 4. 
 Virginia— Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 "North Carolina— Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 Arkansas— Dickinson 1. 
 
 Missouri— Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennessee — Douglas 1. Johnson 11. 
 
 Kentucky — Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 
 I nrliaua— Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan— Douglas 6, 
 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5, 
 
 Iowa— Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3, Johnson 1. 
 
 California— Dickinson 3 A, Lane A. 
 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 
 Whole No. of votes 252— Douglas 151 A-, Guthrie 48, 
 Dickinson 4^', Hunter 22. Johnson 12, l.ane li, 
 Davis 1. Required for an election. 252. No choice. 
 
 On the above vote Arkansas cast one vote for Breckinridge. 
 
 Mr. Beck, of Kentucky, appealed to the gentleman to withdraw that vote. 
 He assured him it was not the wish of Mr. Breckinridge to appear here as a 
 candidate in opposition to the distinguished gentleman from Kentucky, whose 
 name had been before the Convention from the first. 
 
 The vo u e was accordingly withdrawn and cast for Dickinson. 
 
 Mr. Ewing, of Tennessee, said the delegation from the State of Tennessee 
 had, with one exception, cast their vote steadily for a gifted son of that 
 State. Without communication with their candidate, however, a majority 
 of the delegation had come to the conclusion to withdraw their vote from him, 
 and they hoped a nomination would now be made. 
 
 The Convention then proceeded to a 37th vote with the following result : 
 
 THIRTY-SEVENTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 M aine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 Vermont — Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 6, Guthrie 6, Davis 1. 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. 
 Connecticut— I ouglas 3A, Guthrie VA. 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 ■New Jersey— Douglas 2, Guthrie 4% Lane A. 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9 A, Guthne 17A. 
 Delaware— Hunter 2. 
 Maryland— Douglas 4, Guthrie 4- 
 Virginia— Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 North Carolina— Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 Arkansas— Dickinson 1. 
 Missouri— Douglas 4>s, Guthrie 4%. 
 Tennessee— Douglas 1, Gnthrie 10 A, Johnson % 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 Michigan— Douglas 6. 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 Iowa— Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3, Dickinson 1. 
 California— Dickinson 3%. Davis A. 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 Whole No. of votes cast. 252— Douglas 151 A, Guth 
 
 THIRTY-EIGHTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 Vermont— Douglas 5. 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 6, Guthrie 7, 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3A, Guthrie 2A. 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2, Guthrie 4K, Lane -•*,. 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9A, Guthrie 17;*. 
 Delaware— Hunter 2. 
 Maryland— Douglas 4, Guthrie 4. 
 Virginia— Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 North Carolina— u ouglas 1, Lane 9. 
 Arkansas— Dickinson 1. 
 Missouri— Douglas ±A, Guthrie 4^. 
 Tennessee— Douglas 1, Guthrie 11. 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 Michigan— Douglas 6. 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 Iowa— Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3, Dichinson 1. 
 Caliornia— Dickinson 3>£, Lane A. 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 Whole number of votes cast, 252— Douglas 151^, 
 
 rie UA, Dickinson 5>$, Hunter 16. Johnson A, Lane Guthrie 60, Dickinson &A, Hunter 16, Johnson 0, 
 12/^, Davis ly-i. No choice. Lane 13. No choice. 
 
 Mr. Gittings, of Maryland, then desired to renew his motion, that when 
 the Convention adjourns, it adjourn to meet in Baltimore on the first Mon- 
 day in June. 
 
 The President decided the motion out of order, on the ground suggested 
 by Mr. Cochran, when the motion was before made. The motion could be 
 made that when the Convention adjourns, it adjourn to meet on the first 
 
Proceedings at 
 
 Charleston. 
 
 85 
 
 Monday of nex t June, and the place of meeting could be fixed at some 
 subsequent time. 
 
 Mr. Gittings said he would submit his motion in that form ; the onl}' 
 •object he had in making the motion was to enable him to go home to his 
 family. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, moved to lay Mr. Gittings' motion to adjourn on 
 the table, which motion carried, and Mr. Gittings* resolution was laid upon 
 the table. 
 
 The Convention then proceeded to take the 39th vote for President, and 
 the following was the result : 
 
 THIRTT-NINTHVOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine— Douglas a, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont— i»ouglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 6, Guthrie 7. 
 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3>£, Guthrie 2 X A. 
 
 New Vork— Douslas 35. 
 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2, Guthrie 5. 
 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9%, Guthrie 17>£ 
 
 Delaware— Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland— Douglas 4, Guthrie 4. 
 
 Virginia— Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 
 North Carolina— Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 
 Arkansas— ickinson 1. 
 
 Missouri— Douslas 4><, Guthrie 4^ 
 
 Tennessee— Douglas 1, Guthrie 11. 
 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana— Douslas 13. 
 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan— Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin — Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa— Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3. Dickinson I. 
 
 California— Dickinson 3>£, Lane M. 
 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 
 whole N'o of votes 252— Douglas 151 y,, Guthrie 
 36 r<, Dickinson o%. Hunter 16,. Lane 12>£, 
 
 No choice. 
 
 FORTIETH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont— Douglas 5 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 6. Guthrie 7. 
 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3}$, Guthrie 2M. 
 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2. Guthrie 5. 
 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas Sy>, Guthrie 17}£. 
 
 Delaware — Hunter 2 
 
 Maryland— Douglas 4, Guthrie 4. 
 
 Virginia— Douglas 1 Hunter 14. 
 
 North Carolina— Douglas 1. Lane 9. 
 
 Arkansas— Dickinson 1. 
 
 Missouri— Douglas -i%, Guthrie 4><. 
 
 Tennessee— Douslas 1, Guthrie 11. 
 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana— L>ouglas 13. 
 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan — Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa— Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3„ Diekinsonl. 
 
 California— Dickinson 3>£, Lane >£. 
 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 
 v> nole number o' votes 252— Douglas 151 K. Guth- 
 rie 66><. Dickinson 5>£, Hunter 16. Lane 12M. 
 
 No choice. 
 
 FORTY-FIRST VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5. Guthrie 3. 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 Vermont— Douglas 5. 
 Massachusetts — Douglas 6, Guthrie 7, 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. 
 Connecticut— Douglas V/L, Guthrie 2K. 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2. Guthrie 5. 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9}£. Guthrie 17>£, 
 Delaware— Hunter 2 
 Maryland— Douglas 4. Guthrie 4. 
 Virginia— Douslas 1. Hunter 14. 
 North Carolina— Dougla* 1, Lane 9. 
 Arkansas— Dickinson 1. 
 
 ! Missouri— Douslas 4M, Guthrie 4K. 
 
 Tennessee— Douglas 1, Guthrie 11. 
 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12 
 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan— Douglas 6. 
 
 w isconsin— Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa— Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3, Dickinson 1. 
 
 California— Dickinson 3, Lane 1. 
 
 Oregon— Lane 3. 
 
 Whole No. of votes 252— Douglas 151H, Gtrthrie 
 36>£. Dickinson 5, Hunter 16, Lane 13. 
 
 No choice. 
 
 FORTY-SECOND VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine- Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 
 Vei mont — Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 6, Guthrie 7. 
 
 Rhode I-land— Douglas 4 
 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 New York — Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2, Guthrie 5 
 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie IT 1-2. 
 
 Delaware --Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland— Douglas 4, Guthrie 4. 
 
 Virginia— Douglas 1, Huuter 14. 
 
 North Carolina— Douglas 1 Lanefl. 
 
 Arkansas— Dickinson 1. 
 
 Missouri— Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennessee— Douglas 1, Guthrie 11. 
 
 Kentuckv— Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio- Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan — Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin — Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa— Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota — Douglas 3, Diekinson 4. 
 
 California— Dickinson 3, Lanel. 
 
 Orpgon — Lane 3. 
 
 Whole number of votes, 2">2 - Douglas 151 1-2, 
 Guthrie 661-2, Dickinson 5, Hunter 16, Lane 13. 
 
 No choice. 
 
 FORTY-THIRD VOTE F«R PSESIDENT. 
 
 Maine Douglas 5, Guthrie 3, 
 
 New Hampshire Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts Douglas 6, Guthrie 6, Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island Doaglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 21-2. 
 
 New York Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey Douglas 2, Guthrie 5. 
 
 Pennsylvania Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 17 1-2. 
 
 Delaware Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland Douglas 4, Hunter4. 
 
 Virginia Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 
 North Carolina Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 
 Arkansas Dickinson 1. 
 
 Missouri Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennessee Douglas 1. Guthrie 11. 
 
 Kentucky Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana Douglas 13 
 
 Illinois Dougia6 11. 
 
86 
 
 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Michigan Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota Doug;las3 Dickin on 1. 
 
 California Dickinson 3, Lane 1. 
 
 Oiegon ....Lane 3. 
 
 Douglas 151 1-2, Guthrie 65 1-2, Dickinson 5, 
 Hunter 16, Lane 13, Davis 1. 
 
 Whole number of votes 2^2. No choice. 
 
 FORTY-FOURTH VOTE FOR PRE8IDENT. 
 
 Maine .. .Douglas 5. Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermmt Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts Douglas 6. Guthrie 6, Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 New York Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey Douglas 2, Guthrie 5- 
 
 Pennsylvania Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 17 1-2. 
 
 Delaware Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland Doulgas 4. Guthrie 4. 
 
 Virginia Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 
 N >ith Carolina Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 
 A i Kansas Dickinson 1. 
 
 Missouri Douglas 4 1-2. Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Te-nnesee Douglas 1, Guthrie 11. 
 
 Kentucky Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio Douglas 23 
 
 Indiana Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota Douglas 3. Dickinson 1. 
 
 California Dickinson 3, Lane 1. 
 
 Oregon Lane 3. 
 
 Douglas 151 1-2, Guthrie 65 1-2, Dickinson 5, 
 Hunter 16, Lane 13, Davis 1. 
 
 Whole number of votes 252. No choice, and 
 45th vote ordered. 
 
 FORTY-FIFTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine — Douglas 5. Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire — Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont — Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 6, Guthrie 6, Davis 1 
 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. 
 
 <_ onnecticut — Douglas 3£, Guthrie 2>£. 
 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey — Douglas 2. Guthrie 5. 
 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 17 1-2. 
 
 Delawara— Hunter % 
 
 Maryland — Douglas 4, Guthrie 4. 
 
 Virginia — Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 
 North Carolina — Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 
 Arkansas — Dickinson 1 
 
 Missouri — Douglas i y 4, Guthrie 4%. 
 
 Tennessee — Douglas 1, Guthrie 11. 
 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana — Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois — Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan — Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin — Dougias 5. 
 
 Iowa — Douglas 4, 
 
 Minnesota — Douglas 3. D'ckinson 1. 
 
 California — Dickinson 3, Lane 1. 
 
 Oregon — Lane 3. 
 
 Douglas 151>£, Guthrie 65|, Dickinson 5j Hun- 
 ter 16, Lane 13. Davis 1. 
 
 Total vote, 252. No choice, and 4Cth vote or- 
 dered. 
 
 FORTY-SIXTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachustts Douglas 6, Guthrie 6, Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island Douglas 4 
 
 Connecticut Douglas 31-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 New York Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey Douglas 2, Guthrie 5 
 
 Pennsylvania Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 17 1-2. 
 
 Delaware Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland Douglas 4, Guthrie 4. 
 
 Virginia Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 
 North Carolina Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 
 Arkansas Dickinson 1. 
 
 Missouri Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennessee Douglas 1. Guthrie 11. 
 
 Kentucky Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio Douglas 23 
 
 Indiana Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigau Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin Douglas 5. k 
 
 Iowa Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota Douglas 3, Dickinson 1. 
 
 California Dickinson 3, Lane J. 
 
 Oregon Lane 3 
 
 Douglas 151 %, Guthrie 65 l i. Dickinson 5, Hun- 
 ter 16, Lane 13, Davis 1. 
 
 Whole number of votes 252. No choice, and 
 47 th vote ordered. 
 
 F0RTY-8EVENTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts Dougias 6, Guthrie 6, Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 N T ew York Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey Douglas 2, Guthrie 5- 
 
 Pennsylvania Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 17 1-2. 
 
 Delaware Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland Douglas 4. Guthrie 4. 
 
 Virginia Douglas 1, Hunter 14 
 
 North Carolina Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 
 Arkansas Dickinson 1. 
 
 Missouri Douglas 4 1-2. Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennessee Douglas 1, Guthiijll. 
 
 Kentucky Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan Douglas 6, 
 
 Wisconsin Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota Douglas 3, Dickinson 1. 
 
 California Dickinson 3, Lane 1. 
 
 Oregon Lane 3. 
 
 Douglas 151 1-2. Guthrie 65 1-2, Dickinson b, 
 Hunter 16. Lane 13, Davis 1. 
 
 Whol» number of votes, 252 No choice, and 
 48th vote ordered. 
 
 FORTY-EIGHTH VOTE FOB PRESIDENT 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 Jew Hampshire — Douglas 5. 
 Vermont— Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts — Douglas 6, Guthrie 6, Dayisi. 
 Rhode Island — Douglas 4. 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3 I- 2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 New York — Douglas 35. 
 New Jersey — Douglas 2, Guthrie 5. 
 Pennsylvania — Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 17 2-2. 
 Delaware — Hunter 2 
 Maryland — Douglas 4. Guthrie4. 
 Virginia— Dou6las 1, Hunter 14 
 North Carolina— Douglas 1. Laae 9. 
 Arkansas— Dickinson 1. 
 Missouri— Douglas 4 1-2 Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 Tennessee — Douglas 1, Guthrie 11. 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 Indiana — Douglas 13. 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 Michigau— Douglas 6. 
 Wisconsin — Douglas 5. 
 Iowa— Douglas 4. 
 
Proceedings at Charleston. 
 
 87 
 
 Minnesota -Douglas 3, Dickinson 1 
 Califo-ni a— Dickinson 3, Lane 1. 
 Oregon — Lane 3. 
 
 Whole number of votes, 252— Douglas i:>! 1-2 
 Gntlrie 65 1-2, Dickinson 5, Hunter 16, Lane 13. 
 Davis 1 
 
 No choice, and 49th vote ordered. 
 
 FORTY-NINTH VOTB FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 v aine — Douglas 5, Guthrie 3, 
 
 New Hampshire — Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont— D uiglas 5 
 
 Massachusetts — Douglas 6 Guthrie 6 Davis I. 
 
 Rhode Island— D.ragUs 4 
 
 Coun-cM'-ut— D -uglas 3 1-2. Guthrie 2 1 2. 
 
 New York — Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey — D ragtag 2, Guthrie 5 
 
 Pennsylvania — Douglas 9 1-2 ; Guthrie 17 1-2. 
 
 Delaware — Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland— Douglas 4. Cui'iric 4. 
 Virginia— -Donglaa 1. Hunter 14. 
 North Carolina — Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 Arkansas — Lane 1 
 
 Missouri— Douglas 4 12. Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 I Tennessee— Douglas 1. Guthrie 11. 
 Kentucky — Guthrie 12. 
 Ohi. — Douglas 23. 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 Illinois — Douglas 11. 
 Michigan — Douglas 6. 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 Iowa — Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3. Dickinson 1 
 California — Dickinson 3, Lane 1. 
 Oreg-n — Lane 3. 
 
 Whole number of *otes cast, 252 — Douglas 151$, 
 Guthrie 65 1-2, Dickinson 4, Hunter 1C, Lane 14, 
 'Davis 1. No choice. 
 
 A Delegate, from North Carolina, moved that tho Convention adjourn, 
 which motion wis put and lost. 
 
 The Conveation then proceeded to take the 50th vote for President, with 
 the following result : 
 
 FIFTIETH VOTE FOR PRKSIDENT. 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont — D aiglas 5. 
 
 M xsachusetts— Douglas 6, Guthrie 6, Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island — DoujHas 4. 
 
 Connecticut- Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 New Y->rk— Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey — Douglas 2, Guthrie 5. 
 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 17 1-2 
 
 Delawar — Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland — D uglas 4. Guthrie 4. 
 
 Virginia — Douglas 1, Hunter 14 
 
 North Carolina— Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 
 Arkansas — Lane 1 
 
 Missouri— Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tenn^-see— D raglasl, Guthrie II. 
 
 Kentucky — Outhrie 12. 
 
 Ohio — I'ouglas 23. 
 
 Indiana—Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois— Douglas II. 
 
 Michig m— -Douglas fi. 
 
 Wisconsin -D mglas 5. 
 
 Iowa- Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3, Dickinson 1. 
 
 California -Dickinson 3, Lane I. 
 
 Oregon— Lane 8. 
 
 Whole number of votes. 252— Douglas 1511-2 
 Guthrie 65 1-2. Dickinson 4, Hunter 16 
 14, Davis 1. No choice 
 
 FIFTY-FIRST VOTE FOR PRKSIDEXT - 
 
 Maine—Douglas 5. Guthrie 3 . 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont -Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts- -D >uglas 6, Guthrie 6, Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island— Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 New York— D .uglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey- Douglas 2, Guthrie 5 
 
 Pennsylvania-Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 17 1- 
 
 Delaware— Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland -Douglas 4. Guthrie 4. 
 
 Virginia— Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 
 North Carolina — Douglas 1, L .ne 9. 
 
 Arkansas— Lane 1. 
 
 Missouri — Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennessee— Douglas 1, Guthrie 11. 
 
 Keu;ucky- -Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. ; 
 
 Michigan — Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa- Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota-- Douglas 3, Dickinson 1. 
 California— Dickinson 3, Lane 1 
 Oregon--Lane 3 
 
 Total number of votes, 252, Douglas, 15112, 
 Guthrie 16 1-2 Dickinson 4, Hunter 16, Lane 14, 
 Davis 1. No choice. 
 
 FIETY-SECOND VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine — Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire— Douglas 5. 
 iVermont — Douglas 5. 
 
 ! Massachusetts — Douglas 6, Hunter 6, Davis 1. 
 \ Rhode Island — Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3>£, Guthrie 2><. 
 
 New York — Douglas 35. 
 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9%, Guthrie 17%. 
 
 Delaware — Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland — Douglas 4 Guthrie 4. 
 
 Virginia — Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 i North Carolina— Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 [Arkansas — Lane 1. 
 
 Missouri — Douglas 4%, Guthrie V>i % 
 
 Tennessee— Douglas 1, Guthrie 11. 
 
 Kentucky — Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana — Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinoit — Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan — Douglas 6. 
 Lane Wisconsin — Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa — Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota. — Douglas 3, Dickinson 1. 
 
 California — Dickinson 3, Lane 1. 
 
 'Oregon — Lane 3. 
 
 i Whole number of votes, 252. Douglas 151 K> 
 
 Guthrie 65^. Dickins n 4. Hunter 16, Lane 14* 
 j Davis 1. No choice. 
 
 FIFTY-THIRD VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine — Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 New Hampshire — Douglas 5. 
 Vermont — Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 6, Hunter 6. Davis 1. 
 I Rhode Island — Douglas 4 
 i Connecticut — Douglas 3^, Guthrie 2i. 
 I New York — Douglas 35. 
 jNew Jersey — Douglas 2, Guthrie 5. 
 i Pennsylvania— Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 171-2. 
 (Delaware— Hunter 2. 
 j Maryland— Douglas 4, Guthrie 4. 
 [Virginia— Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 jNorth Carolina — Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 ' A rkansas — Lane 1. 
 
 Missouri— Douglas 41-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 Tennesee— Douglas 1, Guthrie 11. 
 
83 
 
 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 
 Oh.o — Douglas 23. 
 
 In liana. — Doii&las 13. 
 
 Ttttaois— Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan— Douglas R. 
 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa — Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3, Dickinson I. 
 
 California — Dickinson 3, Lane 1. 
 
 Oregon — Lane 3. 
 
 Tota vote 252. Douglas 1511-2. Guthrie 65}£ 
 Dickinsou 4, Hunter 16 Lane 14, Davis 1. 
 
 No choice. 
 
 FIFTY-FOURTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine — Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire — Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont — Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 6, Hunter 0, Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Isiand — Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut- Douglas 3 1-2 Guthrie 2 L-2. 
 
 New YorK — Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey — Douglas 2. Guthrie 5. 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas Q 1-2. Suthrie IT 1-2. 
 Delaware — Hunter 2. 
 Maryland— Douglas 4, Guthrie 4. 
 Virginia— Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 North Carolina— Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 Arkansas — Lane 1. 
 
 Missouri — Douglas, 4 1-2, Hunter 4 1-2. 
 Tennessee— Douglas 1. Guthrie 11. 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 Ohio— Douglas 23. 
 Indiana — Douglas 13. 
 Illinois — Douglas 11. 
 Michigan — Douglas H. 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 Iowa — Douglas -t. 
 
 ■tinnesota— Douglas 3. Dick'nson 1. 
 California- Dickinson 1, Lane 3. 
 Oregon — Lane 3. 
 
 Whole number of votes cast, 252— Douglas 151 
 1-2, Guthrie 61, Dickinson 2, Hunter ^o.^a Lane 16 
 Davis 1. No cboice. 
 
 The 
 
 Mr. Green, of North Carolina, moved that the Convention adjourn, 
 question was taken, and the motion did not prevail. 
 
 The Convention then proceeded to the 55th ballot for President, with the 
 folio wing result : 
 
 FIFTY-FIFTH VOTE FOR PRES1DUNT. 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guthrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire — Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont — Douglas 5 
 
 Massachu-etts— Douglas 6, Guthrie 6, Davis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island — Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 New York— Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2. Guthrie 5. 
 
 Pennsylvania — Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 17 1-2. 
 
 De'aware — Hunter i. 
 
 Maryland — Douglas 4. Guthrie 4. 
 
 Virginia— Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 
 Norch Carolina— Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 
 Arkan-as — Lane 1. 
 
 Missouri - Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2, 
 
 Tennessee — Dong'as 1, Guthrie 11. 
 
 Kentucky — Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio— Douglas 23 
 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois— Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan — Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin — Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa — Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3, Dickinson 1. 
 
 California — Dickinson 3, Land 1. 
 
 Oregon — Lane 3. 
 
 Whole number of votes cast. 252 — Douglas 151^. 
 Guthrie 65 1-2, Dickinson 4, Hunter 16, Lane 14, 
 Davis I. No choice. 
 
 FIFTY-SIXTH VOTB FOR PRESIDENT - 
 
 Maine— Douglas 5, Guihrie 3. 
 
 New Hampshire — Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont— Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts— Douglas 6, Guthrie 6, Di vis 1. 
 
 Rhode Island — Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut— Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 Mew York — Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey— Douglas 2, Guthrie 5. 
 
 Pennsylvania— Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 17 \-2. 
 
 Delaware— Hunter 2 
 
 Maryland — Douglas 4, Guthrie 4. 
 
 Virginia— Douglas I, Hunter 14. 
 
 North Carolina— Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 
 Arkansas— Lane 1. 
 
 Tennessee --Douglas I, Guthrie 11. 
 
 Kentucky— Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio- Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana— Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois— Douglas II. 
 
 Michigan— Douglas 6. 
 
 Wisconsin— Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa- --Douglas 4. 
 
 Minnesota— Douglas 3, Dickinson 1. 
 
 < 'alifornia— Dickinson • , Lane 1. 
 
 Jregon — Lane 3. 
 
 Whole nuiiber of votes 252. Douglas 151 1-2. 
 Guthrie 65 1-2, Dickinson 4, Hunter 16. Lane 14, 
 Davis 1. No choice. 
 
 FIFTY-SEVENTH VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. 
 
 Maine Douglas 5. Ou'hrie 3. 
 
 Sew Hampshire Douglas 5. 
 
 Vermont Douglas 5. 
 
 Massachusetts Douglas 6, Guthrie 6, Davisl. 
 
 Rhode Island Douglas 4. 
 
 Connecticut Douglas 3 1-2, Guthrie 2 1-2. 
 
 New York Douglas 35. 
 
 New Jersey Douglas 2. Guthrie 5. 
 
 Pennsylvania Douglas 9 1-2, Guthrie 17 1-2. 
 
 Delaware Hunter 2. 
 
 Maryland Douglas 4, Guthrie 4. 
 
 Virginia Douglas 1, Hunter 14. 
 
 North Carolina Douglas 1, Lane 9. 
 
 Arkansas Lane 1. 
 
 Missouri Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Tennessee Douglas 1, Guthrie 11. 
 
 Kentucky Guthrie 12. 
 
 Ohio Douglas 23. 
 
 Indiana Douglas 13. 
 
 Illinois Douglas 11. 
 
 Michigan Douglas 6 
 
 Wisconsin Douglas 5. 
 
 Iowa Douglas 4 
 
 Minnesota Douglas 3, Dickinson 1. 
 
 California Dickinson 3, Lane 1 
 
 Oregon Lane 3. 
 
 D>uglas 151 1-2, Guthrie 65 1-2, Dickinson 4. 
 Hunter 16, Lane 14, Davis 1. 
 
 Whole number of votes 252. Necessary to a 
 choice, under the decision of the Convention, 202. 
 No choice having been marie, 
 
 Missouri— Douglas 4 1-2, Guthrie 4 1-2. 
 
 Mr. Ashe, of North Carolina, moved that the Convention 
 upon that motion he called for a vote by States. 
 
 adjourn, and 
 
Proceedings ot Charleston. 89 
 
 Mr. Gittings, of Maryland, moved that when they adjourn, it be to meet 
 at Baltimore, the first day of June next, and he called for a vote by States. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Montgomery, the motion of Mr. Gittings was laid upon 
 the table. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. Ashe's motion to adjourn, and it 
 resulted as follows : — Yeas 148, nays 100. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned till Thursday morning at 10 o'clock. 
 
 TENTH JDj^^T. 
 
 Thursday, May 3, 1860. 
 
 The Convention was called to order by the President at 10 o'clock, A. M. 
 
 Prayer was offered by the Rev. Mr. Micklejr. 
 
 On motion, the rending of yesterday's Journal was dispensed with. 
 
 Mr. Rtssell, of Virginia, rose in his place and offered the following reso- 
 lution, viz : 
 
 Resolved, That when this Convention adjourn to-day, it be adjourned to 
 re-assemble at Baltimore, Maryland, on Monday, the 18th day of June next, 
 and that it be respectfully recommended to the Democratic party of the sev- 
 eral States to make provision for supplying all vacancies in their respective 
 delegations to this Convention when it shall re- assemble. 
 
 Mr. Atkins, of Tennessee, moved to amend the resolution by striking out 
 "Baltimore," and inserting Philadelphia. 
 
 Mr. Mason, of Kentucky, raised a point of order, that the preceding ques- 
 tion was the nomination of President and Vice President of the United States. 
 
 Mr. Russell then moved that the pending question be laid upon the table. 
 And upon this motion, 
 
 Mr. Mason called for a vote by States. 
 • The vote to lay on the table was then had, and the following is the result: 
 
 
 Yeas. 
 ... 5 
 ... 5 
 5 
 
 Nays. 
 3 
 
 
 
 by* 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 North Carolina... 
 South Carolina... 
 
 Georgia 
 
 Florida \ 
 
 Alabama 
 
 Louifiana . 
 
 Mississippi . 
 
 Texas 
 
 Arkansas 
 
 Missouri 
 
 Tennessee 
 
 Kentucky 
 
 Yeas. 
 .. 4 
 ... 
 ... 
 ... 
 .. 
 ... 
 ... 
 .... 
 ... 1 
 .. 4| 
 ■• 4* 
 
 Nays 
 6 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 12 
 
 Ohio 
 
 Yeas. 
 23 
 
 Nays 
 
 
 New Hampshire . 
 
 Indiana 
 
 13 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 Massachusetts 
 
 Rhode Island 
 
 ... iy* 
 
 ... 4 
 6 
 
 Michigan 
 
 Wisconsin 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 ... 4 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 Sew York 
 
 New Jersey 
 
 Pennsylvania 
 
 D • laware 
 
 Maryland . 
 
 Virginia 
 
 .. 35 
 
 .. 7 
 
 27 
 
 
 
 ... 4 
 ...14!^ 
 
 Minnesota 
 
 California . . . 
 Oregon 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 199 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 3 
 
 51 
 
 So the motion to lay on the table was carried. 
 
 Mr. Russell's resolution to adjourn was then called up and the reading 
 commenced, when several gentlemen endeavored to get the floor. 
 
 Mr. Peck, of Michigan, raised a point of order, that nothing would be now 
 in order until the reading of the resolution was completed. 
 
 The reading of the resolution was completed, and Hon. D. L. Seymour, of 
 New York, offered an amendment that the word New York be substituted 
 for Baltimore. 
 
 Mr. Randall, of Pennsylvania, raised a point of order, and the President 
 deemed Mr. Randall out of order in raising the point. 
 
 Several members then raised points of order. 
 
 Mr. Randall, of Pennsylvania, moved to amend the resolution by striking 
 out the time and place, and inserting the 4th day of Julv, at Independence 
 H,H, Philadelphia. 
 
 Mr. Ludlow, of New York, called for the previous question. 
 
 The demand for the previous question was seconded. 
 
 "The President then stated the question then before the Convention. 
 
Yeas. Nays 
 
 North Carolina 10 
 
 South Carolina 
 
 Georgia 
 
 Florida 
 
 Alabama 
 
 Louisiana 
 
 Mississippi. 
 
 TVxas 
 
 Arkansas 1 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 Ohio ^3 
 
 Indiana H 
 
 Illinois II 
 
 Michigan 6 
 
 Wisconsin . 5 
 
 Towa 4 
 
 Minnesota 3r i 
 
 California 4 
 
 Oregon 3 
 
 194* 55 
 
 90 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 The first question, being on Mr. Seymour's amendment, was taken, and 
 the amendment was lost. 
 
 The next question in order was the amendment offered by Mr. Atkins, of 
 Tennessee, and a vote was called for by States. 
 
 The roll of States was called, and the following is the result of the vote : 
 Ayes 86)£, nays 166. 
 
 So the amendment was lost. 
 
 And the question then was upon the original Virginia resolution to adjourn 
 to meet at Baltimore on the 18th day of June, 1860, and the State of New 
 York called for a vote by States. 
 
 The roll of States was called, and the following is the result of the vote : 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 
 Maine . 5 3 
 
 New Hampshire 5 
 
 Vermont 5 
 
 Massachusetts -.10 3 
 
 Rhode Island 4 
 
 Connecticut fi 
 
 New York 35 
 
 New Jersey 2 5 
 
 Pennsylvania _.23J 3? 
 
 Delaware {Missouri « 3 
 
 Maryland 5 3 ITennessee 7 5 
 
 Virginia 14j | 'Kentucky 12 
 
 So the Virginia resolution was adopted. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, moved that the Convention do now adjourn. 
 
 Mr. Miles, of Maryland, hoped that arrangements would be made for 
 printing the official proceedings of the Convention. 
 
 The President asked permission, before putting the motion to adjourn, to 
 address a few words to the Convention, and he proceeded as follows : 
 
 I desire first to say, and in saying it to bear testimony to your constituents 
 and to the people of the United States, that considering the numerousness of 
 this assembly, and the important interests involved in deliberations and the 
 emotions thus naturally awakened in your bosoms, — considering all this, I say 
 your sessions have been distinguished by order, by freedom from personalities, 
 by decorum, and by an observance of parliamentary method and law. In 
 competition for the floor, and in the zeal of gentlemen to promote their re- 
 spective opinions by motions or objections to motions, in the lassitude of pro- 
 tracted sittings, occasions have occurred of apparent, but only apparent con- 
 fusion. But there has b^en no real confusion, no deliberate violation of order. 
 I am better able than any other person to speak knowingly on this point, and 
 to speak impartially, and I say it with pride and pleasure, one thing espe- 
 cially proper for me to say from the Chair. I desire further to say, for a n d 
 in behalf of myself, that I also know by knowledge of my own heart and 
 conscience, that in the midst of circumstances always arduous, and in some 
 respects peculiar embarrassments, it has been my steady purpose and con- 
 stant endeavor to discharge impartially the duties of the Chair. If, in the 
 execution of the duties, it shall have happened to me to address any gentle- 
 man abruptly, or not to have duly recognized him, I beg pardon of him an 1 
 of the Convention. Finally, permit me to remind you, gentlemen, that not 
 merely the fortunes of the great constitutional party which you represent, but 
 the fortunes of th,e Constitution also are at stake on the acts of this Conven- 
 tion. During a period now of eighty- four years, we, the States of this 
 Union, have been associated together, in one form or another, for objects of 
 domestic order and foreign security. We have traversed side by side the 
 wars of the Revolution and other and later wars, — through peace and war, 
 through sunshine and storm. We have held our way manfully on until 
 w e have come to be a great Republic. Shall we cease to be such ? I will 
 not believe it. I will not believe that the noble work of our fathers is to be 
 
Proceedinsrs at Charleston. 91 
 
 'O 
 
 shattered — that this great Republic is to be but a name, but a history of a 
 mighty people once existing, but existing no longer save as a shadowy mem- 
 ory or a monumental ruin by the side of the pathway of time. I fondly 
 trust that we shall continue to march on forever, the hope of nations, as well 
 in the old world as in the new, like the bright orbs of the firmament which 
 roll on without rest, because bound for eternity — without haste, because pre- 
 destined for eternity. So may it be with this glorious Confederacy of States. 
 I pray you, therefore, gentlemen, in your return to your constituents, and to 
 the bosoms of your families, to take with you as your guiding thought the 
 sentiment of the Constitution and the Union, and with this I cordially bid 
 you farewell until the prescribed re-assembling of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Bbent, in behalf of the city of Baltimore, tendered the hospitalities of 
 that city to the members of the Convention. 
 
 The motion of Mr. Stuart to adjourn was then put, and the Convention 
 adjourned to meet in the city of Baltimore, on the 18th day of June, 1860. 
 
rmoctatic |Utional Convention, 
 
 I860, 
 AT CHARLESTON AND BALTIMORE. 
 
 PROCEEDINGS AT BALTIMORE 
 
 JUNE 18 — 23. 
 
 first m±-^. 
 
 Monday, June 18, I860. 
 
 The National Democratic Convention, in accordance with the order of 
 adjournment adopted at Charleston, re-assembled in the city of Baltimore, 
 on the 18th day of June, 1860. 
 
 The Convention assembled at the Front Street Theater, the place selected 
 for the holding thereof, at 10 o'clock A. M. 
 
 The President, Hon. Caleb Cushino, directed the Secretary to call the roll 
 of States, in order to ascertain if the delegates were present. 
 
 On the calling of the roll, the following States were found to be fully repre- 
 sented, viz : Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, 
 New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Missouri, Ohio, 
 Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, California, Oregon. 
 
 Connecticut was represented in part, there being some misunderstanding as 
 to the hour of meeting. The Chairman of the delegation stated that the del- 
 egation would all be here by 12 o'clock. 
 
 Pennsylvania was represented with but two exceptions. 
 
 Two delegates were present from Delaware. 
 
 When the State of South Carolina was called, the Chair directed that only 
 those States be called which were present at the adjournment of the Con- 
 vention at Charleston ; consequently, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Ala- 
 bama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, were not called. 
 
 Subsequently, on a call of the States that were not represented in full, 
 Connecticut and Kentucky were found to be fully represented. 
 
 At eleven o'clock A. M., the Pbesident said : 
 
 Gentlemen of the Convention — The standing hour of adjournment has 
 already passed. The Chair has been informed, however, that some misappre- 
 hension existed upon that point, and that some gentlemen supposed the hour 
 of adjournment to be noon, whereas, in fact, it was ten o'clock A. M. In view 
 of that uncertainty as to the understanding of members, the Chair will, in the 
 first place, direct the Secretary to call the roll of States, in order to ascertain 
 
y± Democratic National Convention. 
 
 whether delegates are present, and after that, if they are present, will proceed 
 to call the Convention to order for the purposes of business. Each Chairman, 
 as his State is called, will be good enough to respond upon the question of 
 fact whether his delegation be cr be not present. 
 
 Mr. Saulsbury, of Delaware. I understand that a portion of our delegation 
 are unable to gain admission to the hall, from ihe fact that they have no tick- 
 ets. I do not know what has been the order of this adjourned Convention in 
 reference to issuing tickets, but I understand that some of the members are 
 outside wishing admission who cannot get in, being refused by the doorkeeper. 
 They cannot obtain tickets. I do not understand who issues tickets to this 
 Convention. I would like the Chair to indicate by what authority tickets are 
 issued, and how delegates may gain admission to the floor. 
 
 The President. The Chair will inform the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. 
 Saulsbury) that, according to the usage established at Charleston, the tickets 
 of the delegates were prepared in packages to be delivered to the chairmen of 
 the respective delegations. 
 
 Mr. Howard, of Tennessee. I desire to make a m« tion in regard to the 
 seats which I think will settle the matter. It is this : that the President — 
 A Delegate. The Convention is not in order. 
 
 The President. The Convention has not been called to order. The Secre- 
 tary will again call the roll of the States reported as not fully represented. 
 The Secretary called the States aforesaid, and they were repotted now full. 
 The President then called the Convention to order, stating that the hour 
 for opening had already passed, the reason for such postponement being that 
 there was a misunderstanding as to the hour. Some having thought that 
 noon was the appointed time, whereas ten o'clock was the time. He announced 
 that the Convention would be opened with prayer. 
 
 The opening prayer, by Rev. John McCron, was delivered as follows : 
 Thou, who sittest upon the circle of the earth and observest the children 
 of men — in whom our fathers trusted and wtre not confounded — by whose 
 gracious assistance they wrenched the liberties of these confederated common- 
 wealths from the iron grasp < f unsympathizing power — to Thee we offer the 
 grateful homage of our hearts and lips for the glorious inheritance which they 
 have bequeathed to us. "Our lines are fal'en to us in pleasant places — yea, 
 we have a goodly heritage." We recognize Thy hand in the national blessings 
 we enjoy, and we pray Tnee to accept the praises that we bring, for a little 
 one has now become a thousand and commands the admiration of the world. 
 
 And we pray Thee, God, that the compact Thou hast blessed may be 
 perpetuated in all its integrity and beauty by the cement of Thy favor, and in 
 the shadow of the impenetrable shield of the guardianship of Omnipotence. 
 To this end we beseech Thee to give us the wisdom that cometh from above, 
 so that we may always place the administration of national affairs in hands 
 that are pure and competent to discharge the obligations involved in the 
 trust. 
 
 And as the waters of the political deep are agitated by the rising tempest 
 of seetional discord, give the spirit of a large and liberal forbearance to every 
 one, that '' peace may be within our walls and prosperity within our palaces." 
 May the hatchet of strife be buried and the damps of its sepulchre destroy its 
 temper and corrode its edge, and the calumet of fraternal peace pass contin- 
 ually from hand to hand throughout the States and Territories of our beloved 
 Confederacy. 
 
 And as this Convention has met to consider the interests vital to our coun- 
 try, and to select from their fellow-citizens candidates for Executive authority, 
 give the healthful spirit of thy grace, that the result may redound to Thy 
 honor and to the welfare of the land of our love. Say, in Thy mercy, "Land 
 of the Pilgrim, may thy glory brighten ! Land of Washington, may thy 
 freedom be eternal ! Land of Charity, may Thy hand never lack the ire ins 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 95 
 
 l o 
 
 to gratify thy benevolent desires! May thy soil never be trodden by the foot 
 of an invader, nor the walls of thy hamlets echo the war-whoop of conquest.'' 
 
 Our Father, who art in Heaven, hallowed be thy Name. Thy kingdom 
 come; Thy will be done on eaith as it is in Heaven ; give us this day our 
 daily bread ; forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them who trespa-s against 
 us ; lead us not into temptation, but d> liver us from evil; for thine is the 
 kingdom, the power and glory, forever. Amen. 
 
 At the conclusion of the prayer, Mr. Clshing proceeded to address the 
 Convention as fellows: 
 
 Gentlemen of the Convention : — Peinrt me, in the first place, to congratu- 
 late > ou upon your being re-assembled here for the discharge of your import- 
 ant duties in the interests of the Democratic party of the United States, and I 
 beg leave, in the second jlace, to communicate to the Convention the state of 
 the various branches of its business, us they i.ow ctme up for consideration 
 before you. 
 
 Prior to the adjournment of the Convention, two principal subjects of action 
 were belore it. One, the adoption of the doctrinal resolutions constituting the 
 platform 0/ the Convention ; the other, voting upon the question of the nomi- 
 nation of a candidate for the Presidency. 
 
 In the course of the discussion of the question of a platform, the Convention 
 adopted a vote, the effect of which was to amend the report of the majority of 
 the Committee on the Platform by substituting the report ot the minority of 
 that Committee; and after the adoption of that motion, and the substitution 
 of the minority for the majority report, a division was called for upon the 
 several resolutions constituting that platform, being five in number. The 1st, 
 3d, 4th, and 5th of those resolutions were adopted by the Convention, and 
 the 2d was rejected. After the vote on the adoption of the 1st, 3d, 4th and 
 5th of those resolutions, a motion was made in each case to reconsider the 
 vote, and to lay that motion of reconsideration upon the table. But neither of 
 those m( tions to reconsider cr to lay on the table was put, the putting of these 
 motions having been prevented by the intervention of questions of privilege, 
 and the ultimate vote competent in such case, to wit : of the adoption of the 
 report of the majority as amended by the report of the minority, had not 
 been acted upon by the Convention. So that at the time when the Conven- 
 tion adjourned there remained pending before it these motions, to wit : To 
 reconsider — the resolutions constituting the platform, and the ulterior ques- 
 tion of adopting the majority as amended by the substitution of the minority 
 report. Those questions, and those only, as the Chair understood the mo- 
 tions before the Convention, were not acted upon prior to the adjournment. 
 
 After the disposition of the intervening questions of privilege, a motion 
 was made by Mr. McCook, of Ohio, to proceed to vote for candidates for Pres- 
 ident and Vice President. Upon that motion the Convention instructed the 
 Chair (not, as has been erroneously supposed, in the recess of the Conven- 
 tion, the Chair determining for the Convent : on, but the Convention instructing 
 the Chair,) to make no declaration of a nomination except upon a vote equiv- 
 alent to two-thirds in the Electoral College of the United States, and upon 
 that balloting, no such vote being given, that order was, upon the motion of 
 the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Russell,) laid on the table, for the purpose 
 of enabling him to propose a motion, which he subsequently did, that the 
 Convention adjourn from the city of Charleston to the city of Baltimore, and 
 with a provision concerning the filling of vacancies embraced in the same 
 resolution, which resolution the Secretary will please to read. 
 
 The Secretary read the resolution, as follows : 
 
 "Be-solved, That when this Convention adjourns to-day, it adjourns to re- 
 assemble at Baltimore, Md., oh Monday, the 18th day of June, and that it be 
 respectfully recommended to the Democratic party of the several States to 
 
96 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 make provision for supplying all vacancies in their respective delegations to 
 this Convention when it shall re-assemble." 
 
 The President. The Convention will thus perceive that the order 
 adopted by it provided, among other things, that it is respectfully recom- 
 mended to the Democratic party of the several States to make provision for 
 supplying all vacancies in their respective delegations to this Convention when 
 it shall re-assemble. What is the construction of that resolution ? — what is 
 the scope of its application ?— is a question not for the Chair to determine or 
 to suggest to the Convention, but for the Convention itself to determine. 
 
 However that may be, in the preparatory arrangement for the present 
 assembling of this Convention there were addressed to the Chair the creden- 
 tials of members elected, or purporting to be elected, affirmed and confirmed 
 by the original Conventions and accredited to this Convention. In three of 
 those cases, or perhaps four, the credentials were authentic and complete, 
 presenting no question of controverting delegates. In four others, to wit — 
 the States of Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, and Delaware, there were contest- 
 ing applications. Upon those applications the Chair was called to determine 
 whether it possessed any power to determine prima facie membership of this 
 Convention. That question was presented in its most absolute and complete 
 form in the case of Mississippi, where there was no contest either through 
 irregularity of form or of competing delegations, and so also in the cases of 
 Florida, Texas, and Arkansas. In those four States, there being an apparent 
 authenticity of commission, the Chair was called upon to determine the na- 
 ked abstract question whether he had power, peremptorily and preliminarily, 
 to determine the prima facie membership of all alleged members of this Con- 
 vention. The Chair would gladly have satisfied himself that he had this 
 power, but upon examining the source of his power, to wit — the rules of the 
 House of Representatives, he was unable to discern that he had any authority, 
 even prima facie, to scrutinize and canvass credentials, although they were 
 such as, upon their face, were free from contest or controversy, either of form 
 or of substance, and therefore he deemed it his duty to reserve the deter- 
 mination of that question to be submittd to the Convention. And in due 
 time the Chair will present that question as one of privilege to this body. 
 
 And now, gentlemen, having thus presented to you the exact state of the 
 questions pending or involved in the action of the Convention when it ad- 
 journed, the Chair begs leave only to add a single observation of a more gen- 
 eral nature. We assemble here now at a time «vhen the enemies of the 
 Democratic party — when, let me say, the enemies of the Constitution of the 
 United States, are in the field (applause) with their selected leaders, with 
 their banners displayed, advancing to the combat jvjth the constitutional 
 interests and party of the United States; and upon you, gentlemen, upon 
 your action, upon your spirit of harmony, upon your devotion to the Consti- 
 tution, upon your solicitude to maintain the interests, the honor and the 
 integrity of the Democratic party as the guardians of the Constitution — upon 
 you, gentlemen, it depends whether the issue of that combat is to be victory 
 or defeat for the Constitution of the United States. (Renewed applause.) 
 
 It does not become the Chair to discuss any of the personal or political 
 demands of that question. It may be permitted, however, to exhort you in 
 the spirit of our community, of party interests, in the faith of our common 
 respect for the Constitution, in the sense of our common devotion to the 
 interests and honor of our country ; I say to exhort you to feel that we come 
 here this day not to determine any mere technical questions of form, not 
 merely to gain personal or party triumphs, but we come here in the exercise 
 of a solemn duty, in a crisis of the condition of the affairs of our country, 
 such as has never yet befallen the United States. Shall we not all enter 
 upon this duty in the solemn and profound conviction of the responsibilities 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 97 
 
 thus devolved upon us, of our high duty to our country, to ourselves, and 
 to the States of this Union? (Applause.) Gentlemen, the Convention is 
 now in order for the transaction of business. 
 
 Mr. Howard, of Tennessee, had taken the floor for the purpose of making 
 a motion. 
 
 Mr. Howard, of Tennessee, oftered the following resolut : on : 
 
 Resolved, That the President of this Convention direct the Sergeant-at- 
 Arms to issue tickets of admission to the delegates of the Convention as 
 originally constituted and organized at Charleston. 
 
 Mr. Kavana'JH, of Minnesota. I move to lay the resolution upon the 
 table, and upon that I call for a vote by States. 
 
 Mr. Russell, of Virginia. I rise to ask a few questions of the Chair 
 for information. I suppose they relate to a privileged question, so that I am 
 entitled to ask them, notwithstanding the motion which has been ma<le. I 
 would ask the Chair if he has not undertaken to decide that the gentlemen 
 who have seats here as delegates from the State of Virginia have a right to 
 sit here ? If he has undertaken to decide that question, I ask him to state 
 to this Convention upon what ground he has decided that we are entitled to 
 be here ? 1 ask him to state if it was upon the ground that we had appeared 
 and been recognized as proper delegates to this Convention when it was 
 formerly in session ? If he acted upon that ground with regard to the dele- 
 gates from Virginia, and other delegates here, I ask him to state, for our 
 information, why he has not, upon the same ground, issued tickets to all 
 those formerly seated in this Convention with uncontested seats, or with seats 
 which, if they were contested, were decided to be properly occupied by those 
 gentlemen ? I ask the Chair to state whether he has undertaken, in con- 
 sequence of any action which those delegates themselves have taken, or in 
 consequence of any rumored or reported action elsewhere in the country, to 
 decide that they have deprived themselves of the right to return, as we have 
 returned, with the permission of the Chair ? I desire the Chair to state 
 whether the same grounds do not apply, in his opinion, to all those delega- 
 tions with uncontested seats here, as to Virginia ? 
 
 The President. With the permission of the Convention, the Chair will 
 respond to the questions of the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Russell,) if it 
 be understood by the Convention that it is competent for the Chair to do so, 
 pending the motion of the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kavanagh) to lay 
 on the table the resolution of the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Howard.) 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan. I hope there will be unanimous consent given to 
 the Cnair, but with the understanding that neither the Chair nor the gentleman 
 from Virginia (Mr. Russell) had the right to make any statement in the 
 present condition of the business. (Cries of "leave," "leave.") 
 
 The President. The Chair will then state, in response to the inquiry of 
 the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Russell,) that the Chair did not undertake 
 to judge anything, neither to decide that there were or were not vacancies. 
 All the Chair undertook to say was that the gentlemen borne upon its roll 
 as members of this Convention at the time of its adjournment at Charleston, 
 were entitled to recognition of membership precisely to-day as they would had 
 the Convention adjourned yesterday. [Applause.] To have gone beyond 
 this point would have been to enter into the canvass of conflicting credentials 
 upon new elections of members. The Chair was thoroughly convinced that 
 he had no power to enter into that inquiry of conflicting credentials of persons 
 alleging to have been elected to this Convention by State Conventions held 
 since the adjournment of this Convention at Charleston. The Chair will sug- 
 gest to the gentleman from Virginia that the question did not present itself 
 in the form of simplicity and unity in which his inquiry would suppose, inas- 
 much as several States to which he refers, did not assume that the resolution 
 7 
 
98 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 in the adjournment created vacancies to be filled by new action of the respec- 
 tive States ; and if the Chair had entered into any inquiry of the new creden- 
 tials, as for instance to discriminate upon the question whether these credentials 
 came from a new State Convention called anew, and that Convention vaca- 
 ting anterior commissions ; or whether they emanate from a Convention called 
 anew and simply confirming anterior commissions;— in either case if the Chair 
 had gone into the question it would have been necessary for him to h<>ld hear- 
 ings and investigations of credentials and of facts in resardto eight States of 
 the Union, as to which he had no more power under the rules of the House 
 of Representatives than any other member of the Convention. 
 
 Whilst the Chair is disposed to exert the whole power, in any contingency, 
 of tl»e Speaker of the House of Representatives — having entered upon the 
 discharge of this most unwelcome and responsible duty with a determination to 
 act without favor and also without fear — yet the Chair knows that it'is impos- 
 sible that he shall maintain order in this Convention, that the deliberations of 
 this Convention shall go on in any system of regularity, unless the Chair takes 
 care to walk carefully and rigorously in the simple line of routine and of tech- 
 nical authority. [Applause.] Within the line ol technical authority, and 
 upon the rules of the House of Representatives, as constituting the guide of the 
 Chair, the Chair will take leave to decide all questions as they m*y arise, in or 
 out of the Convention. But the Chair does not propose to assume any judicial 
 or quasi- judicial authority in regard to the canvass of credentials and the 
 authenticity of membership ; an authority manifestly not conferred upon the 
 presiding officer, according to precedent and the uniform usage, of the two 
 nouses of the Congress of the United States never preliminarily determined 
 by the presiding officer of either house of Congress. In issuing tickets to the 
 gentlemen borne on the roll of the Convention, already sufficiently authenti- 
 cated by the proceedings ol the Convention itself, at the time of adjournment 
 the Chair did that at least which was in the sphere of the duties of the Chair ; 
 and in doing that he in no degree involved or prejudiced the question of what 
 was the right of any gentleman ; that depending upon the action of this Con- 
 vention. The Chair, as he before intimated, will now make this the first ques- 
 tion, a question of privilege, that the Convention may instruct the Chair 
 regarding his duty concerning the delegations of the other States, 
 
 Mr. Church, of New York. I will ask the gentleman from Minnesota, 
 (Mr. Kavanagh) to withdraw his motion to lay the resolution of the gentleman 
 from Tennessee (Mr. Howard) upon the table, in order to enable me to offer an 
 amendment which I think will dispose of this whole matter of contested seats. 
 
 Mr. Kavanagh. The gentleman can read his amendment even if my 
 motion is not withdrawn. 
 
 The President. If the gentleman insists upon his motion to lay upon the 
 table, it will not be in order for any proposition to be read. 
 
 Mr. John Cochran, of New York, asked consent of the Convention that 
 the resolution be read for information. 
 
 No objection being made, the proposed amendment of Mr. Church was read 
 as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That the credentials of all persons claiming seats in this Con- 
 vention made vacant by the secession of delegates at Charleston be referred to 
 the Committee on Credentials, and said Committee is hereby instructed, as 
 soon as practicable, to examine the same and report the names ot persons 
 entitled to such seats, with the district — understanding, however, that every 
 person accepting a seat in this Convention is bound in honor and faith to abide 
 by the action of this Convention and support its nominations. 
 
 * Mr. Kavanagh, of Minnesota. I will withdraw my motion to lay upon the 
 table, and accept the amendment of the gentleman from New York (Me. 
 Church,) and upon that I call the previous question 
 
Proceeding's at Baltimore. 99 
 
 Mr. Saulsbury. I rise to a privileged question. It miist be apparent to 
 the whole Convention that its fate, and the fate of the whole party, depends 
 upon that resolution. I think I have indicated as far as — 
 
 Mr. Kavanagh. I rise to a question of order. The gentleman from Del- 
 aware rose to a privileged question. I believe he is attempting to make a 
 general speech on politics, and I hold that that is not a privileged question, 
 even in a Democratic Convention. 
 
 Mr. Saulsbury. The question is debatable. 
 
 The President. The gentleman from Delaware will please to pause. The 
 Oh tir does not understand that auy debatable question is pending. The gen- 
 tleman from New York (Mr. Church,) by unanimous consent had leave to read 
 an amendment. That having been read, conversation occurred upon the 
 applause in the galleries. That conversation having ceased, the question 
 recurs upon the motion of the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kavanagh) 
 upon laying the resolution of the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Howard) on 
 the table. 
 
 Mr. Saulsrury. My privileged question is this, that the Convention has 
 no right to prescribe terms to its members, which terms are not made in the 
 authority of the States from which they come. The resolution proposes to 
 annex a condition to the admission of delegates to this floor. I wish to say — 
 
 Mr. Kavanagh. Is that a privileged question ? 
 
 Mr. Saulsbury. I am perfectly in order. I say I come here intending, if 
 this Convention makes any nomination [calls to order] to support it. 
 
 The President. The gentleman from Minnesota again calls the gentleman 
 from Delaware to order. The Chair begs leave to state that the suggestions 
 .he gentlenam from Delaware is making are substantially arguments in oppo- 
 sition to the amendment of the gentleman from New York, (Mr. Church,) and 
 would be in order if the motion to lay on the table were not pending. 
 
 Mr. Montgomery, of Pennsylvania. I understand that the resolution of the 
 gentleman from New York was accepted by the gentleman from Minnesota, 
 who withdrew his m >tion to lay the resolution of the gentleman from Tennes- 
 see (Mr. Howard) on the table, and called the previous question upon that 
 amendment. 
 
 The President. The Chair was unaware that any such action had been 
 taken by the gentleman from Minnesota. The gentleman from Minnesota 
 will be good enough to state whether he did accept the amendment of the 
 gentleman from New York, and move the previous question upon it. 
 
 Mr. Kavanagh Upon the request of the gentleman from New York I 
 withdrew the call for the previous question — accepted the gentleman's 
 amendment, and moved the previous question on that amendment. 
 
 Mr. Phillips, of Pennsylvania. It is not in the power of the gentleman 
 tio accept the amendment. In the first place, his motion was to lay upon 
 the table, not to amend. In the next place, the resolution of the gentleman 
 from Tennessee was read for information, and was not presented to the body. 
 It was read by leave, while the motion to lay on the table was pending, which 
 was not debatable. The gentleman did say he accepted it, but he had no 
 power to do so. If he had been the mover of the original motion, he might 
 have done so, not otherwise. He only, therefore, withdrew his motion to 
 lay on the table, and that being done, and the floor being yielded, it was in 
 order for the gentleman from New York to offer his amendment. 
 
 The President decided both points of order raised by Mr. Phillips well 
 taken. 
 
 Mr. Church, of New York. I would inquire of the Chair if it is now in 
 order for me to offer an amendment to the resolution of the gentleman from 
 Tennessee? (Mr. Howard.) 
 
 The President. If the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kavanagh) states 
 
100 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 to the Chair that he withdraws his motion to lav upon the table, nnd hU 
 motion for the previous question, then the Chair will rule that the gentleman 
 from New York (Mr. Church) is in order. He can move his proposition as 
 an amendment. 
 
 Mr. Kavanagh. I do withdraw those motions. 
 
 The Chair. The gentleman from New York (Mr Church) is now in order. 
 
 Mr. Church. Then I move the resolution which has been read as an 
 amendment to the resolution of the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Howard), 
 and upon that I call the previous question. 
 
 Mr. Gilmore, of Pennsylvania, i wish to offer an amendment to the 
 amendment. 
 
 The President. That will not be in order pending a call for the previous 
 question. 
 
 Mi. Randall, of Pennsylvania. I understand that there is now before 
 the Convention a proposition of the gentleman from Ntw York (Mr. Church). 
 As it is a distinct proposition, I desire to say a few words upon it. 
 
 The President decided Mr. Randall not to be in order in his remark-. 
 
 Mr. Randall, of Pennsylvania. As the proposition before the Convention 
 contains two distinct propositions, I call for a division of the question. 
 
 The President. The Chair cannot entertain any proposition at this time. 
 
 Mr. Avery, of North Carolina, called for a division of the question. 
 
 Mr. Montgomery, of Pennsylvania. I rise to a point of order that there 
 can be no division now, as the previous question has been demanded. 
 
 The President. The Chair begs leave to state to the gentleman from 
 Pennsylvania (Mr. Montgomery) that he is perfectly correct. The Chair has 
 already determined that it is the duty of the Chair first to call for a second 
 to the demand for the previous question. 
 
 Mr. , of Tennessee. I rise to a point of order that there is no 
 
 Committee on Credentials to which to refer this matter. 
 
 The President. The Chair will inform the gentleman from Tennessee 
 that that is not a question of order but of substance, and that the Convention 
 may at any time revive the Committee on Credentials by an order of refer- 
 ence. The duty of the Chair now is to put the question upon seconding the 
 demand for the previous question. 
 
 The question was stated to be upon seconding the demand for the previous 
 question. Being taken viva voce, 
 
 The PRESinENT stated that the noes appeared to have it. 
 
 Mr. Richardson, of Illinois, doubted the announcement, and asked that 
 the vote be taken by States, which was ordered. 
 
 Mr. Brodhead, ot Pennsylvania, stated that the gentleman frcm New- 
 York (Mr. Church) was willing to withdraw his call for the previous 
 question. 
 
 Mr. Montgomery, of Pennsylvania. The vote having been ordered to be 
 taken by States, it is not now in order to withdraw the call for the previous 
 question . 
 
 The President. The Chair will suggest to the gentleman from New 
 York (Mr. Church) that the previous question having been demanded, the 
 Chair put the question to the Convention whether they seconded that demand, 
 and in the judgment of the Chair it was negatived. Thereupon the gentle- 
 man from Illinois (Mr. Richardson) called for the veiification of that vote 
 by States. After the vote thus made and taken, the Chair does not under- 
 stand that it is competent to withdraw the call for the previous question. 
 
 Mr. Saulsbury, of Delaware, moved that the Convention take a recess 
 until four o'clock this afternoon. 
 
 Mr. Samuels, of Iowa, appealed to the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. 
 Saulsbury) to withdraw his motion for one moment. If, after the sugges- 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 
 
 101 
 
 lion he desired to make, the gentleman desired the motion for a reoess, he 
 would renew it. 
 
 Mr. Satjlsbury said he would withdraw upon that condition. 
 
 Mr. Montgomery, of Pennsylvania, objected to any suggestions or dis- 
 cussions. 
 
 Mr. Ryndbrs, of New York, rose to a point of order that the motion to 
 take a recess having been withdrawn, the demand for the previous question 
 wa< then operative, and no debate was in order. 
 
 The President sustained the point of order. 
 
 Mr. Samuels, of Iowa. Then I will renew the motion for a recess, though 
 I shall vote against it. 
 
 Mr. Ludlow, of New York, called for a vote by States upon this motion, 
 which was ordered. 
 
 The Secretary proceeded to call the roll of States on the motion to take 
 a reeess till four o'clock, which resulted as follows : 
 
 Maine ... 
 
 >>'ew Hampshire . . 
 
 Yeas. 
 
 ... • IK 
 V* 
 
 Nays 
 
 5 
 13 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 35 
 
 2 
 21 
 
 2 
 
 N'orth ''arolina . . 
 *H>uth' Carolina... 
 
 Georgia 
 
 Florida 
 
 Yeas. 1> 
 . ..10 
 
 ays. 
 
 1 
 
 3i 
 
 9 
 
 Ohio. 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 . 23 
 
 13 
 
 
 11 
 
 Ma*<achu-etts 
 
 Michigan 
 
 . 6 
 
 5 
 
 •Connecticut 
 
 New York 
 
 New Jersey 
 
 Pennsylvania 
 
 Delaware 
 
 Maryland 
 
 Virginia 
 
 l 
 
 '.'.'.'.'. 5 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 6 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 Mississippi 
 
 Texas 
 
 
 
 . 1% 2% 
 
 California 
 
 Oregon .... .. 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 Missouri 
 
 TVnn> v s.*ee ....... . 
 
 Kentucky 
 
 <M 
 
 .... 8^ 
 3 
 
 73| 178± 
 
 So the motion to take a recess was lost, and the question being then taken 
 by States upon recording the demand for the previous question, it was not 
 agreed to. Yeas 107)^., nays 140^, as follows : 
 
 Yeas Nays 
 North Carolina 
 S uth Caroliua 
 Georgia 
 
 Yeas Nays. 
 
 Maine . ... ti 2 
 
 New Hampshire 5 
 
 Vermont 4 » H 
 
 M)8sa-husett8 Hi 4| 
 
 Rhode Island 4 
 
 Connecticut 3>£ '<* 
 
 New York 3ft 
 
 N w J-rsey 2J 4| 
 
 Penns>lvania 9y 16>£ 
 
 Delaware » 2 
 
 Maryland 2 fi 
 
 Virginia 15 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 10 
 
 Florida 
 
 A labama 
 
 Louisiana 
 
 Mississippi 
 
 Texas... 
 
 Arkansas 
 
 Vhssouri 
 
 Tennessee .. 
 Kentucky 
 
 Hi^ 
 
 Ohio ...23 
 
 Indiana ... 13 
 
 Illinois , 11 
 
 Michigan. 6 
 
 Wisconsin 5 
 
 Iowa 4 
 
 Minnesota 2%1^£ 
 
 California 4 
 
 Oregon 3 
 
 108| 140* 
 
 The question was then stated to be upon the amendment to the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Gilmore, of Pennsylvania, offered the following amendment to Mr. 
 -Church's resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the President of the Convention be directed to issue tickets 
 of admission to seats in the Convention to the delegates from the States of 
 Texas, Florida, Mississippi and Arkansas, in which States there are no con- 
 testing delegations. 
 
 Mr. Randall, of Pennsylvania. I believe it will be better for the harmony 
 of this body that we should now take a recess, but I do not desire to contra- 
 vene the wishes of the Convention. If it is understood that I shall be 
 entitled to the loor, £ will move that this Convention now take a recess 
 till four o'clock this afternoon. 
 
 Mr. Spinola, of New York, moved that the Convention adjourn till ten 
 o'clock A. M. to-morrow. 
 
 Mr. Randall, of Pennsylvania. At the request of several friends, I accept 
 the modification of trie gentleman from New York (Mr. Spinola.) 
 
 The motion to adjourn was put, and the President decided it to be lost, 
 and a division was called for, and 
 
102 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Mr. Spinola, of New York, called for a vote by States, which was ordered, 
 and the following is the result of the vote. Yeas 33, uays 216. 
 
 So the motion to adjourn was not agreed to. 
 
 Mr. Phillips, of Pen- sylvania, then moved that the Convention take a 
 recess until live o'clock P. M., which motion was agreed to, and the Conven- 
 tion took a recess. 
 
 EVENING SESSION. 
 
 The Convention was called to order at five o'clock. 
 
 The President said: Mr. Randall, of Pennsylvania, has the floor, upon 
 an amendment moved by Mr. Gilmore, of Pennsylvania. Before proceeding 
 in the debate, the Chair begs leave to state to the Convention that he has had 
 placed in his hands credentials of gentlemen claiming seats in the Convention 
 fr m the States of Delaware, Georgia, Alabama, Florida Mississippi, Louis- 
 iana, Texas and Arkansas, including in that enumeration the letter presented 
 to the Convention in his place, by Mr Howard, of Tennessee, in behalf of 
 i lie gentlemen claiming seats from the State of Mississippi, and in addition 
 to that, there has been addressed to the Chair a communication from Mr. 
 Chaffee, claiming a seat from the State of Massachusetts. The Chair deems 
 it hs duty to communicate the fact to the Convention that those several 
 documents have been placed in his hands, to be presented at the proper time 
 to the consideration of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Gilmore, of Pennsylvania. I have made a small addition to the 
 amendment I offered this morning to the amendment of the gentleman from 
 New York (Mr. Church), for the purpose of covering the cases mentioned by 
 the Chair just now. 
 
 The amendment, as modified, was read as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That the President of the Convention be authorized to issue 
 tickets of admission to seats in this Convention to the delegates from the 
 States of Arkansas, Texas, Florida and Mississippi, in which States there are 
 no contesting delegations, and that in those States, to wit : Delaware, Geor- 
 gia, Alabama, and Louisiana, where there are contesting delegations, a Com- 
 mittee on Credentials shall be appointed, by the several delegations, to report 
 upon said States. 
 
 Mr. Clark, of Missouri, called for the reading of the original resolution,, 
 and the amendment of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Church). They 
 were accordingly read. 
 
 Mr. Clark. I will now ask that my friend from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
 Gilmore) accept as a substitute for his amendment what I will send to the 
 Chair to be read for information. If it be accepted it will then stand in the 
 condition of an amendment to an amendment 
 
 Objectio s were made to the modification of Mr. Gilmore's resolution, and 
 also to Mr. Clark's proposition being read. 
 
 Mr. Gilmore. Then, for the purpose of arranging all difficulties, I ask to 
 withdraw the amendment I offered this morning, and substitute the one I 
 have just offered, and which has been read. 
 
 I'he question was stated to be upon the amendment to the amendment as 
 modified. 
 
 Mr. Clark of Missouri. I ask that my amendment be read, that the gen- 
 tleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Gilmore) may aceept it in lieu of his own, if 
 he prefers it. 
 
 Mr. Samuels, of Iowa, said he would withdraw the objection he had made 
 in order that the Convention may ascertain what the proposition is. 
 
 The proposition was then read, as follows : Strike out the proviso in the 
 amendment of Mr. Church, of New York, and add the following : 
 
 Resolved, That the citi&ens of the several States of the Union have an 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 103 
 
 l r^ 
 
 equal right to settle and remain in the Territories of the United States, and 
 to hold therein, unmolested by any legislation whatever, their slave and 
 other property ; and that this Convention recognizes the opinion of the 
 Supreme Court of the United States in the Dred Scott case as a true exposi- 
 tion of the Constitution in regard to the rights of the citizens of the several 
 States and Territories of the United States upon all subjects concerning 
 which it treats ; and that the members of this Convention pledge themselves, 
 and require all others who may be authorized as delegates, to make the same 
 pledge, to support the Democratic candidates, t'airly and in good faith, nomi- 
 nated by this Convention according to the usages of the National Democratic 
 Party. 
 
 Mr. Cochran, of New York. What is the position of this proposition just 
 read? 
 
 The President. It was read merely for inf rmation. 
 
 The question was stated to be upon the amendment to the amendment, 
 when Mr. Randall, ot Pennsylvania, addrt-ssed the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Richardson, of Illinois, addressed the Couventiou on the proposition 
 submitted. 
 
 Mb. Gilmore opposed its adoption. 
 
 Mr. Cochran, of New York, addressed the Convention upon the several 
 propositions under consideration, and opposed the amendment of Mr. Gil- 
 more. 
 
 Mr. Russell, of Virginia, addressed the Convention, and was in favor of 
 the adoption of the amendment offered by Mr. Gilmore. 
 
 Mr. Montgomery addressed the Convention in opposition to the last 
 amendment offered, and in favor of the resolution offered by Mr. Church, of 
 New York. 
 
 Mr. Evving, of Tennessee, addressed the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Claiborne, of Missouri. With the permission of my friend from Ten- 
 nessee (Mr. Bwing), I will say that it has been hinted by the gentleman from 
 Virginia (Mr. Russell), and repeated by the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. 
 Ewing) that there is no contest before this Convention as to the seats claimed 
 by the delegates from Arkansas, who held seats in the National Democratic 
 Convention at Charleston. I will ask the President of this Convention if he 
 has has not^this day received evidence of the fact that there is a contest here 
 about the seats of the delegation from Arkansas ? 
 
 A communication to the President of the Convention v as then read, and 
 
 Mr. Claiborne asked if there was not another paper from the delegation of 
 Arkansas ? One was sent by a messenger to the President, by Gen. ilust, of 
 Arkansas, this morning. 
 
 The President, after examining the file of papers before him, stated that 
 no such communication had been received. 
 
 Mr. Ewing, of Tennessee, resumed his remarks. 
 
 Mr. Loring, of Massachusetts, addressed the Convention in favor of the 
 second amendment. 
 
 Mr. Merrick, of Illinois, addressed the Convention in favor of the 
 amendment offered by Mr. Church, and in opposition to the amendment 
 offered by Mr. Gilmore. 
 
 Mr. Samuels asked the President whether there were any credentials pre- 
 sented to him from the Florida delegation ? He had understood they did 
 not ask for an admission. 
 
 The President. The delegation have placed in my hands a published 
 report in one of the journals of Florida, of the proceedings of the Convention 
 in that State. 
 
 Mr. Samuels. Are they accredited to this Convention ? 
 
 The President. I do not know. The gentleman can have them read. 
 
104 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Mr. King, of Missouri, claimed the floor, and the ITlorida proceedings were 
 not read. Mr. King then addressed the Convention in opposition to the 
 second amendment. 
 
 Mr. West, of Connecticut, addressed the Convention in opposition to the 
 amendment of Mr. Gilmore. 
 
 Mr. Hunter, of Missouri, addressed the Convention in favor of the Gil- 
 more amendment. 
 
 Mr. Avery, of North Carolina, addressed the Convention in favor of the 
 Gilmore amendment. 
 
 Mr. Atkins, of Tennessee, addressed the Convention at some length, and 
 then moved the previous question. 
 
 Mr. Moffatt, of Virginia, moved that the Convention do now adjourn, 
 which motion was not agreed to. 
 
 The vote seconding the demand for the previous question was then put, 
 and a vote by States was demanded, and the demand for the previous ques- 
 tion was recorded by the following vote, viz : yeas 233, nays 18>^. 
 
 The question was then announced to be on ordering the previous question 
 to be put, when, 
 
 Oa motion of Mr. Richardson, of Illinois, the Convention adjourned. 
 
 SECOND ID j£^-^r . 
 
 Tuesday, June 19, 1860. 
 
 The Convention was called to order at 10}£ o'clock A. M., by the Presi- 
 dent, Hon. Caleb Gushing. 
 
 Prayer was offered by the Rev. Dr. Fuller, of Baltimore. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Ludlow, of New York, the reading of the Journal of 
 Monday was dispensed with. 
 
 The President stated the question to be upon ordering the main question 
 to be put, the demand for the previous question having been seconded yes- 
 terday upon the amendment of Mr. Gilmore, of Pennsylvania, to the amend- 
 ment of Mr. Church, of New York, to the resolution of Mr. Howard, of Ten- 
 nessee. 
 
 Mr. Church, of New York. I desire to ask the unanimous consent for the 
 purpose of submitting a proposition calculated to harmonize all the questions 
 now pending before the Convention. (Cries of "hear," "hear.") 
 
 Upon a consultation with the gentleman who moves an amendment to my 
 amendment (Mr Giliuore, of Pennsylvania), he has agreed, if it meets with 
 the approbation of this Convention, for the purpose of harmonizing the action 
 of this Convention, to an arrangement alike honorable to both sides, and 
 which, if carried out, will terminate the controversy as to all pending ques- 
 tions. The proposition which has been made and accepted is simply this : 
 The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Gilmore), is to withdraw his amend- 
 ment to my amendment, and then I am to withdraw the latter part of my 
 resolution, leaving only a simple resolution of reference to the Committee on 
 Credentials. I will now ask the unanimous consent of the Convention for the 
 purpose of carrying out that understanding. 
 
 The President. The Chair will suggest to the gentleman from New York 
 (Mr. Church;, ai d to the Convention, that, as there has been a second to the 
 demand for the previous question, the object which he proposes can only be 
 reached either by putting the vote upon the main question and rejecting it, 
 or by the unanimous consent of the Convention. * 
 
 No objection being heard, unanimous consent was granted. 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 105 
 
 Mr. Gilmore, of Pennsylvania. For the purpose of carrying out the ar- 
 rangement that has just beeu announced, I beg leave to withdraw my amend- 
 ment to the amendment of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Church). 
 
 The amendment of Mr. Giimore was as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That the President of the Convention be directed to issue tickets 
 of admission to seats in the Convention to the delegates from the States of 
 Texas, Florida, Mississippi and Arkansas, in which States there are no con- 
 testing delegations. 
 
 The amendment to the amendment was accordingly withdrawn. 
 
 Mr. Church, of New York. For the purpose of perfecting the arrange- 
 ment, I will now modify my resolution by striking out the latter part of it, 
 leaving it simply a resolution of reference to the Committee on Credentials. 
 
 The reading of tho original resolution of Mr. Howard, of Tennessee, togeth- 
 er with the amendment of Mr. Church, of New York, as proposed yesterday, 
 was caLled for, and they were read ?s follows: 
 
 Mr. Howard's original resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the President of tuis Convention direct the Sergeant-at- 
 Arnis to issue tickets of admission to the delegates of the Convention as ori- 
 ginally constituted and organized at Charleston. 
 
 Mr. Church's amendment: 
 
 Resolved, That the credentials of all persons claiming seats in this Conven- 
 tion made vacant by the secession of delegates at Charleston, be referred to 
 tae Committee on Credentials-, and said Committee is hereby instructed, as 
 soon as practicable, to examine the same, and report the names of persons 
 entitled to such seats, with the distinct understanding, however, that every 
 I erson accepting a seat in this Convention is bound in honor and good faith 
 to abide by the action of this Convention and support its nominees. 
 
 The amendment, as modified by Mr. Church, was then read as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That the credentials of all persons claiming seats in this Conven- 
 tion made vacant by the secession of delegates at Charleston, be referred to 
 the Committee on Credentials, and said Committee is hereby instructed, as 
 soon as pra ticable, to examine the same and report the names of persons en- 
 titled to such seats. 
 
 The President. The next question is, Shall the main question now be 
 put upon the modified amendment which occupies the place of the original 
 before the modification was made. 
 
 The question being taken, the main question was unanimously ordered. 
 
 The question recurred upon the amendment of Mr. Church, of New York, 
 as modified. 
 
 Mr. Ward, of Ohio. I desire, before the question is put, to inquire what 
 the exact question is ? I desire now to know whether that is a substitute 
 for the original proposition, or merely an addition by way of amendment 
 to it. 
 
 The President. The Chair will state that he understands the question 
 to be upon the substitution of the proposition of the gentleman from New 
 York, for the original proposition of the gentleman from Tennessee. 
 
 The question being then taken on the amendment of Mr. Church, of New 
 York, was agreed to, and the resolution of Mr. Howard, of Tennessee, as 
 amended, was adopted. 
 
 Mr. Cochran, of New Y>>rk, made a motion to reconsider the last vote 
 and to lay the motion to reconsider on the table, which was agreed to. 
 
 Mr McCook. oi Ohio, moved that the Convention do now adjourn. 
 
 Mr. Halleti', of Massachusetts, rose to a question of privilege. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan. There can be no higher question of privilege 
 than that of adjournment. 
 
106 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 understands the explanation of the gentleman from Massachusetts to relate to 
 a contested seat in that delegation. 
 
 Mr. Brodhkad moved to amend the motion to adjourn by inserting u to 5 
 o'clock this afternoon. " 
 
 The President. The motion to adjourn is not amendable. 
 
 Mr. Phillips, of Pennsylvania. I move that when this Convention ad- 
 journ to-day it be to meet at 5 o'clock this afternoon. 
 
 The President. The Chair is of opinion that that motion is in order. 
 
 Mr. Stuart. I beg leave to suggest that that motion cannot be in order. 
 
 Mr. Montgomery, of Pennsylvania. 1 would state to the Convention that 
 the delegation from Massachusetts desire, before the House adjourns, to sub- 
 mit a proposition. There is a contested seat in that delegation, and it may 
 as well be disposed of at once. I would suggest to my colleague (Mr. Phil- 
 lips) that he withdraw his motion. 
 
 Mr. Phillips. The motion I made does not interfere with anything the 
 gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr Hallett) may desire to present. I would 
 also state that it is, I believe, the universal practice to allow the House, by its 
 vote, to fix the time to which it will adjourn before it does adjourn. That 
 certainly must be so, for unless that vote is taken before adjournment it never 
 can be taken. 
 
 Mr. McCook, of Ohio, withdrew his motion to adjourn. 
 
 Mr. Phillips, of Pennsylvania, then moved that when this Convention 
 adjourn it be to meet at 5 o'clock this afternoon. 
 
 Mr. Sturman, of Arkansas, asked the gentleman to withdraw his motion 
 
 to allow him to present to the Convention a statement from his colleague. 
 
 This morning he had the protest of the contesting delegates from Arkansas 
 
 „ handed to him, with a polite request to present it to the Convention. He 
 
 would send it to the Chair and request that it be read. 
 
 Mr. Hallett, of Massachusetts, obtained the floor. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, desired to submit some remarks upon the mo- 
 tion of the gentleman from Pennsylvania. 
 
 The President stated that the Chair would receive the document from the 
 gentleman from Arkansas, but at present he could not entertain any new 
 proposition pending the motion to adjourn. 
 
 A Delegate from New York inquired if it would be in order to refer the 
 paper to the Committee on Credentials ? 
 
 The Chair. Not pending the present motion to fix the hour to which the 
 Convention will adjourn. 
 
 Mr. Stuart. On that motion I claim the floor. 
 
 The President. The House having given its unanimous assent to the 
 gentleman from Arkansas to present this paper, it will now be read. 
 
 Mr SruART. The consent of the Convention was not given. 
 
 Mr. Cochran moved that the paper, without reading, be referred to the 
 Committee on Credentials. 
 
 The President. That is not in order. It can be read by unanimous coo- 
 sent, not otherwise. 
 
 Many Delegates objected. 
 
 The President. The question then is on the motion to adjourn till 5 o'clock. 
 
 Mr. Phillips, of Pennsylvania, read from the rules of the House of 'Repre- 
 sentatives, to show that the motion to adjourn was always in order, and that the 
 motion to fix a day to which the House will adjourn takes precedence of any 
 other, and that both these mo. ions, together with the motion to lay on the 
 table, must be decided without debate. 
 
 The President suggested that that might not apply to fixing an hour to 
 which to adjourn. 
 Mr. Phillips believed that it did. 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 
 
 107 
 
 Mr. Stuart said the rule applied to fixing a day, and had no application to 
 this case. It was always in order to proceed to show that the hour designated 
 was an impracticable one. 
 
 Mr. Cochran, of New York, suggested thnt the rules of the House of Repre- 
 sentatives wore applicable to this body as far as they wore practicable. The 
 House sat for months, this Convention for days. Hours of a day were to this 
 Convention as days were to the sessions of the House. 
 
 Mr. Stuart moved to lay the motion on the table. 
 
 The President said that that motion was nor, in order. 
 
 Mr. Cochran The motion to fix a time is a privileged motion, the same 
 as the motion to lay on the table. 
 
 Mr. Stuart. It would be strange if we could not get rid of a subject. 
 
 Mr. Hallett, of Massachusetts, desired to submit a matter to the Conven- 
 tion in reference to a contested seat in Massachusetts. His alternate at 
 Charleston claimed to retain his seat in this Convention. He desired to have 
 a hearing before the Committee on Credentials upon that question, and would 
 submit the question whenever it was in order, or now, by general consent. 
 
 Mr. Clark and Mr. Claiborne, of Missouri, stated that a similar case had 
 occurred in the Missouri delegation. 
 
 Mr. Briggs, of New York, inquired whether, under the resolution adopted 
 this morning, all these cases did not go necessarily to the Committee ? 
 
 The Secretary read the resolution of the gentleman from New York, from 
 which it appears that only credentials from seceding States went to the 
 Committee. 
 
 Mr. Stuart suggested that unanimous consent be given to have all such 
 cases referred to the Committee. 
 
 No objection being made, the order was made. 
 
 Tho President here announced that Mr. Stout, of Oregon, Mr. Whitely, 
 of Delaware, Mr. Wood, of Kentucky, and Mr. Gregory, of California, 
 desired to be excused from serving on the Committee on Credentials. 
 
 By unanimous consent of the Convention, the following delegates were 
 substituted in their place : Mr. Stevens, of Oregon; Mr. Buley, of Delaware: 
 Mr. Morrow, of Kentucky ; and Mr. Dudley, of California. 
 
 The Committee on* Credentials now stands as follows : 
 
 Arkansas. Van. H. Manning; Connecticut, James Gallagher ; California, John S. Dudley. Dela- 
 ware, John H Baley : Indiana, S. Af Hall ; Illinois, William J. Allen ; Iowa, D G Finch; Ken- 
 tucky G H.Morrow; Maine, Charles D. Mason ; Massachusetts, Oliver Stevens ; Michigan, Benj. 
 Follett ; Minnes 'ta, Henry H. Sibley ; Maryland. William S. Gittings ; Missouri, John M. Krum ; 
 New Hampshire, Aaron P. Hughes; New York, D. DeWolf! New Jersey, Alfred R. Spear; North 
 
 Pennsylvania. H. 
 Vermont, Stephen 
 
 Carolina, R R. Bridges; Ohio. James B. Steedman ; Oregon, Isaac J. Stevens; 
 M. North; Rhode Island, George H. Browne; Tennessee. Wm. H. Carroll; 
 Thomas ; Virginia, E W. Hubbard ; Wisconsin, P. H. Smith. 
 
 The question was then taken on the motion to adjourn till 5 o'clock. 
 Before the vote was announced, 
 
 Mr. McCook called for a vote by States. 
 
 The question being taken by a call of the States, resulted as follows : 
 
 Maine, 
 
 New Hampshire.. 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 
 8 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 .13 
 
 4 
 
 2| 3* 
 
 35 
 
 7 
 
 26 1 
 
 2 
 
 8 
 
 15 
 
 North Carolina.... 
 Sourh Carolina. .. 
 
 Yeas. 
 10 
 
 Nays 
 6 
 
 Ohio 
 
 Indiana 
 
 Yeas. Navs. 
 
 *28 
 
 13 
 
 ]| 
 
 Massachusetts. . . . 
 
 Florida 
 
 
 
 Michigan 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 
 
 Iowa 
 
 Minnesota 
 
 California 
 
 Oregon .- 
 
 
 New York 
 
 New Jersey 
 
 Pennsylvania 
 
 elaware 
 
 Maryland ... 
 
 Virginia 
 
 Mississippi. 
 
 Texas 
 
 Arkansas... 
 
 Missouri 
 
 Tennessee.. 
 Kentucky .. 
 
 
 3 
 
 .... 12 
 12 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 185J CH 
 
 On motion of Mr. Butterworth, of New York, the Convention then 
 a djourned. 
 
108 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 EVENING SESSION. 
 
 The Convention re-a8sembled at 5 o'clock. 
 
 Messrs. Fisher, of Virginia, Stetson, of New York, and King, of M issouri, 
 desired information from the Chair, in relation to tickets of admission to the 
 Convention. 
 
 Mr. Stuart. Mr. President, I rise merely to state that, according to 
 my understanding, there can be no business that ought to occupy the atten- 
 tion of this Convention this evening. The Committee on Credentials will 
 not report till to-morrow. I therefore move that the Convention adjourn. 
 
 The President. The Chair requests the gentleman to withdraw his mo- 
 tion for a moment, that the Chair inay present a communication he has re- 
 ceived to the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Stuart. Certainly. 
 
 The motion to adjourn was accordingly withdrawn. 
 
 The President. Before proceeding to make that communication, the 
 Chair desires to make a suggestion to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
 Fisher), and at the same time to make a suggestion to the Convention itself. 
 At the assembling of this Convention at Charleston, a system of organization 
 was adopted which involved the delivery of tickets for admission of mem- 
 bers to the floor, the hall, and to their seats in the hall. That system was 
 resumed at the assembling of the Convention in the city of Baltimore ; and 
 the duty devolved, as a matter of necessity, upon the Chair to direct the dis- 
 tribution of those tickets of admission. Was the Chair to give directions that 
 all persons assuming to be members of this Convention should be admitted 
 without tickets? Gentlemen, have we not been occupied in a debate of an 
 entire day, the whole of which assumes that no gentleman shall come into 
 this hall as a member, and take the seat of a member, without such a ticket 
 of admission ? What would have been the condition of things in this hall if 
 tnere had been no system at the door of checking the admission of persons, 
 and discriminating between those who were recognized as of right members 
 of this Convention, and those who were not so recognized ? Would it have 
 been possible to have continued the deliberations of this body, with the free 
 admission of persons at the doors of this hall, without any check or guard to 
 their admission ? The Chair submits it to the good sense of every member 
 of this body that it would have been materially and morally impossible to go 
 on without s >me provision for the delivery of tickets of members of this body 
 at the door of this Convention. In this state of facts, in this evident necessity 
 for some such provision, it appears that the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
 Fisher), had not obtained the ticket which, as the Chair is informed by the 
 Sergeant-at-Arms, was, in the ordinary course of business, delivered to the 
 Chairman of the Virginia delegation. If that was so, surely the Sergeant-at- 
 Arms and the officers of the Convention can only regret that the accident 
 occurred. 
 
 But beyond that fact, the Chair will submit to the gentleman from Vir- 
 ginia (Mr. Fisher), that the solemn appeal he has made to the country 
 against this ordinary expedient of tickets for the admission of members to the 
 Convention, is an appeal to the country against a primary and obvious neces- 
 sity of order in the Convention. If the Convention shall desire to change that 
 system, no person will accept that change more gratefully than the Chair. 
 (Cries of " no change," " no change ") The duties devolved upon me as the 
 presiding officer of this Convention ; the necessity of preserving order in the 
 Convention ; putting motions ; hearing and deciding questions of order, and 
 the other necessary duties of the Chair, are quite enough occupation for him, 
 and he deeply regrets, that in addition to that occupation — in itself quite 
 enough for him to discharge — there is devolved upon him, in regard to the 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 109 
 
 '© 
 
 admission of members and spectators, an amount of duty inc< mparably great- 
 er than all the other duties of the Chair. He deplores this, and would be 
 deeply grateful to the Convention if they would adopt some other order, if 
 any other order be possible, by which there can be regularity of admission to 
 the Convention. 
 
 With these remarks, the Chair submits the whole subject to the Conven- 
 tion ; and if the Convention will be good enough to pass an order designating 
 some other person to attend to this duty, the Chair will be deeply gratified to 
 be relieved from this, the most onerous duty devolved upon the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan. I think that the whole subject is disposed of 
 satisfactorily, and I hope that the motion will be put that the Convention 
 adjourn. 
 
 The President. The Chair begs leave before putting the ques'ion to lay 
 before the Convention a communication from Mr. Krum, the Chairman of the 
 Committee on Credentials. 
 
 COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMITTEE ON CREDEN'I IALS. 
 
 The Secretary read the following letter : 
 Hon. Caleb Cashing, President, <Sfc. : 
 
 My Dear Sir : I am instructed by the Committee on Credentials to say 
 they will be unable to report at the afternoon session of this day, and beg 
 permission of the Convention to continue our session during the sitting of the 
 Convention. Very respectfully, &c, 
 
 19th June, I860. JOHN M. KRUM, Chairman. 
 
 The President. As no objection is made, the Chair will take it for 
 granted that the permission is given. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, moved that the Convention do now adjourn. 
 
 The motion to adjourn was agreed to, and the Convention accordingly 
 adjourned. 
 
 THIRD IDA^T. 
 
 Wednesday, June 20, 1860. 
 
 The Convention was called to order at twenty minutes past 10 o'clock A. M. 
 
 The President introduced the Rev. Mr. Bowen, vho offered up a prayer. 
 
 Mr. Ludlow, of New York. Mr. President, I would ask whether there is 
 any information in the possession of the Chair, or any member of this Con- 
 vention, as to the probable time when the Committee on Credentials will be 
 prepared to report. 
 
 'I he President. The Chair has not yet received any information upon the 
 subject, but is informed that presently it will be communicated to the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Ludlow. I will, therefore, in order to facilitate the business of the 
 Convention, move that the reading of the journal be dispensed with. 
 
 The motion prevailed. 
 
 Mr. King, of Missouri, rose to a privileged question and stated it. 
 
 Mr. Clark, of Missouri, made a statement upon the privileged question 
 stated by Mr. King. 
 
 Mr. Ludlow, of New York. I rise to a point of order. It is this : The 
 Chair recognized Gov. King. Gov. King has yielded the floor. Having 
 made his explanation, he has exhausted his question of privilege. I now 
 want to know what the question is before the Convention. 
 
 The President. The Convention will understand that no question is 
 pending, and that the remarks of the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. King), as 
 also those of the other gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Clark), are only pro- 
 
110 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 ceeding under the assumed indulgence of the Convention. If objection be 
 made, it is the duty of the Chair to arrest the course of remark. 
 
 Mr. Ludlow. Who is entitled to the floor ? 
 
 The President. Mr. Clark, of Missouri, was recognized. 
 
 Mr. Ludlow. Is he in order ? 
 
 The President. He is not in order unless by unanimous consent. 
 
 Mr. Ludlow. I object. 
 
 The President. The gentleman from Missouri will observe that objection 
 is made from various quarters, and he will not, therefore, be in order to 
 proceed. 
 
 Mr. Clark. I only want to place the record of my State right. 
 
 Mr. Ludlow. I now move, sir, that this Convention take a recess until 
 five o'clock P. M. 
 
 The President. The Chair requests the gentleman to withdraw the 
 motion a moment in order that he may have read a letter from the delegation 
 from Florida, for the purpose of correcting a misapprehension arising in the 
 public mind, and possibly in the Convention, in consequence of a miscon- 
 struction of a statement made by the Chair. 
 
 The Secretary then read the following letter : 
 
 Rooms of the Florida Delegation to the} 
 Democratic Convention* at Richmond, > 
 Baltimore, June 19th, I860.) 
 Gen. Caleb Cushing, President Baltimore Convention : 
 
 Sir : In yesterday's proceedings of the Convention over which you 
 preside, you are reported as stating that credentials of gentlemen claiming 
 seats in the Convention from Florida had been placed in your hands. In 
 this you have — unintentionally, doubtless — done the State of Florida great 
 injustice. 
 
 By reference to the proceedings of the recent Democratic Convention of 
 that State, a newspaper copy of which was placed in your hands by one of 
 our delegation, as we learn from him, for your private information only, and 
 not as "credentials," you will perceive that Florida accredited her delegates 
 to Richmond only. It is true her delegates to Richmond are entrusted with 
 a large discretion for the purpose of harmonizing the Democracy, if possible, 
 upoa the principles rejected at Charleston. 
 
 In the exercise of that discretion the Florida delegates, during the recess 
 of the Richmond Convention, are in attendance at Baltimore, observant spec- 
 tators of your proceedings, and prepared to avail themselves of the first 
 honorable opening for a re-union with their Democratic brethren ; but as 
 yet they have seen nothing to induce them to suppose that such opening will 
 occur, aiad until it does they have unanimously determined not to participate 
 in your proceedings in any manner whatever. 
 
 They have therefore to request that Florida may be omitted from the list 
 of those States represented, or seeking to be represented, in the Convention 
 over which you preside, until they shall themselves notify you of their desire 
 to participate in your proceeiings. N. BAKER, Chairman. 
 
 GEO. W. CALL, 
 JAS. B. OWENS, 
 W. D. BARNES, 
 JOS. JOHN w ILLIAMS, 
 B. F. WARDLAW, 
 Florida Delegation, Richmond. 
 The President. The Chair will only add in further explanation that his 
 remark to which the letter refers was undoubtedly misapprehended. His 
 statement was that the official proceedings of the Convention contained in a 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. Ill 
 
 newspaper had been placed in his hands. He did not mean to be understood 
 as saying that the delegation had presented credentials to the Convention, for 
 he well understood at the time that it was otherwise ; and in view of the 
 respectful and dignified tone of this letter, further explaining the matter, the 
 Chair had asked this indulgence of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Ludlow, of New York. I am informed from an authentic source that 
 the Committee on Credentials will not be prepared to report until five o'clock 
 this afternoon, and in view of that fact, and also in view of the additional fact 
 that there is no other business and can be no other business before the Con- 
 vention, I move that we take a recess untl five o'clock. 
 
 The motion was put and carried, and accordingly, at 10 minutes before 11 
 o'clock, the Convention took a recess. 
 
 EVENING SESSION. 
 
 The Convention was called to order at precisely five o'clock. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan. I have, within the last five minutes, had an 
 interview with the Chairman of the Committee on Credentials, as I passed 
 alonj; by the building, in order to ascertain, if possible, when they would be 
 able to report ; and I understand from him that it will not be possible for them 
 to report until to-morrow morning. Therefore, sir, without taking further 
 time, I will move that the Convention adjourn, which will be an adjournment 
 until to-morrow morning at 10 o'clock. 
 
 The motion was put and carried, and accordingly the Convention adjourned. 
 
 FOURTH JD j^^T . 
 
 Thursday, June 21, 1860. 
 
 The Convention was called to order by the President, at 10 o'clock A. M. 
 
 Prayer was offered by the Rev. Henry Slicer. 
 
 Mr. Dawson, of Pennsylvania, moved to dispense with the reading of the 
 journal, which was agreed to. 
 
 The President announced that reports of Committees were in order. 
 
 At this point of the opening proceedings, just at the moment when the most 
 intense anxiety prevailed as to the presentation of the report of the Committee 
 on Credentials, and when the Chairman, Mr. Krum, was expected to rise, a 
 loud crash proceeded from the center of the floor. For a moment a scene of 
 the wildest excitement ensued, which was communicated to all parts of the 
 house, though fortunately the ladies who filled the dress circle, and the 
 crowded upper tiers of male spectators, were able in a moment to comprehend 
 the nature of the accident. 
 
 The floor being cleared, it was ascertained that the front of the stage and 
 the portion covering the orchestra had given away, and suddenly sunk about 
 three feet in the center, throwing the settees and those who were on them, 
 within a circle of about fifty feet, into one wedged mass, from which they 
 extricated themselves as rapidly as possible, and fled in all directions to distant 
 parts of the house. Fortunately no one was injured, as would doubtless have 
 been the case if the floor had sunk down all the way to the basement under- 
 neath. 
 
 The extent of the damage done was proved upon investigation to be very 
 slight. The simple slipping of an upright support to the transverse beams 
 upon which the joist and floor rested, caused the floor to be lowered to the 
 ground. The floor itself being laid in battoned sections, was easily taken up, 
 other supports placed in the proper places and the floor speedily relaid. 
 
 Mr. Ludlow, of New York. In view of the fact that there are now three 
 
112 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 times the number of delegates present on the floor, I move that we take a 
 recess for one hour. (Cries of "No," "no," "no !") 
 
 The President. How can the seats be otherwise repaired ? 
 
 The motion to take a recess was put and declared carried. 
 
 Mr. Stuart. We cannot do any business a^ a Convention. I, therefore, 
 make the suggestion to the Chair that all tickets, whether held by delegates 
 or reporters, after this floor shall have been cleared, be given up as gentlemen 
 come in, as being the only remedy for this abuse. 
 
 [The object being: to prevent delegates, after they have obtained admittance, 
 from sending out their tickets to other parties, who again use them.] 
 
 Several Members. "That's right." 
 
 The President. During the sitting at Charleston the Chair ventured to 
 take that step, and he would have renewed it now except for suggestions 
 made in regard to his exercise of authority that tended to render him reserved 
 upon that point. He will now, in view of the accident that has occured, 
 assume to direct that every ticket, upon being presented by any gentleman 
 havii g a right to admission, shall he delivered up to the officer, upon enter- 
 ing, and that a check be given to each gentleman admitted, with which he 
 may resume his seat. 
 
 The Chair be^s leave to make a further suggestion — that with the under- 
 standing that a proper arrangement shall be made by which it shall be 
 rendered impossible that other gentlemen shall be introduced upon delegates' 
 tickets, the Chair will adopt ^ome process for that purpose. Meanwhile, in 
 order that the injury may be repaired, he respectfully requests of gentlemen 
 to vacate the hall, in order that the workmen may proceed to their work. 
 
 Mr. Rynders, of New York. I doubt if an hour will be time enough to 
 do it. 
 
 The floor was then slowly cleared, and the workmen at once proceeded to 
 make the necessary repairs." The damage was found to be easily remedied, 
 arid within the hour the floor was entirely repriced, with such additional pre- 
 cautions as to avoid a, recurrence of the mishap. 
 
 At twelve o'clock M. the Convpntion was called to order by 
 
 The President, who said : Gentlemen : — The members of the Convention 
 appear to have re-assembled ; the period of the recess has expired; the Con- 
 vention will please come to order. 
 
 Mr. Craig, of Missou'i. T desire to offer some resolutions, which T will 
 send to the Secretarv to have read. 
 
 Mr. McCook, of Ohio. I object to the introduct'on of resolutions at this 
 time as out of order. 
 
 The President. The only question is the point of order raised by the 
 gentleman from Ohio (Mr. McCook). 
 
 Mr. Craig. I would beg the gentleman from Ohio to withdraw his point of 
 order. 
 
 The President. Until th" gentleman from Ohio (Mr. McCook) has with- 
 drawn it, the Chair must enforce the rules of order. The gentleman from Ohio 
 objects to the proposed resolutions as not in order. The Chair requests the 
 Convention to revert to the fact that at the moment when the cause arose this 
 morning that led to our separation an hour ago, the Chair had announced that 
 the business in order was the reports from Committees, and the Chair was 
 waiting for a report to be presented from the Committee on Credentials. And 
 without deciding the general question whether if no report is to be made, 
 resolutions would be in order, the Chair is of opinion that under the rules of 
 the Convention and the call of the Chair, the first business is to receive reports 
 of Committees. 
 
 Mr. Cbaig. Will the Chair allow me to appeal to the gentleman from Ohio 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 113 
 
 (Mr. McCook) to allow tie resolutions to be read? I will not ask for any 
 action df the C invention. 
 
 jection was male by several delegates. 
 
 Mr. Craig I would ask, if the Chairman of the Committee on Credentials 
 demanding his privilege, am I not in order? 
 
 The President. The Chair will decide that question when it arises. The 
 Chair perceives that the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Krum) is upon the 
 flour, as the Chair supposes, for the purpose of presenting his report. 
 
 REPORTS FROM THE COMMITTEE ON CREDENTIALS. 
 
 Mr. Krum, ol Missouri. The Committee on Credentials is now prepared to 
 report. 
 
 Mr. Clark, of Missouri. I ask the Chairman of the Committee (Mr. Krum) 
 to proceed to the Secretary's desk to read his report from there. 
 
 Mr. Krum. I think I can make myself heard from here. I trust my brother 
 members of the Convention will give their attention while the Committee 
 present their report. And allow me, before proceeding to the reading of that 
 report, to ad .ert to a fact or two, which T regard as not inappropriate. This 
 is the first time in the history of the Democratic party when questions of the 
 kind which have undergone investigation before your Committee have ever 
 arisen. The remark able question has arisen that after the beginning of the 
 session of a National Convention questions of vacancies have 
 
 Mr. Davjs, of Virginia. I rise to a point of order. Is this speech in order, 
 or is the report first in order? If the speech is in order, I want to hear it; if 
 it is not, I do n )t want to hear it. I demand t m decision of the Chair upon 
 the point of order. 
 
 The President. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) makes a point 
 of order on the remarks the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Krum) is making.. 
 
 Mr. Krum. Allow m? before that question is decided 
 
 Mr. D wis. Ljt the Chair decide the question. 
 
 Mr, KftUM. In the remark I was about to raa'te I was not going to discuss 
 the merits of the report. I wa-i designing to make some prefatory remarks 
 which I did not deem inappropriate, not affecting the subject matter of the 
 report, or any question of privilege of this body. I had supposed that the 
 courtesy of gentlemen would be extended to the C >mmittee to say at least a 
 word of explanation in regard to the labors which they have undergone. I had 
 hoped to have had that courtesy from the Old Dominion. 
 
 Mr. Davis, of' Virginia. I want to have it understood that some courtesy is 
 due also to the Old Dominion to be heard if the gentleman says anything that 
 the" Old D )minion does not like. Is th.it also to be accorded to them? 
 
 Mr. Krum. If I shall say anything that is disagreeable to the Old Dominion 
 or her representatives here I trust that this Convention will unanimously allow 
 me to retire to my distant home. in the West. I hope my friend will be satis- 
 fied to listen to a dozen words. 
 
 Objection was made by delegates from several States. 
 
 The President. Objection is midetothe gentleman from Missouri (Mr. 
 Krum) g'»in : on. The Chair will suggest as a solution of the whole question, 
 that the C lairman of the C >mmittee should offer his report, and then he will 
 be entitled to go on with his remarks after he has submitted his report. If 
 the Chair is required to rule upon the point of order, he must rule that the 
 Coairman of the Committee is to first submit his report, and then he will have 
 the floor to make his remarks upon the report. 
 
 Mr. Krum. I will then send up my report to be read. 
 
 8 
 
114 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 THE MAJORITY REPORT. 
 
 The report was then read as follows : 
 T> the Persident of the National Democratic Convention: 
 
 Mr. President: Toe Committee upon Credentials respectfully report that 
 prior to the adjournment of this Convention nt Charleston, on the 3d of May 
 last, the following resolution was adopted : 
 
 k ' Resolved, Toat when this Convention adjourns to-day it be adjourned to 
 re-assemble at Baltimore, Md., on Monday, the 18th of June next, and that it 
 be respectfully recommended to the Democratic parry of the several States to 
 make provision for supplying all vacancies in their respective delegations to 
 this Convantion when it shall re-assemble." 
 
 On there-assembling of this Convention in Baltimore, the following resolu- 
 tion was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That the credentials of all persons claiming seats in this Conven- 
 tion made vacant by the secession of delegates at Charleston, be referred to 
 the Committee on Credentials ; and said Committee is hereby instructed, as 
 soon as practicable, to examine the same, and report the names of persons 
 entitled to such seats. 
 
 By the further order of the Convention, the claims of all other persons 
 claiming seats were also referred to your C >mmittee. Your Committee thus 
 •instructed have proceeded to examine the claims of all persons which have 
 been brought before them. Your Committee found that the delegations of the 
 •several States of Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas and Floiida had 
 become wholly vacant by reason of the secession of the entire original delega- 
 U >ns from this Convention ; the delegations of the States of Georgia, Arkam-as 
 and Delaware had become vacant in part only from the same cause. In no 
 other State had there been any secession, but individual seats were contested 
 in the delegations from the States of Massachusetts and Missouri. 
 
 Aside from the above, no question touching the seats of delegates was 
 brought to the notice of your Committee. After patient and full investigation, 
 your Committee are of opinion that the persons hereinafter named in the 
 resolutions, which are herewith submitted as a part of this report, are sever- 
 ally entitled to seats as delegates in this Convention, and they respectfully 
 recommend that they be so received by tin's Convention. 
 
 From the State of Florida no credential of any delegates were presented to 
 your Committee. From the States of Mississippi and Texas no contesting 
 claimants appear. From Alabama, Louisiana, Georgia and Arkansas there 
 appeared contesting claimants for all the vacant seats. Of the four votes to 
 which the State of Arkansas is entitled, the now sitting delegates represent 
 -one vote. The seats representing the remaining three votes had become 
 vacant by the secession of the original delegates. These seats were all con- 
 tested, one set of contestants consisting of six persons, and the other set con- 
 sisting of three persons. Your Committee are of opinion that all of these 
 contestants should be admitted to seats as delegates, with the power of voting 
 as hereinafter declared in the resolution herewith reported in that behalf. 
 
 In the Fifth Congressional District of Massachusetts it appeared that B. F. 
 Hallett and another person were appointed delegates to this Convention, and 
 R. L. Chaffee and another person were appointed substitutes. That Mr. 
 TEallett, not being able to attend at Charleston, notified Mr. Chaffee of that 
 tfact, who thereupon proceeded to Charleston, presented his credentials, and 
 was duly admitted to his seat, which he continued to fill at the time of the 
 ■adjournment of this Convention to Baltimore. At the re-assembling of the 
 Convention at Baltimore, Mr. Hallett appeared, claimed the seat which had 
 been awarded to Mr. Chaffee, and receiving the entrance ticket from the 
 Chairman of the Massachusetts delegation, actually took possession of the 
 seat. Your Committee are of opinion that when Mr. Hallett had notified 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 115 
 
 Mr. Chaffee that he could not fulfill his duty as delegate, and Mr. Chaffee 
 repairing to Charleston had been duly admitted to this Convention, his rights 
 to his seat became absolute, and not subject to be superseded at the pleasure 
 of Mr. Hallett, and that Mr. Chaffee is now the rightful delegate to this Con- 
 vention. 
 
 In the Eighth Electoral District of Missouri the facts are precisely parallel 
 to the above Massachusetts case. The only difference is in terms, Johnson 
 B. Clardy having been elected delegate, and Jolin O'Fallon, Jr., having been 
 elected alternate. Your Committee, for reasons above stated, are of opinion 
 that, Mr. O'Fallon is now the rightful delegate 
 
 In regard t.i the contesting claimants from Georgia, your Committee have 
 to report that the evidence adduced before your Committee by the respective 
 parties, presented a great variety of novel, as well as complexed facts and 
 questions, touching the rights of either parties to seats. Your Committee, in 
 attempting to solve these difficulties, encountered embarassments on every 
 hand. After a most patient consideration of the whole matter, it seemed to 
 your Committee that the only way of reaching a satisfactory adjustment is 
 to admit to seats both delegations, with power to each of said delegations to 
 cast one half of the vote of the State, in the manner expressed in the resolu- 
 tion herewith submitted. This solution seems equitable to your Committee, 
 and therefore they recommend the adoption of said resolution. All of which 
 is respectfullv submitted. JOHN M. KRUM, Chairman. 
 
 1. Resolved, That George H. Gordon, E. Barksdale, W. F. Barry, H. C. 
 Chambers, Joseph R. Davis, Beverly Matthews, Charles Clark, Wm. L. 
 Featherston, P. F. Liddell, C. G. Armistead, Wm F. Avant, and T. J. 
 Hudson, are entitled to seats in this Convention, as delegates from the State 
 of Mississippi. 
 
 2. Resolved, That Pierre Soule, F. Cottman, R. C. Wickliffe, Michael 
 Ryan, Manuel White, Charles Brenveneau, Gustavus Leroy, J. E. Morse, A. 
 S. Herron, M. D. Colmer, J. N. T. Richardson, and J. L. Walker, are entitled 
 to seats in this Convention, as delegates from the State of Louisiana. 
 
 3. Resolved, That R. W. Johnson, T. C. Hindman, J. P. Johnson, De- 
 Roan Carroll, J. Gould, John A. Jordan, N. B. Burrows, and F. W. Hoad- 
 ley be admitted to seats as delegates from the State of Arkansas, with power 
 to cast two votes, and that Thos. H. Bradley, M. Hooper, and D. C. Cross, 
 be also admitted to seats as delegates from the same State, with power to cast 
 one vote, and in case either portion of said delegates shall refuse or neglect to 
 take their said seats, or to cast their said votes, the other portion of said 
 delegates taking seats in this Convention, shall be entitled to cast the entire 
 three votes of said district. 
 
 4. Resolved, That Guv M. Bryan, F. R. Lubbock, F. S. Starkdale, E. 
 Greer, H. R. Runnells, thos. P. Ochiltree, M. W. Covie, and J. F. Crosby, 
 are entitled to seats as delegates from Texas. 
 
 5. Resolved, That James A. Bayard and Wm. G. Whitely are entitled to 
 seats from the county of New Castle, Delaware. 
 
 6. Resolved, That R. L. Chaffee, who was duly admitted at Charleston as 
 a delegate from the Fifth Congressional District of Massachusetts, is still 
 entitled to said seat in this Convention, and that Benjamin F. Hallett, who 
 has assumed said seat, is not entitled thereto. 
 
 7. Resolved, That John O'Fallon, Jr., who was duly admitted at Charles- 
 ton as a delegate from the Eighth Congressional District of Missouri, is still 
 entitled to said seat in this Convention ; and that John B. Clardy, who has 
 assumed said seat, is not entitled thereto. 
 
 8. Resolved, That R. A. Barker, D. C. Humphrey, John Forsyth, William 
 Garrett, J. J. Seivels, S. C. Posey, L E. Parsons, Joseph C. Bradley, Thomas 
 B. Cooper, James Williams, 0. H. Bynum, Samuel W. Weaxley, L. V. B. 
 
116 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Martin, John W. W" arrack, W. R. R. Wyatt, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas M. 
 Mathews and N"orment McLeod, are entitled to seats in this Convention as 
 delegates from the State of Alabama. 
 
 9. Resolved, That the delegation from the State of Georgia, of which H. 
 L. Benningis Chairman, be admitted to the Convention, with power to cast 
 one-half of the vote of said State ; and that the delegation from said State, 
 of which Col. Gardner is Chairman, be also admitted to the Convention, with 
 power to cast one-half the vote of said State, and if either of said delegations 
 refuse or neglect to cast the vote as above indicated, that in such case the 
 delegates present in the Convention be authorized to cast the full vote of 
 said State. 
 
 Mr. Krum. Mr. President, when the question of order was made by the 
 gentleman from Virginia, I was about to submit a few prefatory remarks, 
 which I deemed as due to the Committee itself, but being one of those that 
 always submit with cheerfulness to the rules and actions of Democratic Con- 
 ventions, I yielded to the question of order thus made. 
 
 The remarks I was about to submit have no relation to the merits of the 
 report. I was about to refer to the remarkable fact that has been developed 
 since the session of this body in a distant Southern city, and I refer to it for 
 the purpose of saying a word in respect to the labors of the Committee on 
 Credentials and the manner in which those labors have been performed by 
 that Committee. The report just submitted to you, as doubtless you all 
 know, involves new, complex and unusual questions, that have arisen since 
 the session at Charleston. The Committee to whom those questions were 
 referred have, in the discharge of their duties, desired to do justice and to 
 discharge those duties with fidelity, and in their behalf I desire to say that 
 they have labored with an industry that I have never seen surpassed and 
 rarely equaled. A limited time was allowed to your Committee, for, Mr. 
 President, we were aware that you were sitting here impatiently. We had 
 the conviction thrust upon us that it was necessary to have our labors com- 
 pleted at an early day. We come before you, therefore, knowing that our 
 work has been but imperfectly performed. If further time had been allowed 
 to us, we doubtless could have perfected it and presented a more elaborate 
 report. These remarks, I thought, were due to the Committee. 
 
 JNow, Mr. President, I have only to say that it has been communicated to 
 the Chairman of the Committee that a portion of that Committee desired to 
 present a minority report, and in addition to that, that one of the Committee 
 desires to present another minority report, and I trust an opportunity will be 
 given to those gentlemen to do so. 
 
 MINORITY REPORT. 
 
 Mr. Stevens, of Oregon, then rose and submitted the minority report as 
 follows : 
 To the President of the Democratic National Convention : 
 
 Sir : — We, the undersigned, members of the Committee on Credentials, 
 feel constrained to dissent from many of the views and a large portion of the 
 action of the majority of the Committee in respect to the rights of delegates 
 to seats referred to them by the Convention, and to respectfully recommend 
 the adoption of the following resolutions : 
 
 1. Resolved, That B. F. Hallett is entitled to a seat in this Convention as 
 a delegate from the 5th Congressional District of Massachusetts. 
 
 2. Resolved, That John B. Gardy is entitled to a seat in this Convention 
 as a delegate from the 8th Congressional District of the State of Missouri. 
 
 3. Resolved, That James A. Bayard and W. C. Whitely are entitled to 
 seats in this Convention as delegates from the State of Delaware. 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 117 
 
 ' r> 
 
 4. Resolved, That the delegation headed by R. W. Johnson are entitled 
 to seats as delegates in this Convention from the State of Arkansas. 
 
 5. Resolved, That the delegation of which Guy M. Bryan is Chairman are 
 entitled to seats as delegates in t v »is Convention from the Scale of Texas. 
 
 6. Resolved, That the delegation of which John Tarlton is Chairman are 
 entitled to seats in this Convention as delegates from the State of Louisiana. 
 
 7. Resolved, That the delegation of which L. P. Walker is Chairman are 
 entitled to seats in this Convention as delegates from the State of Alabama. 
 
 8. Resovled, That the delegation of which Henry L. Benniug is Chairman 
 are entitled to seats in this Convention from the State of Georgia. 
 
 9. Resolved, That the delegation from the State of Florida, accredited to 
 the Charleston Convention, are invited to take seats in this Convention and 
 cast the vote of Florida. 
 
 The principles involved in these resolutions and the facts on which they 
 rest are of such gravity and moment that we deem it due to the Convention 
 and to ourselves to set them forth with care and particularity. We differ 
 radically from the majorit}^ of the Committee, both in much of the action vv e 
 reccommeud to the Convention and the principles which should control such 
 action. It is a question not simply of the integrity, but the existence of the 
 Democratic party in several States of this Union. It is a question whether 
 the Democratic party in said State shall be ostracized and branded as unwor- 
 thy of affiliation with the national organization. 
 
 Ir. is a question whether persons irregularly called, or withdrawing from 
 the regular Convention, shall have the sanction of the National Convention 
 to raise the flaa. of rebellion against their respective State organizations. It is 
 a question whether the Convention itself shall repudiate its own deliberate 
 action at Charleston. We do not magnify the importance of these questions 
 when we assert that upon their proper solution depends the fact as to whether 
 there shall be a National Democratic party or not. The task will not 1 e 
 difficult to show that the action recommended by the majority of the Com- 
 mittee is grossly inconsistent, and should be reprobated and condemned by 
 this Convention. But to the task, without further preamble. 
 
 Reserving to the closing portion of this report the cases of contested seats 
 in the Massachusetts and Missouri delegation, we come at once to the cases 
 of the delegates who withdrew from the Charleston Convention. This 
 Convention, on the eve of its adjournment at Charleston, and in the great 
 cause of the restoration of harmony to our distracted purty, "respectfully 
 recommended to the Democratic party of the several . v tates to make provision 
 for supplying all vacancies in their respective delegations to this Convention 
 when it shall re-assemble." We call particular attention to the wording of 
 the resolution. Certain delegates had withdrawn. They had placed on the 
 Convention the reasons of their withdrawal. 
 
 They, still, however, wtre the representatives of the Democratic party of 
 their several States. Their withdrawal was not a resignation. It was not so 
 considered by the Convention. The vacancies referred to had reference to the 
 contingency of vacancies at the time of re-assembling, and the resolution 
 proposed to provide for supplying them. The Convention did not presume 
 to touch the question as to whether the withdrawal of the delegates consti- 
 tuted a resignation, nor had it anv right to interfere in the matter. A 
 resignation must be made to the appointing power, and to be complete and 
 final must be accepted by the appointing power. It was well known on 
 the adjournment of the Convention at Charleston that the withdrawing 
 delegates desired the instruction of their several constituencies before 
 deciding on their future course. 
 
 Such was the spirit and purpose of their deliberations at Charleston. They 
 consulted th^ir respective constituencies. In every case except the case of 
 
118 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 South Carolina, their constituencies directed or authorized them— the vacan- 
 cies being filled as contemplated in the resolution of the Convention to 
 
 repair to Baltimore, and there in earnest efforts with their brethren of the 
 Convention, to endeavor once more to unite their party and promote harmony 
 and peace in the great cause of their country. The resolution of the Con- 
 vention did not prejudge the question since so strenuously raised that their 
 withdrawal was a resignation, but left the whole question to the said delegates, 
 and their respective constituencies, to the end that every State in this Union 
 might be represented in Baltimore. 
 
 The Committee has passed resolutions, declaring by a vote of 16 to 9, that 
 the delegation from Louisiana, headed by Pierre Soule — by a vote of 14 to 1L, 
 that the delegation from Alabama, headed by Parsons — and by a vote of 13 
 to 10, that half of each delegation claiming seats from Georgia, are entitled 
 to seats in the Convention. The resolutions recommended by the undersigned 
 to the Convention declare the right of the delegations elected to Charleston, 
 with vacancies supplied, as contemplated in the resolution of the Convention 
 to which reference has been made, and accredited to Baltimore, to said seats. 
 The Committee which thus recommend the irregular delegates from these 
 three States, have rejected the regular delegates from Delaware, and adnrtted 
 tne Charleston delegates. 
 
 It has admitted irregular delegates from Arkansas, and rejected a portion of 
 the Charleston delegates, as modified, by the filling of vacancies. It has ad- 
 mitted the Charleston delegates from Mississippi by a vote of 23 to 2, and the 
 Charleston delegates from Texas by a vote of 19 to 6. The fact that delega- 
 tions are not' contested does not establish the right to seats in the Convention. 
 There may be irregular delegates without contest, and there may be a contest 
 between two sets of irregular delegates. The right of persons to seats as del- 
 egates is to be determined by the fact as to whether they were appointed by 
 the constituency which they claim to represent, and appointed according to 
 the usages of said constituency. Wanting these essential pre-requisites, they 
 are not entitled to seats, even if there be no contestants ; and having these*, 
 their right to seats is not impaired or affected by contestants. 
 
 The Committee, in deciding by a vote of 23 to 2, that the Charleston dele- 
 gates from Mississippi are entitled to seats in the Baltimore Convention, have 
 decided rightly, just because they were duly accredited to Charleston, have 
 never since resigned, and have received instructions from the State of Missis- 
 sippi, through a Convention called by the Democratic Executive Committee 
 of the State, to return to Baltimore. 
 
 The Charleston delegates, both from Alabama and Georgia, stand in pre- 
 cisely the same position. They were also duly accredited to Charleston. 
 They withdrew and never resigned. They returned to their respective con- 
 stituencies. The Executive Committees in these States, as in the case of Mis- 
 sissippi, called a Convention of the party. The Convention met. The 
 delegates, as in the case of Mississippi, submitted their action to the Conven- 
 tions, and these Conventions approved their course, continued their powers, 
 and accredited them to Baltimore. Their rights stand on precisely the same 
 basis, and are sustained by the same authority as in Mississippi. The contest- 
 ants were appointed by nobody authorized to meet according to the usages of 
 the party in these States, and are not entitled to any consideration whatever. 
 
 In the case of Alabama, the Convention assembled on the call of the Dem- 
 ocratic Executive Committee (addressed to the Democracy of the State,) was 
 very largely attended, nearly every county in the State having been repre- 
 sented. A small number of persons, however, issued a notice, which was 
 published in only three newspapers in the State — in two papers the notice 
 was without signers, and in the third paper (Mobile Register) it was signed by 
 John Forsyth and thirty-five others. The notice in one paper called upon 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 119 
 
 o 
 
 all Democrats and all other persons — in the second paper upon Democrats and 
 all conservatives, and the third paper (Mobile Register) upon thepeople of Ala- 
 hum,', to held oor.nty meetings and send delegates to a State Convention, to 
 be hold in Montg mery or Selma, the 4th day of June, to appoint dtdegates 
 to Baltimore. Twenty-eight counties only out of fifty-two were represented. 
 
 It was the coming together of persons from all parties outside of the regu- 
 lar organization to strike down the Democracy of the State. It was a call 
 without any official authority whatsoever. We thusfind the Democracy of the 
 State assembling in Convention according to the usages of the party, and we 
 •find at the same time persons assembling at the call of unauthorized individ- 
 uals. In the former case the whole State was represented. In the Litter 
 about half the ^tate. Yet the majority of the Committee have indorsed the 
 action of the Democracy of Alabama, and have repudiated, contrary to all 
 precedent, usage, right and justice, the action of the former ; not only this, 
 they have repudiated the principlesof their own action in the case of the Mis- 
 sissippi delegation. 
 
 But the action of the majority of the Committee in the case of Georgia has 
 gone one step further in its disregard of the acknowledged principles of the 
 party. The Convention which the Committee put on an equality with the 
 regularly authorized Convention', consisted in great part of persons who just 
 participated in the regular Democratic Convention of the State. The regular 
 called Convention consisted of nearly four hundred delegates, representing 
 all the counties of the State. The resolutions of the Convention having been 
 adopted, by a vote of 299 to 41, these latter withdrew from the Convention 
 and organized anew. Thus the majority of your Committee have exalted the 
 pretensions of less than one-eighth of the delegates of the State Convention 
 to an equality with the rights of seven- eighths of the Democracy of the State. 
 
 In the case of Louisiana, the old Convention, which originally appointed 
 the delegates to Charleston, was re-assembled on the call of the Executive 
 Committee of the State, and by a decisive majority accredited the Charleston 
 delegates to Baltimore. The reasons for this action have their parallels in the 
 cases of Texas and Delaware, which have received the sanction of the Com- 
 mittee. In Texas, the delegates come back accredited by the Democratic Ex- 
 ecutive Committee simply — it being a manifest impossibility, from want of 
 time, to assemble the party in a State Convention ; and in Delaware, under the 
 usages and rules of the party, the old Convention was re- assembled. In Lou- 
 isiana there was time to assemble the old Convention, but not to order an 
 election of delegates in the several parishes to meet a new Convention. The 
 Executive Committee did every thing it could to get the expression of thf 
 views of the State. It re-assembled the old Convention, nearly every parish 
 in the State being represented, and accredited the Charleston delegates to Bal 
 timore. 
 
 But the Convention whose delegates to Baltimore have been indorsed by the 
 majority of your Committee, was called at the instance of two local organi- 
 zations, and of Dr. Cottman, a former member of the National Executive 
 Committee of the party. The calls were somewhat conflicting. The notice 
 did not reach many parishes in the State. Only twenty parishes out of thir- 
 ty-nine are pretended to be represented, and in several of these there is no 
 reason to doubt the fact that the delegates did not leave behind them a single 
 constituent agreeing with them in sentiments. In not a single parish was this 
 call responded to by a majority of the Democratic voters. The Convention 
 only represented a very small portion of the party — it was totally irregular, 
 besides. 
 
 The majority of the Committee object to the aetion of the old Convention 
 on hs re-assembling at the call of the Executive Committee, on the ground 
 th t it was defunct and could not be brought to life. Yet it indorses the action 
 
120 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 of the other Convention on the call in part of the equally defunct member of 
 t lie National Committee, Dr. Cottman. The following the usage of Dela- 
 ware, by the Executive Committee of Louisiana, though manifestly a neces- 
 sity^ for the reasons stated, has no weight as a precedent with this majority. 
 Conceding their ground of its being irregular, seals as delegates should be 
 given to the body called by the regular authority and not to the body assem- 
 bled by no responsible authority whatever, and especally when the former 
 represented the great body of the party and the latter did not. All these con-, 
 siderat : ons, however, have been disregarded by the majority of the Committee, 
 who have persisted by a vote of 16 to 9 to award the seats as delegates to the 
 representatives of the disorganizing minority Convention. 
 
 Iu the case of Arkansas, the majority of the Committee propose to divide 
 out the seats to all applicants. In this State the Democratic party were about 
 assembling in their District Conventions, consisting of delegates from the sev- 
 erai counties of the State, for the nomination of member of Congress, when 
 their delegates returned from Charleston. As in Texas, there was not time 
 for the assembling of a State Convention. In these District Conventions, 
 delegates were selected to represent the party at Baltimore. A call was how- 
 ever issued in a Memphis paper, without any signature whatever, calling upon 
 the people of the Northern District to assemble in mass meeting at Madison, 
 lo elect delegates to Baltimore. 
 
 Some four or five hundred men from ten to twelve counties thus assembled and 
 appointed three delegates to Baltimore. The majority of the Committee 
 propose to allow these men to vote in the Convention. There are twenty- 
 seven counties and twenty-five thousand voters in the district. Col. Hindman, 
 a delegate, elected by the District Convention, to Baltimore, was elected to 
 Congress, in 1858, by eighteen thousand majoiity, and was unanimously re- 
 nominated by the Convention which selected him as a delegate to Baltimore. 
 These facts show the significance of the action of the District Convention in 
 electing delegates to Baltimore as representing truly the sentiment of the 
 Democratic party of the district, and they exhibit the utter insignificance of 
 the anonymously called Convention, fur it will be borne in mind that it was 
 held at a central point, at the western terminus of the railroad from Memphis, 
 and where several stage and wagon routes meet. They were elected as dele- 
 gates generally from the State to the National Convention, with the hope 
 that they might get in without any definite claim. 
 
 In Massachusetts and Missouri, the contests are between principals now 
 holding their seats and substitutes who held their places at Charleston. In 
 each case the principal was detained at home by sickness in his family. In 
 eaeh case the principal gave notice to his substitute that he should take his 
 seat at Baltimore. The majority of the Committee hold that the principals, 
 elected as such by the proper Conventions, are not entitled to their seats aud 
 have reported accordingly. We hold that a substitute is appointed simply 
 to act in the absence of the principal, and that his authority ceases whenever 
 the principal makes his appearance and takes his seat. We emphatically 
 declare that such has been the invariable usage in all Conventions of the 
 party, whether National or State, and that it is based on reason and the 
 representative principle 
 
 All which is respectfully submitted. 
 ISAAC J. STEVENS, Oregon, A. R. SPEFIR, New Jersey, 
 
 H. M. NORTH, Pennsvlvania, JOHN H. BULEY, Delaware, 
 
 E. W. HUBUARD, Virginia, R. R. BRIDGES, North Carolina, 
 
 WM. H. OARiiOLL, Tennessee, GEO. H. MORROW, Kentucky, 
 
 D. S. GREGORY, California. 
 
 In the points of difference between the majority and minority reports of the 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 12 1 
 
 ',•-> 
 
 Committee on Credentials, I concur in the conclusion of the minority report 
 in the cases of Georgia, Alabama, Missouri and Massachusetts. 
 
 AARON V. HUGHES, New Hampshire. 
 Mr. Stevens. It will be observed that the Committee are nearly unani- 
 mous, and the two reports agree in the case of Texas, Missouri and Delaware. 
 I am requested to state that the delegate from Tennessee dissents from a portion 
 of the conclusion of the Committee, but votes under instruction of his co- 
 delegates ; also that the gentleman from New Hampshire agrees with the 
 report, of the minority, in the case of Georgia, Alabama, Massachusetts and 
 Missouri. 
 
 A SECOND MINORITY REPORT. 
 
 Mr. Gittings, of Maryland. Mr. President : Being unable to agree with 
 either wing of the Committee on Credentials, I have drawn up a report, 
 which I submit to the Convention. 
 
 The report was then read as follows : 
 Son. Caleb Cashing, President: 
 
 Sir : — The undersigned, a delegate from the State of Maryland, and repre- 
 senting that State upon the Committee on Credentials, begs leave to say to 
 the Democratic National Convention that, while he concurs in and indorses 
 the report of the majority of the Committee upon Credentials — so far as 
 relates to the contested seats of the State of Massachusetts ; the contested 
 seat in the State of Missouri ; the contested seats in the State of Delaware ; 
 as also in regard to the contested delegations in the States of Arkansas, 
 Georgia and Louisiana, and agreeing with them also in their recommendation 
 to admit the delegations now present and claiming seats from the States of 
 Texas and Mississippi — he differs from and protests against their action with 
 regard to the State of Alabama. 
 
 Upon a careful examination of all the fa*cts concerning this State, the 
 undersigned believes and so reports, that the delegation of which L. P. Walker 
 is chairman is the regularly elected representative of the State of Alabama, 
 and as such is clearly entitled to seats in the Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Coming here as they do, not alone by virtue of the commission under 
 which they held their seats at Charleston, but having been re-elected 
 and accredited by a State Convention called together in accordance 
 with the usages of the Democratic party of the State of Alabama, the under- 
 signed holds it to be the imperative duty of this National Convention to 
 recognize their claims as the only authorized delegates from the State of 
 Alabama. 
 
 The undersigned therefore offers the following : 
 
 Resolved, That so much of the majority report of the Committee on 
 Credentials as relates to Massachusetts, Missouri, Delaware, Arkansas, Georgia, 
 Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas be adopted. 
 
 Resolved, That the delegation of which L. P. Walker is Chairman, be and 
 they are hereby declared the only regular authorized representatives of the 
 State of Alabama, and as such, are entitled to seats in this National Demo- 
 cratic Convention. 
 
 All of which is respectfully submitted. 
 
 Baltimore, June 21, 1860. W. S. GITTINGS. 
 
 Mr. Gittings. I move that the report be printed, and that we take a 
 recess till 3 o'clock. [Many voices, *'no," "no."] 
 
 Mr. Gittings. I withdraw it. 
 
 Mr. Krum resumed the floor. 
 
 Mr. Phillips desired to make a suggestion to the gentleman from Maryland . 
 
 Mr. Krum declined to yield the floor. He then said : Mr. President and 
 gentlemen of the Convention, by the majority and minority reports you are 
 
122 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 now possessed of the questions which arise in respect to those reports, and it is 
 not my purpose now to enter upon a debate in respect to any of those ques- 
 tions, but merely to make a suggestion in order that we may understand each 
 other in our future action in regard to those reports. And, in the first place, 
 J am thorough' convinced that an extended debate in regard to any one of 
 the questions will result in little if any good to the harmony of this Conven- 
 tion ; and, as the propositions are plainly stated and addressed to the 
 judgment of the Convention in the several reports, I desire to state that, 
 within a resonable time, I shall move the previous question, in order that we 
 may come to direct action. [Applause, and cries from all quarters, " move it 
 now," " now," "now."] I am appealed to on every hand to move it now. 
 I desire to state that I am under such obligations to brethren of the Com- 
 mittee, with whom I have acted with entire harmony and good faith, that I 
 eould not do so. [Renewed cries of " question," and '' move it now."] 
 
 Mr. Phillips, of Pennsylvania. I suggest that as the reports of the 
 majority and minority agree as to recommending the admission of the dele- 
 gates from Mississippi, Texas and Delaware, I ask the unanimous consent of 
 the Convention to let the vote be taken upon them now. [Many voices — 
 "no," "no."] Mr. President, tell me with what fairness it can be refused ? 
 
 Mr. Cessna, of Pennsylvania. I call my colleague to order. 
 
 The President. The Chair begs leave to inquire whether the gentleman 
 from Missouri (Mr. Krum) made a motion or yielded the floor? He did not 
 know which, it was done so abruptly. 
 
 A Delegate. He yielded the floor to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. 
 Stevens). 
 
 The President. The Chair did not so understand, and therefore wishes to 
 inquire of the gentleman from Missouri? 
 
 Mr. Krum No, sir — I only yielded temporarily. 
 
 The President. Then the gentleman from Missouri has the floor. 
 
 Mr. Phillips. I submit that the gentleman cannot yield the floor tempo- 
 rarily, but must yield it absolutely — and I understood the gentleman to say 
 that he did yield it to the gentleman from Oregon. 
 
 Points of order were made by Mr. Schell, of New York, Mr. Atkins, of 
 Tennessee, and Mr. Waterbury, of New York, upon Mr. Krum, each claim- 
 ing that Mr. Krum had yielded the floor. 
 
 The President stated that he must determine the question of order by 
 ascertaining the question of fact. If the gentleman from Missouri sa)Sto 
 the Convention that he had finished what he had to say, and had ceased to 
 speak in order to enable the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Stevens) to speak 
 — if that was his intention when he left his position, the Chair will be bound 
 to say that the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Krum) had lost the floor and 
 could not resume it, and upon that question of fact and intention the Chair 
 will be bound to accept the declaration upon honor of the gentleman from 
 Missouri. 
 
 Mr. Krum, of Missouri. I trust that whenever I speak it will be regarded 
 that I speak upon honor. I speak to you now upon honor. I state now, as 
 I did before, that the fact is I supposed I had the right to yield the floor 
 temporarily to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Stevens) that he might make 
 some explanation or comment to this Convention. I did so, and it was my 
 design to resume the floor. And I did not suppose I had lost my right to the 
 floor simply because I stepped from this elevation. 
 
 The President. The gentleman from Missouri now explains that what 
 he said was, " I yield the floor temporarily to the gentleman from Oregon " 
 Nov the Chair does not understand that any gentleman in this body can 
 yield the floor to any other gentleman to speak, until the gentleman so pro- 
 posing to speak shall b<j recognized by the Chair. If it were otherwise, there 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 123 
 
 i '& 
 
 would be an end of all order of debate, as well as interchange of fair rights 
 of inequality upon the floor of the Convention. And now as the gentleman 
 from Missouri (Mr. Kf am) says that in sitting down he said, ll I yield the 
 floor, &c," the Chair rules that that is a yielding of the floor ; and if the 
 gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Stevens) had got the floor so that he could be 
 recognized, he would have been recognized. But in this case the Chair 
 recognized the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Phillips), and the Chair is 
 of opinion that he is entitled to the floor. 
 
 Mr. Phillips submitted some remarks upon the subject of the several 
 reports of the Committees, and was called to order by Mr. Stuart, of Michi- 
 gan, and by Mr. Pngh, of Ohio. 
 
 Mr. Phillips. I did wot mean to submit any motion of amendment at 
 this time. My object is merely to call the attention of the Convention to 
 some points presented by the different reports of the Committee on Creden- 
 tial, and upon that it occurred to me that the duty of the Convention would 
 be plain. I repeat, I invite the attention of the Convention to the fact that 
 the Committee on Credentials report unanimously in iavor of the admission 
 of the delegations of Mississippi, Texas and Delaware. Upon all those dele- 
 gations there is unanimity. 
 
 Mr. Stevens, of Oregon. I do not rise to inflict a speech upon this Con- 
 vention. I am content, for the most part, to rest the views of the minority 
 of the Committee on Credentials on the report which they have presented to 
 the Convention. That report has been read, and shows entire unanimity in 
 the Committee as regards Delaware, Texas and Mississippi. Those three 
 cases involve the principles which the minority of the Committee have 
 adopted in reference to the action they ask of this Convention upon the 
 resolutions they have submitted. My friend from Pennsylvania (Mr. Phil- 
 lips) has well put the case of those three States, and I need add nothing 
 further. I now call the previous question. 
 
 Mr. Gotjlden, of Georgia. I appeal to this Convention to hear me for a 
 few moments. 
 
 L'he President. I must state the question, as it is called for. It is the 
 duty of the Chair now to put the preliminary question, w 7 hich is upon the 
 second of the demand for the previous question. Is the Convention ready 
 for that question ? 
 
 Mr. Gollden, of Georgia. Before the question is put, allow me to say 
 a word. 
 
 The President. The gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Goulden) is out of 
 order. 
 
 Mr. Avery, of North Carolina. I rise to a privileged question. Before 
 the question is put upon seconding the demand for the previous question, I 
 call for a division of the question upon the resolutions. 
 
 The President. That can be done as well after the previous question is 
 ordered. 
 
 The question was then put to the Convention — 
 
 " Shall the demand for the previous question be seconded? " 
 
 Ai:d the Convention agreed to the seconding of the demand for the previous 
 question. 
 
 The President. The question now is — 
 
 "Shall the main question be now put ?'" 
 
 A vote was taken, and the main question was ordered. 
 
 Mr. Cochran, of New York. We of the New York delegation, wish to 
 consult before voting upon this question. And for the purpos ! of affording us 
 that opportunity, I move that when this Convention adjourn, it be to meet at 
 5 o'clock this afternoon. 
 
 Cries of " no adjournment," " let us vote." 
 
124 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 The question was then taken upon the vote of Mr. Cochran, and the Chair 
 announced that it was not agreed to. 
 
 Mr. Randall, of Pennsylvania, moved that tho Convention take a recess 
 until half-past four o'clock, and upon that he called for the vote by States. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan. I would suggest to the Chair that after the 
 house has ordered the main question to be put, nothing can take precedence of 
 it but a motion to adjourn generally. 
 
 Mr. Seymour, of New York. I move that the Convention now adjourn till 
 five o'clock this afternoon. We wish an opportunity to look through the reports. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan. There is no motion in order but a general motion 
 to adjourn. 
 
 Mr. Seymour. Then I move to adjourn. 
 
 Mr. Avery, of North Carolina. I will withdraw my motion fcr a division of 
 the question. 
 
 Mr. Phillips, of Pennsylvania, and others renewed the call for the division 
 of the question. 
 
 The President. The division of the question has now been called for. 
 The first question is now upon the motion of Mr. Seymour, of New York, to 
 adjourn. 
 
 The question being taken, the motion to adjourn was not agreed to. 
 
 Mr. Randall, of Pennsylvania. I move the Convention adjourn to half- 
 past four o'clock. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan. I must insist upon my point of order, that after 
 the house has ordered the main question to be now put, it cuts off every ques- 
 tion except the motion to adjourn generally. 
 
 Mr. Ludlow, of New York. I have a suggestion to make in favor of a 
 recess. It is that the large delegation of New York has had no opportunity of 
 consultation upon the questions now before the Convention. I now move that 
 the Convention take a recess until 5 o'clock this afternoon. 
 
 The President. There is no question before the Convention except the 
 motion of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Ludlow,) to take a recess until 
 5 o'clock, and- the Chair does not understand that in this stage of the previous 
 question a motion for a recess is in order. A motion to adjourn is in order, but 
 not a motion for a recess. 
 
 Mr. Bradford, o( Pennsylvania. I move that when the Convention adjourn 
 to-day, it be to half- past four o'clock this afternoon. 
 
 Mr. Samuels, of Iowa. I ask the Chair, in connection with that motion, to 
 pass upon the question of order made by the gentleman from Michigan, 
 (Mr. Smart,) and that is that such a motion is not in order after the previous 
 question has been ordered. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan. I would suggest that the Convention go on with 
 the business of the Convention, so that we may be able to proceed to a vote 
 immediately upon assembling again. 
 
 The President. The Chair understands that the main question having 
 been ordered, the first question is upon the amendments to the majority report, 
 the amendments consisting of the two minority reports. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan. With that understanding, I will withdraw my 
 objection. 
 
 Mr. Cessna, of Pennsylvania. The delegation from Pennsylvania iu-on 
 consultation are willing to withdraw their opposition, and to vote in favor of 
 the motion, if the call of the S-ates is withdrawn. 
 
 Mr. Randall, of Pennsylvania. If the call of the vote by States is with- 
 drawn, the motion will probably now be carried. 
 
 Mr. Saulsbury withdrew the call. 
 
 The question was then taken upon the motion to take a recess and was 
 agreed to. 
 
 Thereupon the Convention took a recess until half- past four o'clock. 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 125 
 
 EVENING SESSION. 
 
 The Convention was called to order by the President at 5 o'clock. 
 
 Mr. LUDLOW, of New York. Mr. President : — On behalf of the delegation 
 from New York, r tender their apology for having kept this Convention waiting 
 beyond the time of the recess. And I am authorized by them in view of the 
 face that they are now in consultation, and will be unable for some length of 
 time to record their votes upon the question now before the Convention. I am 
 deputized by them to appear before you and ask a further recess and time to — 
 
 Many voices. ''No, no," "yes, yes." 
 
 Mr. Johnson - , of Maryland. I would suggest, in order to save the time of 
 this Convention, that the vote be now taken, and the vote of New York be 
 recorded when she is ready to give it. 
 
 Responses oi "good, good," and "no, no." 
 
 Mr. Bradford, of Pennsylvania. I move a recess till 8 o'cl >ck this evening. 
 
 Voices, " no, no." 
 
 Several Delegates moved to adjourn. 
 
 Mr. Bradford. I move we do now adjourn. 
 
 Mr. Saulsbury, of Delaware. I call for the vote by States. 
 
 A Delegate from Massachusetts inquired if the Convention adjourned, to 
 what hour it would be ? 
 
 The President. Till 10 o'clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 The call of the Spates having been completed, and all having responded 
 with the exception of the New York delegation, who were absent in consulta- 
 tion, 
 
 The President inquired, as a matter of form, of the Chairman of the N"ew 
 York delegation, if present, whether the vote of that State was ready to be 
 recorded ? It was not material, but receiving no answer, he would assume 
 that there was uo one here authorized to cast the vote of that State. 
 
 The Chair begged leave to state, before declaring the vote just taken, that 
 he had received this afternoon a communication from gentlemen of the Srate of 
 Arkansas, which he had had no opportunity to present this afternoon, but 
 would offer to the Convention to-morrow morning. He desired to state this 
 lest he might be supposed to have overlooked it. 
 
 The vote was then announced on the motion to adjourn — ayes 161^, nays 48, 
 as follows : 
 
 Yeas. Nays i Teas. Nays' Yeas. Nays. 
 
 Maine.... 8 ! North Carolina 7£ 2£ Ohio 23 
 
 New Hiaipshire \ -HSonth Carolina 
 
 Vermont. Georgia ... 
 
 Massachusetts.- -H 8 p Florida 
 
 Rhode Island 4 'Alabama 
 
 Connecticut 2 4 ^Louisiana 
 
 New York Mississippi. 
 
 Mew Jersey 4 3 Texas 
 
 Pennsylvania 15 11 jArkansas - 
 
 Delaware _ 2 Missouri.. fi 
 
 Maryland 4 4 iTennessee 5 
 
 Virginia 14 1 Kentucky 12 
 
 Whereupon the Convention adjourned. 
 
 Indiana 13 
 
 rairrois 11 
 
 Michigan 6 
 
 Wisconsin 5 
 
 Iowa ; 4 
 
 Minnesota 4 
 
 California 4 
 
 Oregon 3 
 
 16H 48 
 
 FIFT^3I DAT. 
 
 Friday, June 22, 1860. 
 At 10 o'clock the President called the Convention to order, and it was 
 opened bv the Rev. Mr. Schwartz with prayer. 
 
 Mr. W sight, of Massachusetts, called for the reading of the journal. 
 Mr. McCook, of Ohio, moved to dispense with the reading of the journal. 
 Mr. Wright. I desire to have it read because there is a difference of opin- 
 ion as to the state of the motions before the Convention. It is proper that 
 
126 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 we should know how the journal stands, and I submit to the gentleman the 
 propriety of having it read. 
 
 Many Voices. "No," "no." 
 
 Mr. McCook. We can have the state of the questions from the Chair. 
 
 The question was taken, and the reading of the journal was dispensed with. 
 
 The President. At the adjournment of the Convention yesterday, it had 
 ordered that the main question be now put. If it be the pleasure of the Con- 
 vention, the Chairman will have reported in due form, the order of questions 
 as they arise to which the main question applies. 
 
 The Secretary here read the resolutions of the majority of the Committee. 
 
 Mr. Krum rose to a question of privilege. His attention had been directed 
 to the fact that errors had occurred in the names of the delegates in both the 
 report of the majority and the minority, and he asked permission to correct 
 the same. 
 
 The President stated tint he had been informed of the errors by the gen- 
 tlemen who made the several reports, and if the Convention pleased, the 
 Chairman would understand that by unanimous consent the gentlemen from 
 Missouri have permission to correct the misnomers. 
 
 Mr. Stevens, of Oregon, desired to state that an omission had occurred, 
 in the minority report, of a resolution in regard to the delegates from Missis- 
 sippi, and he would ask the unanimous consent of the Convention to have it 
 incorporated. 
 
 Resolved, That George H. Gordon, E. Barksdale, W. F. Barry, H. C. 
 Chambers, Joseph R. Davis, Beverlv Matthews, Charles Clark, Wm. L. 
 Featherston, P. F. Slidell, C. G. Armistead, Wm. F. Cevant and F. G. Hud- 
 son are entitled to seats in this Convention as delegates from the State of 
 Mississippi. 
 
 The President. The Chair will undersstand that unless objection is made, 
 the unanimous consent of the Convention will be given that the clerical errors 
 be corrected. 
 
 The resolutions of the minority report (Mr. Stevens') were then read as 
 corrected ; also the resolution reported by Mr. Gittings, of Maryland. 
 
 Mr. Sibley, of Minnesota. Mr. President, I desire to propound a single 
 respectful interrogatory. It will be recollected that yesterday the Chairman 
 of the Commitee on Credentials, while proceeding to address the Convention 
 upon the presentation of the majority report, under a misapprehension of his 
 right, yielded the floor to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Stevens), for 
 explanation, and was thus unable to proceed. I now submit to the Chair the 
 question whether, according to the rules and practice of the House of Repre- 
 sentatives, which govern this body, the Chairman of the Committee has not 
 a right to close the debate before the previous question is put ? 
 
 The President. If the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Krum) desires to 
 close debate, it is, as the Chair understands, his privilege to do so, even after 
 the main question has been ordered. Before doing so, the Chair desires to 
 inquire of the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gittings) whether he wishes to 
 make an amendment to his resolution ? 
 
 Mr. Gittings. It has been suggested that as there has been no new matter 
 in my first resolution it is out of order. I readily see that it is so, and to 
 save the Chair the pain of calling me to order, I shall ask permission of the 
 Convention to withdraw it, leaving but one resolution. 
 
 The President. The Chair will understand the Convention as giving its 
 unanimous consent to the amendment desired by the gentleman from Mary- 
 land (Mr. Gittings). 
 
 Mr. Wright, of Massachusetts. Before that question is decided I wish to 
 raise a question of order whether the gentleman from Maryland did submit a 
 motion to the Convention to amend the report before the Convention by the 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 127 
 
 substitution of his resolution yesterday for the majority resolution ? I did 
 not hear it. I heard him submit a motion tcj print. 
 
 Mr. Gittings. I undoubtedly made the motion. If my friend did not 
 hear it, either his hearing is bad, or my voice is very feeble. 
 
 Mr. Wright. I receive the gentleman's explanation, but respectfully 
 submit that the gentleman omitted to do it, though he intended to make the 
 motion. 
 
 The President. The Chair understood the gentleman from Maryland to 
 make the motion. 
 
 Mr. Wright. Do i how understand the first resolution moved to be out 
 of order as a proposition to amend the majority report ? 
 
 The President. The first resolution has been withdrawn by unanimous 
 consent. [Voices, " oh, no. 1 '] Does not the gentleman from Maryland 
 withdraw the proposition ? 
 
 Mr. Wright. I do not consent, it is out of order. 
 
 The President suggested to the gentleman from Maryland, in order not to 
 require the Chair to rule his amendment out of order, to ask the consent of 
 the Convention to withdraw his resolution. 
 
 Mr. Wright now rose to another question — whether the second resolution, 
 being identical with a proposition in the majority report, is not also surplusage 
 and out of order ? 
 
 The President stated that he would rule upon that question when it 
 came up for action upon it. 
 
 Mr. Gtttings. Inasmuch as there is some disposition to debate, I will 
 withdraw both the resolutions. 
 
 The President. By unanimous consent the gentleman from Maryland 
 wishes to withdraw h's proposition. 
 
 Unanimous consent was given, and Mr. Grittings withdrew his Minority 
 Report and Resolutions. 
 
 Mr. Krum. I rise to a further question of privilege, to correct the list of 
 names, Mr. Burrows and Mr. Manning belonging to the Arkansas delegation 
 instead of Florida. 
 
 He then asked leave, in behalf of the majority of the Committee on Cre- 
 dentials, to file a brief statement of their reasons. 
 
 Air. Sibley, of Minnesota, inquired whether a single objection was suffi- 
 cient to prevent the speech of the Chairman of the Committee being made ? 
 
 Mr. Krum. If the Convention will allow me to present this brief statement 
 I will consent to make no speech whatever. 
 
 Mr. Wright rose to a point of order. There had been no debate upon the 
 resolutions and therefore the claim of the Chairman of the Committee could 
 not be allowed. 
 
 The President. The gentleman from Missouri has the floor. The Chair 
 desires to understand whether he wishes to exercise his presumed right to be 
 heard. 
 
 Mr. Krum. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Waterburt, of New York, insisted that the point of order taken by 
 the gentleman from Massachusetts was correct — that there had been no 
 debate, and therefore the gentleman from Missouri had no right to speak as 
 Chairman of the Committee. 
 
 Mr. Atkins, of Tennessee. I trust the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
 Waterbury) will withdraw the point of order he has made upon the gentleman 
 from Missouri, (Mr. Krum.) There certainly was some little debate yes- 
 terday upon this proposition. 
 
 Mr. Waterbury, of New York. I am not aware of any debate upon this 
 proposition, unless it be the few remarks made by the gentleman from Mis- 
 souri himself (Mr. Krum) and the suggestion made by the gentleman from 
 
128 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Pennsylvania (Mr. Phillips.) But the gentleman from Pennsylvania did not 
 debate the merits of the propositions before the Convention. And there has 
 not been, in the proper sense of the term, any debate whatever upon these 
 propositions. 
 
 Mr. Clark, of Missouri. Before the Chair announces its opinion, I wish 
 to call the attention of the President to the remarks of the gentleman from 
 Pennsylvania, (Mr. Phillips.) and some remarks of the gentleman from 
 Oregon, (Mr. S'evens,) in reference to the various reports. I make these sug- 
 gestions merely to enable the Chair to determine whether there has been any 
 debate at all or not. 
 
 The President. The Chair is aware of that, and the Chair was about to 
 say that yesterday, upon the report of the Committee on Credentials being 
 rendered, the gentleman from Missouri, (Mr. Krum,) the Chairman of the 
 Commjttee, made a speech within the rules of the Convention. The Chair 
 would be bound to consider that as debate, although it was only on one side 
 of the question. After that followed — although it may have been but a sin- 
 gle sentence — yet there followed a remark or two from the gentleman from 
 Oregon, (Mr. Stevens,) and after that there followed more suggestions from 
 the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Phillips,) upon which suggestions the 
 gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stuart,) made a point of order whether or not 
 debate was in order at that time, and whether what the gentleman from Penn- 
 sylvania, (Mr. Phillips) was saying, constituted debate in order ? The Chair 
 expressly ruled at that time that the several propositions before the Conven- 
 tion were debatable propositions, and that the Chair understood the gentleman 
 from Pennsylvania to be debating those propositions in order; therefore, the 
 Chair is of opinion that there was debate, and that upon that state of facts, 
 in concurrence with the usage of the House of Representatives— which the 
 Chair assumes to bind him in all matters not expressly set down in the rules, 
 the Chair rules that the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. K r um) has the right 
 to address the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Krum, of Missouri. I will submit to this Convention a few remarks, 
 and in order that they may be concisely stated, I have taken the trouble to 
 condense them in as brief a space as the circumstances in which I am placed 
 will allow. The gentleman then proceeded to read as follows : 
 
 It will be observed that the majority report contains only the conclusions 
 and recommendations of the Committee. This is the usual course. Commit- 
 tees are the chosen organs for investigation of deliberative bodies. Their 
 reports are confided in, and unless assailed, stand unquestioned. In the 
 matter now before the Convention, the report of the Committee is assailed 
 by a minority report, (signed by I. J. Stevens and eight others,) and a state- 
 ment of certain premises and labored argument have been presented by the 
 minority of the Commitee, to support the conclusions of this minority. 
 
 The statements contained in this minority report, on which the main argu- 
 ment of these gentlemen is founded, are for the most part naked assumptions, 
 not established by any evidence before the Committee, and depend entirely 
 for their verity upon the mere ipse dixit of the gentlemen who make them. 
 
 The task of exposing the misstatements contained in this minority report 
 is an easy one, and it will be done in terse but unmistakable language. In 
 the brief space of fifteen minutes the most salient points can only be noticed. 
 If the facts assumed by these gentlemen have no foundation, as a matter of 
 course their argument based upon them falls to the ground. Now to the 
 work : 
 
 First. It is asserted that the withdrawal from this Convention of certain 
 delegates, was not a resignation ; that the vacancies referred to (in the resolu- 
 tion of this Convention,) had reference to the contingency of vacancies at the 
 time of rc-assembling, <$fc, i. e. prospective vacancies ! A b alder absurdity 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 329 
 
 '© 
 
 was never uttered. Now what was the subject matter of which the Com- 
 mittee had jurisdiction ? Was it not the ll Credentials of all persons claiming 
 seats, tfc, made vacant by the secession of delegates at Charleston?" This 
 Convention decided for itself whether vacancies had occurred. The Democ- 
 racy of the States, affected by such withdrawal, in every instance, by 
 appointing delegates anew, virtually admitted that vacancies had occurred. 
 The claimants who appeared before }^our Committee, by accepting a new 
 appointment admitted the fact, and the gentlemen of the minority stultify 
 their own statement by acting on these very cases. 
 
 If there were no vacancies by secession, there was nothing for the Com- 
 mittee to do in vespect to such cases. Out upon such nonsense ! 
 
 Secondly, In attempting to show the inconsistency of the majority report, 
 these gentlemen state that delegates were recommended to seats who had not 
 been re-appointed or re-accredited to Baltimore aft jr their secession at Charles- 
 ton. To this a flat denial is given. This denial is based upon th; evidence 
 that was before the Committee. In every case, to wit, in Alabama, Georgia, 
 Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Texas, the parties admitted to seats by 
 the majority report had been severally elected, appointed or re- accredited in 
 some form, since the adjournment at Charleston. Of this fact, (if the evidence 
 is reliable,) successful contradiction is challenged. 
 
 The minority gentlemen again stultify themselves, for they show that re- 
 elections took place in three States, but they strangely forgot to state the 
 fact, (established before the Committee,) that Messrs. Bayard and Whitely 
 were re-appointed according to the rules of the Democracy of New Castle 
 county, Delaware, and the Texas delegation were directed by the Executive 
 Committee of that State to repair to Baltimore. It was in evidence before 
 the Committee that this was a customary mode in those States of making 
 nominations and appointing delegates, &c. The Committee considered it tan- 
 tamount to a re-appointment. But what of Mississippi? Is it not the boast 
 of some of the Mississippi delegation, that they have been re- appointed since 
 their secession without opposition? If there has not been a new election, 
 how comes it that delegates are here from Mississi ppi who were not at Charles- 
 ton? The credentials of this delegation show upon their face that they were 
 appointed by the Convention that sat on the 30th and 31st of May, I860 ! 
 The temerity of the gentlemen is without a parallel. No new election in 
 Mississippi? 
 
 The following are some of the reasons which influenced the decision of the 
 majority of the Committee in respect to the claimants from Alabama, of which 
 L. P. Walker is Chairman. He and his associates claim to have been appoint- 
 ed by a Convention that sat on the 4:th of June inst. Several of these were 
 not seceders at Charleston. Mark this fact. But where were these delegates 
 appointed on the 4th of June to go? — to what Convention? They were 
 instructed by the Convention that appointed them to repair to Richmond and 
 to co-operate with the delegates of that Convention, tfc. 
 
 This is written upon the face of the credentials which were before your 
 Committee. It is true, a little lower down in the same paper, they are " ac- 
 credited " to this Convention ! 
 
 These gentlemen were considered by your Committee, for this and other 
 reasons, as delegates to the Richmond Convention and not to this. A roving 
 commission ! Suppose their instructions had included Conventions of the 
 Blacfc Republicans of Chicago, and of the Mormons of Utah — would this 
 Convention allow them seats after they had boxed the compass under such a 
 roving commission? Your Committee said no, and every true Democrat 
 throughout the land will respond no ! (Applause and some hisses.) 
 
 In the Arkansas case, the applicants for seats show no regularity of record. 
 The seceders from Charleston having vacated their seats by the act of 
 9 
 
130 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 secession, the Committee felt it their duty either to recommend to the Con- 
 vention the exclusion of both sets of applicants on the score of irregularity, 
 or to admit both. The two District Conventions that are alleged to have 
 sustained the action of the seceders and to have accredited them to Baltimore, 
 had, by their own admission, no power to act in the premises, and therefore 
 their action does not entitle the applicants to seats in the Convention. The 
 opposing claimants were appointed by a Convention called, upon notice, in 
 the usual way, by individuals not possessing an official character, and they 
 are therefore, technically speaking, no more entitled than the others to seats ; 
 but the Committee, disregarding technicalities and not desiring to leave the 
 Democracy of Arkansas unrepresented on this floor, decided to recommend 
 that all the claimants be admitted to seats in the Convention, on the terms 
 and conditions specified in their report. 
 
 In the Louisiana case it is clearly demonstrated likewise, that according to 
 strict usage neither of the delegations were entitled to be received by this 
 Convention. The seceders from Charleston did not present themselves before 
 a new Convention, fresh from the people, but the old Convention which had 
 adjourned sine die, (and therefore had by its own act and the usages of the 
 party terminated its legal existence,) was called together to indorse the action 
 of the seceders. That so called Convention had therefore no more right than 
 any other like number of individual Democrats to assume to act as the repre- 
 sentatives of the Democracy of Louisiana. Their proceedings in any case 
 were of no force or validity, and their action in re-accrediting the seceding 
 delegates to Baltimore was a gross usurpation of power on their part. 
 
 On the other hand, the delegation whose admission has been recommended 
 by the Committee was appointed by a Convention assembled at Donaldson- 
 ville, composed of delegates from twenty-one parishes, (including the city of 
 New Orleans,) out of thirty-nine parishes in the State. It is true that the 
 call for the Democracy of the State to send delegates to the Convention was 
 made by individual Democrats and by two distinct Democratic clubs, but in- 
 asmuch as the State Executive Committee refused to call a new Convention, 
 and thus appeal to the Democracy to indorse or condemn the action of their 
 delegates at Charleston who withdrew from the Convention, there was no other 
 course to be pursued than for known and distinguished members of the party 
 to issue the call, and for the Democracy to sustain it by the appointment of 
 delegates in accordance with such call. An emergency had arisen, and inas- 
 much as the Executive Committee had refused to act, it seemed to the Com- 
 mittee that there was no other course left to the Democracy of Louisiana, but 
 to assemble in Convention upon the spontaneous call of individual Democrats. 
 
 The admission of both of the delegations presenting themselves from Geor- 
 gia, was recommended because the Committee believed that each of those 
 delegations represent the opinions and sentiments of a part of the Democracy 
 of the State. The withdrawal from the Convention of a part of its members 
 was occasioned, as the evidence before the Committee demonstrated, by a dif- 
 ference of construction between them and their associates upon oertain points 
 in the Democratic platform. Two Conventions, each claiming to be the cor- 
 rect and only exponents of the Democratic sentiment of the State, were held, 
 and each appointed a delegation to this Convention. The regularity of both of 
 these Conventions was involved in doubt. At all events one does not seem 
 more regular than the other. After a full investigation of the facts in this 
 case, the Committee, deeming it of the highest importance that the harmony 
 of the party in Georgia required that both delegations should be admitted upon 
 the floor of the Convention, with equal privileges, so recommended to the 
 Convention in their report. It is undeniable that the appointing power in both 
 cases was composed of delegates fresh from the ranks of the Democracy, and 
 in the opinion of the Committee, the irregularities alleged in either case were 
 not sufficient to justify the exclusion of either of the delegations. 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 131 
 
 The Committee consisted of twenty-five members, and the majority report 
 received the sanction of sixteen, as to the greater portion of it, and the whole 
 is approved by fifteen. The minority report is approved altogether by nine 
 and but partially by one member. 
 
 Practically, then, the question is presented by the minority report, shall the 
 statements and opinions of nine gentlemen outweigh and overbalance the 
 statements and opiuions of fifteen of equal respectability, touching the same 
 matter? 
 
 Mr. Brown, of North Carolina. It is with very great reluctance that I 
 venture to interpose a few words upon this occasion. Sir, it would give me 
 infinitely more pleasure to pour oil on the agitated waves which now disturb 
 us, than to say anything which would have a contrary effect. 
 Mr. Sibley, of Minnesota. I rise to a point of order. 
 Mr. Brown, of North Carolina. I ask leave of the Convention to make an 
 explanation as to a matter of fact within my personal kcwledg<r? 
 
 Mr. Sibley. The gentleman has anticipated my point of order by asking 
 consent to speak. 
 
 Mr. Gorman, of Minnesota. The necessity of the case requires that I shall 
 insist upon the point of order. 
 
 The President. The Chair must decide that no debate is now in order. 
 Mr. Stevens, of Oregon. I rise to a personal explanation. 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan. I must object. 
 Mr. Stevens. I have only two sentences to say. 
 Mr. Stuart. I must object. 
 
 The President. The Chair must administer the rules of the Convention, 
 which preclude debate in this stage of the business. 
 
 Mr. Stevens. I appeal to the gentleman to allow me to make a personal 
 explanation. 
 
 Mr. Stuart. No gentleman will go farther than myself in relation to per- 
 sonal matters, but it is obvious to all that we must proceed with business. 
 
 The President. The Chairman will state that the first question in the 
 order of motion and of vote is the proposition of the gentleman from Oregon 
 {Mr. Stevens); that gentleman moves certain matter as a substitute for the 
 report of the Committee. The Chair understands that motion to be equiva- 
 lent to a motion to strike out and iusert, and although the Chair feels that 
 there may be some doubt as to whatshouM be the construction of a case like 
 this, and, indeed, of what is the true construction of the universal rule that a 
 motion to strike out and insert is indivisible, without going to the extent that 
 that universal declaration applies to this motion, or what is behind the mo- 
 tion. The Chair has, on reflection, come to the conclusion to rule that this 
 motion to strike out and insert is indivisible ; and, therefore, unless overruled 
 by the Convention, the Chair will be prepared to put the question upon the 
 series of resolutions in block. Having come to that conclusion, of course, 
 upon a prima facie reflection upon the subject, the Chair will be subject to be 
 instructed and directed by the Convention. The Chair had conceived that if 
 the resolutions of the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Stevens), should be 
 adopted, then they would be divisible, and the separate propositions con- 
 tained in the report of the minority would be susceptible of being voted upon 
 separately; or if the motion for substitution should be rejected, then, upon 
 the Convention being brought to a vote upon the resolutions of the gentleman 
 from Missouri (Mr. Krum) those propositions would be separable. Upon 
 this view of the whole case, the Chair has arrived at this prima facie conclu- 
 sion, subject to be instructed or directed by the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Cochran, of New York. I shall appeal from the decision of the 
 Chair, merely to make an explanation to the Convention upon the ruling of 
 the Chair ; and having made that explanation, I shall leave it to the contem- 
 
132 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 plation and judgment of the Chair and withdraw the appeal. It is undoubt- 
 edly true that the motion to strike out and insert is indivisible ; the motion 
 to strike out and inserting one independent proposition of the majority re- 
 port is indivisible. But the rule is applicable to that and nothing more; that 
 is, if upon the first branch of the majority report the motion should be made 
 to strike out that branch and insert the first branch of the minority report, 
 that motion would be indivisible. That is the extent of the application of 
 the rule of the House. But that does not reach an amendment in the nature 
 of a substitute. That motion, I think, is as divisible being a substitute as it 
 would be if it was a simple motion to amend ; for the substitute is nothing 
 more than an amendment of the nature of a substitute. I now withdraw my 
 appeal. 
 
 Cries of "question," "question!" 
 
 The President. The Chair will repeat that he suggested the doubt in 
 his" mind, behind this question, whether the motion of the gentleman from 
 •Oregon (Mr. Stevens), might or might not involve divisible matter ; but he 
 concluded still that it would be more convenient for him to rule upon that 
 which is the prima facie construction of the rule of the Convention. If that 
 prima facie construction be not correct, then the Chair would be most gladly 
 instructed or overruled by the Convention. 
 
 Cries of " question," " question !" 
 - The President. Before putting the question the Chair desires to remind 
 the Convention that he informed the Convention yesterday that he had been 
 requested to lay before the Convention a communication from gentlemen from 
 Arkansas. He had no opportunity of having it read then ; he again informs- 
 the Convention that he has been requested to present that communication in 
 order to have it read. 
 
 Mr. Gorman, of Minnesota, and others, objected to the reading of the 
 communication. 
 
 Objections being made, the President stated the communication could not 
 be read. 
 
 The question recurred upon the motion to substitute the resolutions of Mr. 
 Stevens, of Oregon, on part of the minority of the Committee on Credentials, 
 for the resolutions of Mr. Krum, of Missouri, on part of the majority of the 
 same Committee. 
 
 Upon that question, Mr. McCook called for a vote by States, which was 
 ordered. 
 
 The President. The vote by States has been called for by the State of 
 Ohio. The Secretary will, in the first place, report the resolutions now to be 
 voted upon, as they have been corrected by Mr. Stevens, of Oregon, and then 
 the Secretary will proceed to call the vote by States. 
 
 The resolutions were then read as follows : 
 
 1. Resolved, That B. F. Hallett is entitled to a seat in this Convention as 
 a delegate from the 5th Congressional District of Massachusetts. 
 
 2. Resolved, That Johnson B. Clardy is entitled to a seat in this Conven- 
 tion as a delegate from the 8th Congressional District of the State of Mis- 
 souri. 
 
 3. Resolved, That James A. Bayard and W. G. Whitely are entitled to 
 seats in this Convention as delegates from the State of Delaware. 
 
 4. Resolved, That the delegation headed by R. W. Johnson are entitled to 
 seats as delegates in this Convention from the State of Arkansas. 
 
 5. Resolved, That the delegation of which Guy N. Bryan is Chairman, are 
 entitled to seats as delegates in this Convention from the State of Texas. 
 
 6. Resolved, That the delegation of which John Tarleton is Chairman are 
 entitled to seats in this Convention as delegates from the State of Louisiana. 
 
 7. Resolved, That the delegation of which L. P. Walker is Chairman are 
 entitled to seats in this Convention from the State of Alabama. 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 133 
 
 8. Resolved, That the delegation of which Henry L. Benning is Chairman 
 are entitled to seats in this Convention from the State of Georgia. 
 
 9. Resolved, That the delegation from the State of Florida, accredited to 
 the Charleston Convention, are entitled to take seats in this Convention and 
 oast the vote of Florida. 
 
 10. Resovled, That George H. Gordon, E. Bark sd ale, W. S. Barry, H. C. 
 Chambers, Joseph R. Davis, Beverly Matthews, Charles Clark, William S. 
 Featherstone, P. F. Siddell, Wirt Adams, C. G. Armistead, A. M. Clayton, 
 and F. G. Hudson, are entitled to seats in this Convention as delegates from 
 the State of Mississippi. 
 
 The Secretary proceeded to call the roll of States. 
 
 The Chair then announced the vote upon the question of substituting the 
 resolutions of the minority in place of the majority resolutions— yeas 100^, 
 nays 150— as follows : 
 
 Yeas. Nays, Delaware 2 illlinois 11 
 
 Maine 2^ 5>£!Maryland *S% 2 Michigan 6 
 
 Virginia 14 1 Wisconsin 5 
 
 North Carolina 9 1 Iowa 4 
 
 Arkansas... % ^Minnesota 1% 2% 
 
 Missouri £ 4 California 4 
 
 Tennessee 10 1 Oregon 3 
 
 Kentucky 10 2 ; 
 
 Ohio 28 j 100* 150 
 
 Indiana 13 \ 
 
 New Hampshire % * 
 
 Vermont.. \]/ 2 Z% 
 
 Massachusetts 8 5 
 
 Rhode Island 4 
 
 Connecticut 2]/ 2 3|£ 
 
 New York 35 
 
 New Jersey 4 8 
 
 Pennsylvania 17 10 
 
 Maryland % vote not voted ; Tennessee 1 vote not voted. 
 
 So the motion to substitute the minority for the majority resolutions was 
 rejected. 
 
 The President. The Secretary will now repeat the original resolutions 
 in block if no division is called. 
 
 The Secretary read the resolutions. 
 
 Mr. Flournoy, of Arkansas, by unanimous consent, read the list of dele- 
 gates from Arkansas. Mr. Hoadley's name should be transferred from Texai 
 to Arkansas, and the name of Mr. Leroy Carroll should be De Rosa Carroll. 
 
 Mr. Jones, of Tennessee, and Mr. Church, of New York, called for a di- 
 vision of the question on the resolutions— the vote to be taken on each reso- 
 lution separately. 
 
 The President inquired of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. McCook), 
 whether he limited his call of the States to the whole matter, or intended it 
 to apply to a, single proposition ? 
 
 Mr. McCook, of Ohio, said he limited his call to the vote just taken. 
 There were propositions which did not require the vote to be taken by States, 
 .and it would consume time to do so. 
 
 The Chair. Then the call already made has exhausted the motion. 
 
 Mr. Saulsbury, of Delaware, and Mr. Gilmore, of Pennsylvania, renewed 
 the call of States. 
 
 The President. On each one of the propositions or one only? 
 
 Mr. Sauj.sbury and Mr. Gilmore. Each one. 
 
 MISSISSIPPI. 
 
 The Secretary then read t^e first of the series of resolutions : 
 
 1. Resolved, That George H. Gordon, E. Barksdale, W. S. Barry, H. C. 
 Chambers, Joseph R. Davis, Beverly Matthews, Charles Clark, William S. 
 Featherstone, P. F. Siddell, Wirt Adams, C. G. Armistead, A. M. Clayton, 
 and F. G. Hudson are entitled to seats in this Convention as delegates from 
 -the State of Mississippi. 
 
 The question being taken by States, resulted — ayes 250, nays 2% ; the 
 nays being a half vote from Towa and two from Pennsylvania. 
 
 The resolution was accordingly adopted. 
 
134 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Mr. Rynders called for the admission of the delegates from Mississippi 
 instan ter, in accordance with the vote just taken. 
 
 Several delegates signified their dissent. 
 
 Mr. Rynders. I make that motion. I don't care whether you say aye or 
 no. 
 
 Mr. Cochran said that the propositions were being voted upon seriatim, 
 and until the last one was adopted, the whole question had not been put as 
 determined, so that the delegates from Mississippi could not take their seats. 
 
 The President ruled in accordance with the suggestion of Mr. Cochran. 
 
 Mr. Mason, of Kentucky, respectfully differed with feke Chair, but did Dot 
 take an appeal. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan. The Chair is undoubtedly correct. 
 
 LOUISIANA. 
 
 The Secretary then read the second resolution, to wit : 
 
 2. Resolved, That Tierre Soule, F. Cottman, R C. Wickliffe, Michael Ryan, 
 
 Manuel White, Charles Brenveneau, Gustavus Leroj', J. E. Morse, A. S. 
 
 Herrou, M . D. Colmar, J. N. T. Richardson, and J. L. Walker, are entitled 
 
 to seats in this Convention as delegates from the State of Louisiana. 
 
 The quesMon being taken on the second resolution by States, resulted — ayes 
 
 153, nays 98 — as follows : 
 
 
 Yeas. Nays 
 
 by 2 -Ay 
 
 4, y 2 
 
 4)£ H 
 
 Delaware 
 
 Maryland 
 
 Virginia 
 
 NTorth Carolina 
 
 Arkansas 
 
 Missouri 
 
 2 
 
 ... 2^ $% 
 
 .... 1 13 
 
 .... 2 8 
 
 — : i i 
 
 .... 4 5 
 2 10 
 
 Illinois 
 
 11 
 
 New Hampshire . . 
 
 Wisconsin 
 
 I' >wa 
 
 Minnesota 
 
 California 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 Massachusetts 
 
 5 8 
 
 4 
 
 Wz 2h 
 
 36 
 
 ... 2* 1J 
 4 
 
 
 Oregon 
 
 3 
 
 
 Kentucky 
 
 Ohio 
 
 Indiana 
 
 .... 2 10 
 ....23 
 13 
 
 
 
 
 153 98 
 
 Pennsylvania 
 
 10 17 
 
 The resolution was accordingly adopted. 
 
 ARKANSAS. 
 
 The third resolution was then read : 
 
 3. Resolved, That R. W. Johnson, T. C Hindman, J. P. Johnson, De 
 Rosa Carroll, J. Gould, John A. Jordan,. B. B. Burrow and F. W. Hoadley 
 be admitted to seats as delegates from the State of Arkansas, with power to 
 cast two votes, and thatThos. H. Bradley, M. Hooper and D. C. Cross be also 
 admitted to seats as delegates from the same State, with power to cast one 
 vote, and in case either portion of said delegates shall refuse or neglect to take 
 their said seats, or to cast their said votes, the other portion of said delegates 
 taking seats in this Convention shall be entitled to cast the entire three votes 
 of said State. 
 
 Mr. Saulsbury moved to divide the resolution and take the question on 
 three distinct branches of it, to wit : first, in regard to the admission of Mr. 
 Johnson and his coadjutors, with power to cast two votes ; second, as to the 
 admission of Mr. Hooper and coadjutors, with power to cast one vote ; and 
 third, as to how the vote of the State is to be cast in case either one of those 
 delegates does not choose to take his seat. 
 
 The President ruled the resolution divisible, as each part makes sense 
 with the other parts rejected. 
 
 The question was then stated on the first part of the resolution, and the 
 State of Maine called. 
 
 Mr. Wright, of Massachusetts, appealed from the decision of the Chair 
 as to the divisibility of the question. 
 
 Mr. Sturman made a point of order that the State of Maine, having been 
 called, the appeal came too late. 
 
 The President. The State of Maine has not answered^ 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 
 
 135 
 
 Mr. Gorman, of Minnesota, inquired how it would be possible, if the 
 Convention rejected the latter part of the resolution, for the State of Arkan- 
 sas to be represented by any other than two votes ? It would disfranchise the 
 State of one vote. 
 
 The President stated that it was not in the power of the Convention to 
 adopt a proposition which was unjust or which wouH d ; sfranchise a State. 
 
 Mr. Stuart moved to lay the appeal from the decision of the (.'hair on 
 the table, which was agreed to. 
 
 The vote was then taken by States on the first part of the resolution, and 
 resulted — ayes 182, nays 69 — as follows : 
 
 Yeas Nays. Teas. Nays.| Yeas Navft 
 
 Maine 6* 2* North Carolina 1 
 
 New Hampshire 5 South Carolina 
 
 Georgia 
 
 Vermont 5 
 
 Massachusetts 13 
 
 Rhode Island 4 
 
 Connecticut 6 
 
 New York 3o 
 
 Nrw Jersey 7 
 
 Pennsylvania 10 
 
 Delaware 2 
 
 Maryland 2£ 
 
 Virginia 
 
 Florida ... 
 i Alabama... 
 [Louisiana .. 
 
 Mississippi 
 
 17 
 
 9 
 Hi 
 
 Ohio 23 
 
 Indiana 13 
 
 Illinois , 11 
 
 Michigan 6 
 
 Wisconsin 5 
 
 Ii.wa 3* 
 
 Minnesota 4 
 
 California 
 
 Oiegon 
 
 If 
 
 HI 
 
 182 69 
 
 Texas 
 
 Arkansas. . 
 j Missouri . 
 5i Tennessee . 
 15 [Kentucky 12 j 
 
 The vote was then taken on the second branch of the resolution, and 
 resulted— ayes 150, nays lUO^— - as follows : 
 
 Yeas. Nays.j Yeas. 
 
 Maine 4 5£ 
 
 New Hampshire .5 
 
 Vermont 4| 
 
 Massachusetts 5 
 
 Rhode Island 4 
 
 Connecticut 33£ 
 
 New York 35 
 
 New Jersey ... %Y% 
 
 Pennsylvania 10 
 
 Delaware 
 
 Maryland 2 
 
 Virginia 1 
 
 'l\\ North Carolina 1 
 
 isouth Carolina 
 
 \ (Georgia 
 8 {Florida ... 
 JAlaliama 
 2^|Loui ? iana 
 
 Nays, 
 
 9 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 11 
 10 
 
 Yeas. 
 . 83 
 ...13 
 ....11 
 .... 6 
 
 Ohio , 
 
 Indiana 
 
 Illinois 
 
 Michigan .... 
 
 Wisconsin 5 
 
 Iowa 4 
 
 Minnesota „ 2\ 
 
 California 
 
 Oregon 
 
 Nays. 
 
 Mississippi 
 
 4J-2lTexas 
 
 17 JArkansas . 
 2 Missouri .. 
 
 6 (Tennessee % 11 150 100% 
 
 14 (Kentucky 2 
 
 Arkansas declining to vote. 
 
 Mr. Brodhkad, of Pennsylvania, for the purpose of saving time, appealed 
 to the gentleman who called for the vote by States to withdraw it on the 
 remainder of the resolution. . 
 
 The call was accordingly withdrawn, and the question taken viva voce, 
 resulting in the adoption of the last branch of the resolution. 
 
 So the entire resolution was adopted. 
 
 TEXAS. 
 
 The fourth resolution, in regard to Texas, was then read as follows : 
 
 4. Resolved, That Guy M Bryan, F. R. Lubbock, F. S. Stockdale, E. 
 Greer, H. R. Runnells, Thos P. Ochiltree M. W. Covie and J. S. Crosby, are 
 entitled to seats as delegates from Texas. 
 
 Mr. Brodhead, of Pennsylvania, suggested that the vote upon this resolu- 
 tion be taken viva voce, but objection being made, 
 
 The Secretary proceeded to call the roll of States, which having been 
 concluded the vote was announced: Yeas 250, nays 2>£, the nays being 
 Pennsylvania 2, Iowa %. 
 
 The resolution was accordingly adopted. 
 
 DELAWARE. 
 
 The fifth reso^tion was then read, as follows : 
 
 5. Resolved, That James A. Bayard and Wm. G. Whitely are entitled to 
 seats from the county of New Castle, Delaware. 
 
Illinois 11 
 
 Michigan <i 
 
 Wisconsin 5 
 
 Iowa 3^ 1| 
 
 Minnesota 2>2 1\ 
 
 California 4 
 
 uregou 3 
 
 138 112* 
 
 138 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Mr. Ruodiii ad, of Pennsylvania, suggested that it would save time to 
 take the vote viva voce, which was agreed to. 
 The question being taken, the resolution was adopted. 
 
 MASSACHUSETTS. 
 
 The sixth resolution was then read, as follows : 
 
 6. Resolved, That K S. Chaffee, who was duly adraited at Charleston as 
 a delegate from the Fifth Congressional District of Massachusetts, is still 
 entitled to said seat in this Convention, and that Benjamin F. Hallett, who 
 has assumed said seat, is not entitled thereto. 
 
 The question being taken upon this resolution by States, resulted — yeas 
 lo8, nays 112)2 — as follows : 
 
 Yeas. Najs-i Yeas. Nays. Yeas. Nays. 
 
 Mxine ... :->}4 2)., North Carolina LOjOhio 23 
 
 New Hampshire 2$ 2| South Carolina Indiana 13 
 
 Vermont 3 2 {Georgia 
 
 M tsa<ichusett8 3 85 [Florida . 
 
 Rhode Island 4 lAhbama 
 
 Connecticut 'Si 2} Louisiana 
 
 New York 35 l*i*wisstppi ... 
 
 Hew Jersey \% 4* Texas 
 
 Pennsylvania .. 9? 17iJArKausas .. 1 
 
 Delaware....... 2 | Missouri i 5 
 
 Maryland, 2* i'Hi Tennessee 12 
 
 Virginia lol&entucky Vl 
 
 The resolution was accordingly adopted. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan. I rise to a privileged question. I move to 
 reconsider the vote just taken, and move to lay that motion on the table. I 
 understand that that motion cannot now be taken up, but it can be received. 
 I also make the same motion in regard to each of the other votes taken this 
 morning upon the propositions from the Committee on Credentials, including 
 the vote on the minority reports. 
 
 The President said the several motions of Mr. Stuart would be receeived 
 and entered upon the journal. 
 
 So the motions of Mr. Stuart were considered and entered, as having been 
 so many distinct motions made and entered in their order, upon the rejec- 
 tion of the Minority Report, and the adoption of each resolution reported by 
 the majority of the Committee on Credentials/to be acted upon when pro- 
 perly called up, in their order. 
 
 MISSOURI. 
 
 The seventh resolution was then read as follows : 
 
 7. Resolved, That John O'Fallon, Jr., who was duly admitted at Charleston, 
 as a delegate from the Eighth Congressional District of Missouri, is still enti- 
 tled to .-aid seat in this Convention ; and that John B. Clardy, who has assumed 
 said seat, is not entitled thereto. 
 
 The question being taken by States upon the resolution — it iesulted — yeas 
 138£, rajs 112— as follows : 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 
 Ohio 23 
 
 Indiana 13 
 
 Illinois ..11 
 
 Yeas. Nays ! Yeas. IS ays. 
 
 Maine 5>£ 2% I North ''arolina ...... 10 
 
 New Hampshire. 2^| 2>a [South Carolina. .. 
 
 Vermont. 3 2 | Georgia 
 
 Massachusetts 5 8 Florida 
 
 Rhode Island 4 Alabama 
 
 Connecticut 3}£ 2)4 Louisiana 
 
 Mew York 35 (Mississippi 
 
 New Jersey _. \% o^iTexa* 
 
 Pennsylvania 10 17 j Arkansas i U 
 
 Delaware 2 Missouri 1% 6 I 
 
 Maryland 2% 5%| Tennessee 13 j 138* 112 
 
 Virginia 15 [Kentucky 12 \ 
 
 The resolution was accordingly adopted. 
 
 Michigan 6 
 
 Wisconsin 5 
 
 Iowa 3^ 1# 
 
 Minnesota 2% 1% 
 
 California .- 4 
 
 Oregon 3 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 137 
 
 '.-> 
 
 Ohio 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 28 
 
 ludiana 
 
 Illinois 
 
 13 
 
 11 
 
 Michigan 
 
 Wisconsin 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 Minnesota 
 
 2 l A H 
 
 4 
 
 Oregon 
 
 3 
 
 148* 10H 
 
 Mr. Cessna, of Pennsylvania, rno\ed that the vote just taken be reconsidered, 
 and that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table. 
 
 The motion was received and ordered to be entered upon the journal. 
 
 ALABAMA. 
 
 The eighth resolution was then read, as follows : 
 
 ». Resolved That R. A. Baker, D. C. Humphreys, John Forsyth, Wm. Gar- 
 rett, J J. Seibles, S. 0. Posey, L. E. Parsons, Joseph C. Bradley, Th< mas B. 
 Cooper. James Williams, 0. H. Bynum, Samuel D. Weakley, L. V. B, Martin, 
 John W. Wornack, W. R.'R. Wyatt, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas M. Mathews 
 and Nornient McLeod, are entitled to sea.s in this Convention as delegates 
 from the State of Alabama. 
 
 The question then being taken by States upon this resolution, it resulted — 
 yeas 148£, nays 101^-, — as follows : 
 
 Yeas. Nay s. I Yeas. Nays 
 
 Maine,.... 5H' 2>£jNorth Carolina \%. 8 
 
 New Hampshire 2% 2 (South Carolina 
 
 Vermont 4H *2 Georgia 
 
 Massachusetts 5 8 jFloriia --- 
 
 Rhode Island 4 |Aiabama..- 
 
 Connecticut 3£ 21 Louisiana • 
 
 New York 35 ; Mississippi 
 
 New Jersey 3 4 jTexas 
 
 Pennsylvania 10 17 jAraansas % H 
 
 Delaware 2 Missouri 4 5 
 
 Maryland 2 6 |Tennessee 2 10 
 
 Virginia >£ HfKentucky Wz 10^ 
 
 New Hampshire ^, 'declined voting. 
 
 The resolution was accordingly adopted. 
 
 Mr. Cessna, of Pennsylvania, movtd to reconsider the vote just taken, and 
 that that motion be laid upon the table. 
 
 The motion was received and ordered to be entered upon the journal. 
 
 Mr. Seward, of Georgia, sent the following communication to the Secretary's 
 desk to be filed, a copy of which had also upon the assembling of the Con- 
 vention in the morning, been placed in the hands of the President of the 
 Convention : 
 
 Baltimore, June 22, 1860. 
 
 Hon. Caleb Cushing, President of the National Democratic Convention: 
 
 Sir : — In obedience to instructions herewith enclosed, I withdraw the 
 application of the National Democratic Delegates from Georgia, for seats in 
 the Convention over which you preside, and I request that the instructions 
 be read to the Convention. 
 
 Yours respectfully, JAMES GARDNER, 
 
 Chairman Georgia National Democratic Delegation. 
 
 Consultation Room of the Georgia National Delegation, 
 
 Baltimore, June 22, 1860. 
 Resolved, That our Chairman, Mr. Gardner, be and is hereby instructed to 
 witudraw the application of the National Democratic Delegates of Georgia, for 
 seats in the Convention now sitting in this city. 
 
 Resolved, That we are prompted to this course by a sincere desire to relieve 
 the Convention of embarrassment, and to promote as far as possible the har- 
 mony of the Convention. 
 
 Resolved, That we do not hereby admit that the delegation headed by the 
 Ho:!. Henry L. Benning, as Chairman, represents the National Democracy of 
 Georgia, nevertheless, we shall rejoice sincerely to see them adhere to the Con- 
 vention, and in good faith support its nuininees. 
 
 JAMES GARDNER, Chairman. 
 B. Y. Martin, Secretary. 
 
138 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 GEORGIA. 
 
 The ninth and last resolution of the series was then read, as follows : 
 
 9. Resolved, That the delegation from the State of Georgia, of which H. L. 
 Benning is Chairman, be admitted to the Convention, with power to cast one 
 half of the vote of said State; and that Ihe delegation from said State of which 
 Col. Gardner is Chairman, be al*o admitted to the Convention, with power to 
 cast one-half the vote of said State, and if either of said delegations refuse or 
 neglect to cast the vote as above indicated, that in such case the delegates pre- 
 sent in the Convention be authorized to cast the full vote of said State. 
 
 The Secretary proceeded to call the roll, and as he called the State of 
 Maine — 
 
 Mr. Williamson, of Kentucky, called for a division of the question upon the 
 resolution. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan. I submit that that motion cannot be made. The 
 rule is that if the remaining portion will by itself stand so as to make sense, 
 and the po-tion included in the first division, will also by itself stand so as to 
 make sense, then it may be divided, but not otherwise. I have examined this 
 resolution, with a view to call for the division myself, but I am satisfied that 
 it is incapable of division. 
 
 Mr. Sibley, of Minnesota. I call the gentleman to order; the Secretary had 
 commenced the call of the roll, and the State of Maine had responded. 
 
 The President. The Chair thinks that the gentleman from Kentucky, 
 (Mr. Williamson) addressed the Chair before any response was given from 
 Maine. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan. The rule is that the portion to be voted upon 
 must make sense by itself, and the portion left must make sense by itself, or 
 else the proposition is not divisible. 
 
 The President. The Chair is informed by the Secretary that the State of 
 Maine had been called, and the response entered upon the record, before the 
 Chair was addressed. If that be so, the Chair is bound to decide that the call 
 for the division is too late. 
 
 Mr. Williamson, of Kentucky. I think there must be an error on the part 
 of the Secretary. I addressed the Chair before the State of Maine responded 
 to the call of the Secretary ; but I did not get my proposition fully submitted 
 before that State responded. 
 
 Mr. Rynders, of New York. I can say that we here understood the vote of 
 Maine to be announced before the Chair was addressed. 
 
 Mr. Jones, of Tennessee. I wish to know if I did not demand a division of 
 the question upon every distinct proposition susceptible of division ? 
 
 The President. That was the understanding of the Chair of the effect of 
 the demand of the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Jones) and the gentleman 
 from De 1 aware (Mr. Salisbury.) 
 
 Mr. Jones. Then I submit to the Chair whether we cannot vote upon each 
 portion of the resolution now reported to the Convention ? 
 
 The President. If the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Jones) claims that 
 right now, the Chair will be bound to rule as he did in the case of Arkansas. 
 The Chair will be bound to look into the question of divisibility. It will not 
 be a division upon the demand of the gentleman from Kentucky, (Mr. Wil- 
 liamson,) but the demand of the gentleman from Tennessee, (Mr. Jones.) 
 
 Subsequently the President said : The Chair, on inspecting the 9th resolu- 
 tion, pertaining to the State of Georgia, perceives that it is constructed «>o 
 precisely the same principles with the resolution pertaining to the S'ate of 
 Arkansas. And the Cnair having ruled that that was divisible, is bound to 
 make the same ruling in this case. If the Chair is in error upon this subject 
 he has no pride of opinion about it, and of course submits it to the C mventi >n. 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 139 
 
 '.-> 
 
 Bat the Chairflmust make the decision that it is divisible. The Secretary will 
 report the first branch of the resolution. 
 
 Tho Skcri.tary reported it as follows : 
 
 "Resolved. That the delegation from the State of Georgia, of which H. L. 
 Benning is Chairman, be admitted to the Convention, with power to cast one- 
 half of the vote of said State." 
 
 Mr. Waterbury, of New York. Is it in order to divide the first part of the 
 resolution ? 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan. That is the very point that I raised. If you 
 divide the first part of the resolution, and reject the first part and retain the 
 last part, it will have no sense. 
 
 The President. The Chair has ruled that the part just read by the S cre- 
 tary constitutes the first branch of the resolution. 
 
 Mr. Brodhead, of Pennsylvania. I would suggest that the first division 
 ghould end with the word " Convention," so that it will read — 
 
 "Resolved, That the delegation from the State of Georgia, of which H. L. 
 Benning is Coairman, be admitted to the Convention." 
 
 Mr. 3tuart, of Michigan. The idea is this : The Chair cannot anticipate 
 what the vote will be ; the proposition may be carried or rejected. But it is 
 not susceptible of division unless, in either event, the remaining words have 
 a substantive meaning by themselves. Suppose the first part is voted down 
 and the latter part adopted — "with power to cast one- half of the vote of said 
 State." Those words would have no meaning at all by themselves. 
 
 Mr. Cochran, of New York. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stuart) 
 states the proposition correctly. If the first branch of the resolution be 
 abstracted the last is naught. 
 
 The President. The Chair has two or three times endeavored to state 
 what he means to rule ; but gentlemen have interposed with suggestions from 
 time to time so that he has not as yet been able to do it. The Chair takes 
 the same view of this resolution as he did of the resolution in regard to 
 Georgia. The resolution begins — 
 
 " Resolved, That the delegation from the State of Georgia, of which FT. L. 
 Benning is Chairmm, be admitted to the Convention with power to cast one- 
 half of the vote of that State." 
 
 The Chair finds there a proposition having sense. It may or may not, if 
 adopted alone, operate unjustly. That is not a qnest ; on of order ; the ques- 
 tion of justice or injustice is independent of the question of sense. 
 
 As to the decision suggested by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
 Brodhead), if the first part he proposes be rejected, then there remain words 
 of no possible application to any part of the resolution, to wit : "with power 
 to cast one-half of the vote of said State." The view, therefore, of the 
 Chair is that the division must beat the end of the words, " of syid State." 
 
 Mr. Seward, of Georgia. I rise to a question of privilege on behalf of 
 the contestants from the State of Georgia. I send a communication to the 
 Chair, which I desire to have read. It is intended as a peace measure, and 
 to relieve this Convention of this perplexing and troublesome question. 
 [Cries of "object," "object," and "question."] 
 
 Mr. Williamson, of Kentucky. I withdraw the call for a division of this 
 resolution, if it is upon my motion. 
 
 The President. The Chair understands that the call is upon the motion 
 of the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Jones.) 
 
 Mr. Williamson. Then I hope that gentleman will withdraw the call. 
 
 Mr. Jones. I cannot withdraw it. 
 
 Mr. Seward, of Georgia. I insist upon my question of privilege, and that 
 no gentleman has a right to object to it, because it atfects the rights of 
 members upon this floor. 
 
140 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 The President. The Chair will state to the Convention that the gentle- 
 inin from Georgia (Mr. Seward) presents this letter and desires that it be read. 
 
 Mr. Butterworth, of New York. I object to the reading of it at this 
 time. 
 
 The President. The Chair understands, in the first place, that in the 
 present stage of the question — that is, under the operation of the previous 
 question — it is not competent to introduce any document to be read, except 
 by unanimous consent of the Convention, or under a suspension of the rules. 
 And the Chair is not aware how, in this stage of the question, there can be a 
 motion to suspend the rules. Therefore, the Chair understands that in this 
 stage of the question there must be unanimous consent for the reading of a 
 document. 
 
 [It was understood that the letter was from Col. Gardner, the Chairman of 
 the contesting delegation from the State of Georgia, notifying the Convention 
 that they withdrew from all further contest, and which letter had beeh placed 
 on the Secretary's files.] 
 
 Mr. Jones, of Tennessee. At the request of several gentlemen I withdraw 
 my call for a division of the question. 
 
 The President stated the question to be upon agreeing to the entire reso- 
 lution, as originally reported by the Secretary to the Convention. 
 
 The question being then taken by States upon the resolution, it was re- 
 jected — yeas 106}^, nays 145 — as follows : 
 
 Maine 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 
 4 4 
 
 2 3 
 
 3/2 1/2 
 
 5 8 
 
 4 
 
 .... Z}i 8V 2 
 35 
 
 Maryland... 
 
 Virginia... 
 
 North Carolina... 
 
 Arkansas 
 
 Missouri 
 
 Yeas 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 y 
 
 4 
 
 Nays. 
 6 
 
 14 
 
 t \s 
 : /z 
 
 5 
 
 12 
 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 6 
 
 New Hampshire 
 
 Vermont 
 
 Massachusetts 
 
 Wisconsin 
 
 Iowa 
 
 Minnesota 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 2% \% 
 
 4 
 
 
 Oregon 
 
 3 
 
 New York 
 
 Kentucky 
 
 Ohio 
 
 23 
 
 
 
 2 5 
 
 9% mi 
 
 2 
 
 loek 145 
 
 Pennsylvauia. ... 
 Delaware 
 
 Indiana 
 
 Illinois... 
 
 13 
 
 11 
 
 
 Mr. Church, of New York. The delegation from New York have had no 
 opportunity 
 
 The President. Will the gentleman excuse the Chair a moment ? The 
 Chair will state that as he now understands it all the resolutions reported 
 from the Committee on Credentials have been acted upon, and therefore the 
 previous question, so far as it is applicable to this subject matter has been 
 exhausted. 
 
 Mr. Church, of New York. The New York delegation have had no op- 
 portunity to vote upon the question of the admission of delegates from the 
 btate of Georgia in accordance with their wishes, or as they believe would 
 b3 right and just to the Democracy of that State. Coming here, as the New 
 York delegation did, with the determination, so far as it lay in their power, 
 to reconcile the Democracy of this great nation, and to harmonize the party, 
 so that the results of this Convention would be indorsed by the Democracy 
 of this nation, we propose now to submit a motion in relation to that State — 
 Georgia — which I have no doubt will meet with the approbation of this Con- 
 vention. That motion is that the delegation from the State of Georgia, 
 claiming seats in this Convention, of which EL L. Benning is Chairman, be 
 admitted to this Convention, and upon that I call the previous question. 
 
 Mr. Brodhead, of Pennsylvania. I have a similar proposition, reduced to 
 writing, in the form of a resolution, which I hope the gentleman will ac- 
 cept. 
 
 Mr. Church. I will accept it. 
 
 The President. The Chair wishes to understand whether the proposition 
 sent to the Chair by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Brodhead), is the 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 141 
 
 6ame proposition as that submitted by the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
 Church?) 
 
 Mr. B&ODHEAD. It is the same. 
 
 Mr Seward, of Georgia. I rise to a point of order. 
 
 The President. The Chair asks the gentleman to let the resolution be 
 reported. 
 
 The resolution was then read as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That the delegation of which Henry L. Benning is Chairman are 
 entitled to seats in this Convention from the State of Georgia. 
 
 Mr. Seward. My point of order is this : That the majority report, as 
 amended, has not been acted upon. And although the previous question may 
 have been exhausted, that is the pending proposition before the Convention, 
 and the Convention must be brought to a direc' vote upon the report as 
 amended before it is finally disposed of. 
 
 The President. In regard to the question of order raised by the gentle- 
 man from Georgia (Mr. Seward), the Chair considers that, acoordirg to hie 
 understanding of thes'ate of proceedings, all matters reported from the Com- 
 mittee, upon which it is competent to vote, have been voted upon, and, 
 therefore, the previous question is exhausted, and no additional motion need 
 be put; or is in order to be put. 
 
 Mr. Hallett, of Massachusetts, here obtained the floor, but was called to 
 order by several delegates. 
 
 Mr. Church, of New York. I rise to a point of order. I submit that 
 having myself offered a resolution and called the previous question upon it, 
 no debate is in order. 
 
 The President. The gentleman from New York undoubtedly has reason 
 in his suggestion. The gentleman from Massachusetts has risen to some- 
 thing, the Chair cannot tell what. It may or may not be some competent 
 motion, notwithstanding the gentleman has moved the previous question. 
 
 Mr. Church. The gentleman has announced that he rose for the purpose 
 of discussing my resolution. 
 
 The President. 1 he Chair did not so understand him. The gentleman 
 from Massachusetts will state to what question he has arisen. 
 
 Mr. Hallett. I understand that a motion was made by the gentleman 
 from New York to admit the Georgia delegation accredited to the Charleston 
 Convention ? 
 
 The President. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Hallett. And that the motion is before the Convention ? 
 
 The President. The gentleman from New York demanded the previous 
 question, and it is the duty of the Chair to put it unless some privileged mo- 
 tion intervenes. The Secretary will please read the resolution of the gentle- 
 man from New York. 
 
 The resolution was read accordingly. 
 
 The President. The question is on seconding the previous question. 
 
 The question being then taken on seconding the previous question, it was 
 agreed to. 
 
 The question recurring on ordering the main question, it was also agreed 
 to. 
 
 The question beins then taken on the resolution of the gentleman from 
 New York (Mr. Church), it was adopted, and the Georgia seceding delegates 
 declared entitled to their seats. 
 
 Mr. Hallett and numerous others addressed the Chair at the same in- 
 stant. 
 
 The President recognized the gentleman from Massachusetts, and 
 
 Mr. Hallett addressed the Convention and moved that the Convention 
 take a recess till 5 o'clock. 
 
142 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Mr. Stuart. I now move to lay on the table the motion to reconsider, 
 made by the gentleman from Massachusetts. 
 
 Mr. Cochran. I now move that when the Convention adjourn it be to 
 meet at 5 o'clock. 
 
 The President inquired if the gentleman from Michigan asked for a vote 
 on each one of the resolutions to lay it on the table, or if his motion referred 
 to the 9th only? 
 
 Mr. Russell, Chairman of the Virginia delegation. Mr. President, I wish, 
 before the Convention adjourns, to make an announcement in behalf of the 
 Virginia delegation. I wish, to do it at the proper time. 
 
 The President. The Chair would like to be informed by the gentleman 
 from Michigan whether his motion is intended to be applied to each of the 
 resolutions seriatim f 
 
 Mr. Stuart. I have no choice. I suppose the proper mode of proceeding 
 would be to call up one at a time. If the Chair deems it his duty to take 
 them up in this order, I am entirely satisfied. 
 
 The President. The Chair does not deem it his duty to volunteer, but if 
 any gentleman wishes to call for the vote in that order he can do so. 
 
 Mr. Stuart. I will call for them in their order. 
 
 The President. The question is now upon the motion of the gentleman 
 from New York (Mr. Cochran,) that when the Convention adjourn it be to 
 meet at 5 o'clock this afternoon. 
 
 Upon that question Mr. Saulsbury called for a vore by States, which was 
 ordered. The question being then taken bv States, the motion was not agreed 
 to— Yeas 82 \ 9 nays 168. 
 
 Mr. Cessna, of Pennsylvania, called up the several motions to reconsider, 
 with the accompanying motions to lay on the table. 
 
 The President stated the first question to be upon laying upon the table 
 the motion to reconsider the vote by which the Convention refused to substi- 
 tute the resolutions reported by the minority of the Committee on Credentials 
 for those reported by the majority of said Committee. 
 
 Upon this question the State of Tennessee demanded a vote by States 
 which was ordered. The question being then taken by States, the motion to 
 lay on the table was not agreed to — yeas 113}, nay* 138}, as follows : 
 
 Maine 
 
 New Hampshire... 
 Vermont 
 
 Yeas. 
 
 5^ 
 
 .... 3 
 .... 4* 
 .... 5 
 .... 4 
 .... 3| 
 
 -".'.' &A 
 
 -...10 
 
 Nays. 
 2^ 
 2 
 
 V A 
 8 
 
 2| 
 35 
 
 17 
 2 
 
 Maryland 
 
 Yeas. 
 2 
 
 Nays 
 6 
 15 
 9 
 
 I 
 4* 
 
 10 
 
 Michigan, 
 
 : Wisconsin 
 
 Iowa 
 
 : Minnesota 
 
 Yeas 
 
 6 
 
 .- 5 
 
 4 
 
 2* 
 
 Nays 
 
 North Carolina... 
 
 1 
 
 .... i 
 
 H 
 
 
 Missouri 
 
 ¥k 
 
 4 
 
 
 iOr.-'gon-. 
 
 
 3 
 
 New York 
 
 New Jersey 
 
 Pennsylvania 
 
 Delaware 
 
 Kentucky 
 
 Ohio 
 
 Indiana 
 
 Illinois 
 
 2 
 
 ... 23 
 
 ...13 
 
 .11 
 
 113* 
 
 138J" 
 
 The question recurred upon the motion to reconsider the vote rejecting 
 the minority resolutions. 
 
 Mr. Cochran, of New York, moved that when this Convention adjourn, it 
 be to meet this evening at 7 o'clock, which was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. Cochran moved that the Convention do now adjourn, which was 
 agreed to. 
 
 And the Convention accordingly took a recess until 7 o'clock P. M. 
 
 EVENING SESSION. 
 
 The Convention was called to order at a few minutes past 7 o'clock. 
 
 The President stated that the pending question to be upon reconsidering 
 the vote by which the Convention refused to substitute the resolutions sub- 
 mitted upon the part of the minority of the Committee on Credentials in 
 place of the resolutions submitted by the majority of said Committee. 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 
 
 143 
 
 Mr. Cessna, of Pennsylvania, called for the previous question upon this 
 motion, which was seconded, and the main question ordered to be put. 
 
 The question recurred upon the motion to reconsider. 
 
 Mr. Saulsbury, of Delaware, called for a vote by States, which was or- 
 dered. 
 
 The question being then taken by States, the motion to reconsider was Hot 
 agreed to — yeas 113, nays 139 — as follows : 
 
 Yeas Nays.! Yeas. 
 
 Maine 2 l Z &% Mary 1 and 6 
 
 New Hampshire .2 3 Virginia ---1*> 
 
 Vermont 1 4 North Carolina 9 
 
 Arkansas 3 
 
 Missouri 4 1 
 
 Tennessee 10 
 
 Kentucky 10 
 
 Ohio 
 
 Indiana 
 
 Illinois 
 
 The next question was upon the motion to lay upon the table the motion 
 to reconsider the vote by which the Convention adopted the first resolution 
 of the majority report in relation to delegates from Mississippi. 
 
 The question being taken, the motion to lay on the table was agreed to. 
 
 Thy next question was upon the motion to lay upon the table the motion 
 to reconsider the vote by which the Convention adopted the majority reso- 
 lution in relation to delegates from Louisiana. 
 
 Mr. Saulsbury, of Delaware. At the request of others, not that I care so 
 much about it myself, I call for a vote by States. 
 
 The question being taken by States, the motion to lay on the table was 
 agreed to — yeas 150^, nays 99, — as follows : — 
 
 Massachusetts 8 
 
 Rhode Island 
 
 Connecticut 2>2 
 
 New York 
 
 iNew Jersey --- 4K 
 
 Pennsylvania 17 
 
 Delaware . 2 
 
 Nays 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 Michigan 
 
 Wisconsin 
 
 Yeas Navs. 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 
 Minnes >ta 
 
 1% 2% 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 2 
 
 23 
 13 
 11 
 
 iregoQ 
 
 3 
 
 113 139 
 
 Maine 
 
 New Hampshire... 
 
 Yeas. 
 
 .... 5k 
 
 .... 4% 
 
 4^ 
 
 5 
 
 .... 4 
 . 3K 
 
 Nays.; 
 
 2% .Maryland 
 
 1 J 2 Virginia 
 
 zilNoi th Carolina.. 
 
 Yeas. 
 2 
 
 ....... 1 
 
 — . l A 
 
 Ui 
 
 2 
 
 Nays. 
 6 
 15 
 
 \'% 
 
 4% 
 
 10 
 
 Michigan 
 
 Wisconsin 
 
 Yeas* 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 Nays. 
 
 
 Minnesota 
 
 California 
 
 2% 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 Rhode Island 
 
 Missouri 
 
 New York 
 
 ... 35 
 
 .... 2!-i 
 
 iKentucky 
 
 4 1 £|Ohio 
 
 17 'Indiana 
 
 2 illlinois 
 
 2 
 
 23 
 
 13 
 
 11 
 
 10 
 
 
 150}£ 
 
 99 
 
 Pennsylvania 
 
 Delaware - 
 
 ...10 
 
 
 The next question was upon laying upon the table the motion to reconsider 
 the vote by which the Convention adopted the majority resolution in relation 
 to delegates from Arkansas. 
 
 The question being taken, the motion was agreed to. 
 
 The next question was upon the same motion in relation to Texas. 
 
 The question being taken, the motion to reconsider was laid upon the table. 
 
 The next question was upon the same motion in relation to Delaware, and 
 the motion to lay upon the table was agreed to. 
 
 The next question was upon laying upon the table the motion to recon- 
 sider the vote by which the Convention adopted the 6th resolution in relation 
 to the claim of Mr. K. S. Ch-iffee, as against Mr. B. F. Hallett. 
 
 The motion to reconsider was laid upon the table. 
 
 The next question was upon laying upon the table the motion to reconsider 
 the vote by which the Convention adopted the 7th resolution of the majority 
 report, giving John O'Fallon, Jr., the seat in the Missouri contest. 
 
 The motion to reconsider was laid upon the table. 
 
 The next question was upon the motion to lay upon the table the motion to 
 reconsider the vote upon the resolution in relation to Alabama — the motion 
 was agreed to. 
 
 The same with regard to the vote of the Convention, rejecting the resolu- 
 tion of the majority in relation to Georgia. 
 
 The next question was upon the motion to lay upon the table the motion 
 
144 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 to reconsider the vote adopting the resolution offered by Mr. Church, of New 
 York, admitting the original delegates from the State of Georgia to vote in 
 the Convention. 
 
 The motion was laid upon the table. 
 
 Mr. Cessna, of Pennsylvania. I now offer the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That this Convention do now proceed to nominate candidates for 
 President and Vice President of the United States. 
 
 And on that resolution I call the previous question. 
 
 Mr. Stansbury. I move that the Convention do now adjourn sine die. 
 
 The President. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Cessna) moved 
 a resolution to proceed to ballot for nominations for President and Vice 
 President, and upon that motion he demanded the previous question. It is 
 the duty of the Chair to call for a second to that question in the ordinary 
 course of business. The Chair understands the gentleman from Maryland 
 (Mr. Stansbury) interposed with a motion the Convention do adjourn sine die. 
 
 Mr. McKibben, of Pennsylvania. 1 second that motion. 
 
 The President. The Chair supposes that motion to be in order. 
 
 Mr. Cessna, of Pennsylvania. Certainly ; there is no doubt about it ; and 
 on that motion I demand a vote by States. 
 
 Mr. McKibben. The gentleman has no right to speak for the Pennsylvania 
 delegation and demand a vote by States. 
 
 A Voice. New York demands it. 
 
 Mr. Moffatt, of Virginia. I rise to a question of privilege. 
 
 Mr. Stansbury, of Maryland. As gentlemen object to my motion I 
 withdraw it. 
 
 Mr. Moffatt, of Virginia. Have I the right to the floor ? 
 
 The President. The gentleman is entitled to the floor. 
 
 Mr. Moffatt, of Virginia. I understand that the proceedings in which we 
 have been engaged this evening have been fully consummated ; and that the 
 question of contested seats here is at an end. I therefore raise this point, 
 whether or not it is the duty of the Chair at once to issue tickets to the 
 admitted delegates, in order that they participate in the proceedings of this 
 Convention. 
 
 The President. The Chair will state that he so understands his duty, 
 and has already given that direction. 
 
 The demand for the previous question was then seconded. 
 
 Mr. Russell, of Virginia. If it be the pleasure of yourself, Mr. President, 
 and the Convention, I will now make the brief announcement of which I 
 made mention this morning. 
 
 Mr. Gorman, of Minnesota. I object to the gentleman's proceeding, and I 
 raise the point of order that he has no right to make any debate, or any other 
 announcement pending the call for the previous question. 
 
 Mr. Russell. I rise to a question of privilege. 
 
 The President. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Russell) rises to address 
 the Chair, and the Chair desires to know what proposition he desires to 
 make. 
 
 Voices. Let the gentleman proceed. 
 
 Mr. Russell. I consider it a question of privilege, and the Chair will de- 
 cide whether it is so or not when I submit it. I will detain the Convention 
 but a very brief time. I understand that the action of this Convention upon 
 the various questions arising out of the reports from the Committee on Cre- 
 dentials has become final, complete and irrevocable. And it has become my 
 duty now, by direction of a large majority of the delegation from Virginia, 
 respectfully to inform this body that it is inconsistent with their convictions 
 of duty to participate longer in its deliberations . 
 
 The delegates from Virginia, who participate in this movement, have come 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 345 
 
 >-> 
 
 to the conclusion which I have announced, after long, mature and anxious 
 deliberation, and after, in their judgment, having exhausted all* honorable 
 efforts to obviate this necessity. In addition to the facts which appear upon 
 your record, I desire the attention of this body long enough only to state that 
 it is ascertained that the delegations to which you, sir, under the order of this 
 Convention have just directed tickets to be issued— some of them at least, 
 and all of them whom we regard as the represen;atives of the Democracy of 
 their States — will decline to join here in the deliberations of this body. For 
 tbe rest, the reasons which impel us to take this important &tep will be ren- 
 dered to those to whom only we are responsible, the Democracy of the Old 
 Dominion. To you, sir, and to the bo ly over which you preside, I have only 
 to say in addition, that we bid you a respectful adieu. 
 
 Mr. Moffatt, of Virginia, ootained the floor. 
 
 The portion of the delegation Irom Virginia which retired "'aen left their 
 seats. 
 
 Mr. Moffatt resumed If it be your pleasure, Mr. President, aud the 
 pleasure of this Convention, [ desire to do what I have not done since the 
 time of my first connection with this body, and that is to occupy some por- 
 tion of your time in defining the position which I occupy as one of the repre- 
 sentatives from the Commonwealth of Virginia, and to say a few words on 
 behalf of my colleagues who remain as members of this Convention. I will 
 commence by saying that I was appointed, as was my colleague who repre- 
 sents jointly with me the Eleventh Electoral District of Virginia, by a Dis- 
 trict Convention, composed of delegates elected by the sovereign people of 
 that district. I owe allegiance to that district Convention and to none else. 
 I was elected by that district Convention a delegate to this National Conven- 
 tion, and was given a charter to represent that constituency in the Conven- 
 tion. 
 
 But I never was elected to any other Convention. I was authorized to 
 represent that constituency in this Convention, but I never was authorized 
 to withdraw from it. I was appointed to carry out the wishes of the people, 
 who are national and not sectional — men who are willing to stand by the 
 banner now, as they have in times past, of the National Democracy. There- 
 fore, acting here in the absence of instructions from that constituency, I can 
 never feel justified in separating from this body. I desire to say a few words 
 in regard to the action that has precipitated upon the country the fearful issue 
 which we now behold. What is the spectacle that presents itself? 
 
 Mr. Augustus Schell, of New York, called the gentleman to order, and 
 objected to his proceeding further in his remarks. 
 
 Mr. Lander, of North Carolina. Mr. President, painful as the duty is, it 
 is, nevertheless, my duty to announce here, as a representative of the dele- 
 gates from North Carolina, that a very large majority of them are compelled 
 to retire permanently from this Convention on account of the unjust action, 
 as we conceive, that has this day been perpetrated upon some of our sovereign 
 States and fellow-citizens of the South. We of the South have heretofore 
 maintained and supported the Northern Democracy, for the reason that thej T 
 are willing to attribute to us in the South equality in the Union. 'Ihe vote 
 to-day has satisfied the majority of the North Carolina delegates that that 
 being refused by our brethren of the Northern Democracy, North Carolina — 
 Rip Van Winkle as you may call her — can no longer remain in this Conven- 
 tion. The rights of sovereign States and of gentlemen of the South have been 
 denied by a majority of this body. We cannot act, as we conceive, in view 
 of this wrong. 1 use the word ''wrong" with no intention to reflect upon 
 those gentlemen of the North Carolina delegation who differ with me or with 
 the majority of the delegation. For these reasons, without assigning any 
 more, as I have no idea of inflicting a speech upon this Convention, who are 
 10 
 
146 Democratic National Convention, 
 
 in do state of preparation to receive it, I announce that eight out of ten of 
 the votes of North Carolina iisk to retire. 
 
 Mr. Ewing, of Tennessee. Mr. President, in behalf of the delegation from 
 Tennessee, I beg leave to address this Convention unon this occasion, so im- 
 portant, and, to us, so solemn in its consequences. The delegation from Ten- 
 nessee have exhibited, so far as they knew bow, every disposition to harmo- 
 nize this Convention, and to bring its labors to a happy result. They were 
 the first, when the majority platform was not adopted, to seek for some prop- 
 osition for compromise — something that would enable us to harmonize. They 
 have a candidate who was dear to them. They cast away his prospect for 
 the sake of harnvmy. They have yielded all that they can. They have 
 endeavored with all their power to accomplish the result they came here for, 
 but they fear that the result is not to be accomplished in a manner that can 
 render a just and proper account to their constituents. We have consulted 
 together, and after anxious and long deliberation, without knowing exactly 
 what phase this matter might finally present, we have not adopted any de- 
 cisive rule for our action ; but a large majority of our delegates — some 20 to 
 4— have decided that upon the result which is now obtained, we shall ask 
 leave of this Convention to retire, that we mny consult and announce our 
 final action ? We shall take no further part in the deliberations of this Con- 
 vention, unless our minds should change, and of that I can offer you no rea- 
 sonable hope. 
 
 Mr. Caldwell, of Kentucky. Mr. President, I am instructed by a majority 
 of the Kentucky delegation to state- that circumstances have arisen that make 
 it exceedingly doubtful in their minds whether they should continue in this 
 body. We have arrived now at a point when a grave question arises in the 
 minds of a large majority of our delegation, whether it is not our duty to 
 retire and report to our constituents that we have failed in our mission. We 
 have not yet determined to withdraw, but we ask permission to retire for 
 consultation. 
 
 The President. The Chair will understand that leave is granted. 
 
 Mr. Stuart. That cannot be the understanding of the Convention. I 
 object to it. 
 
 The President. The Chair desires that there may be some understanding 
 for his own guidance. It has repeatedly occurred heretofore that delegations 
 have retired on leave for consultation. Kentucky now makes that request. 
 Is the Chur to understand that the Convention does or does not consent to 
 the application ? 
 
 Many Voices. Yes, yes. 
 
 Mr. Stuart and others. No, no. 
 
 Mr. McCook, of Ohio. According to the rule adopted at Charleston, the 
 effect of a delegation retiring is to suspend ousiness. Every member is will- 
 ing that the Kentucky delegation should have time for deliberation, but our 
 proceedings have been protracted and the time of those who remain is to be 
 considered, as well as of the few who wish to retire. I am therefore opposed 
 to granting leave, if it. is to suspend our proceedings. 
 
 Mr. Stuart. Mr. President, I understand that the delegation wish to re- 
 tire but a very few minutes. I therefore withdraw my objection. 
 
 Mr. Johnson, of Maryland. Mr. President, I am authorized by my col- 
 leagues to report the state of facts in regard to a portion of the Maryland 
 delegation. Mr. Johnson stated that a portion of the delegates thought it no 
 longer consistent with their rights and honor to participate in the proceed- 
 ings of the Convention, but did not state what portion of the delegates 
 s ould withdraw from the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Glass, of Virginia. It is due to me, Mr. President, to state that I, as 
 one of the representatives of Virginia, have not concurred with the majority 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 147 
 
 i .^ 
 
 of my delegation in the important steps which they have just announced to 
 this Convention. I have done every tiling in my power to preserve the na- 
 tionality <>r' the Democratic party, and the harmony and successful termination 
 of this Convention, believing that upon that harmony depends the most mo- 
 menious consequences to our country. I have, however, in deference to the 
 overwhelming expression of the purpose of the majority of my delegation, 
 declined any further participation in the deliberations of this Convention. 
 But in doing so, I wish it distinctly placed on record, that I do not intend to 
 indorse their action. That [ reserve to myself and constituency in the 
 mstances may determine. My sole purpose in going out and 
 declining any further action on this occasion, is to preserve, if possible, the 
 union and harmony of the Democracy of Virginia. With that view I dec'ine 
 any further participation with this body. 
 
 Mr. WATtfiBSON, of Tennessee. I was a member of the Baltimore Conven- 
 tion twenty years ago, and since that time I have voted for every Democratic 
 candidate for President, and for every Democratic nominee in my bail wick, 
 and I shall be among the last to leave the ship ; I shall cling to the last 
 spar ; and having voted for the last twenty years, as I have said, I announce 
 to this Convention that, if I live until the next Presidential election, I shall 
 vote for the nominee of this Convention. ('Loud applause.) 
 
 Mr. Jon t e<. of Tennessee, here got and claimed the floor. 
 
 Mr. Watersox. I am not through yet. But I am proud that my friend 
 by my side is actuated by the same sentiments and the same considerations 
 that animate me. (Renewed applause.) There are some gallant spirits here 
 from the land of Jackson who will remain. (Applause) I had the honor 
 of being a member of the State Convention that accredited the delegates to 
 this Convention. I had the honor of being a member of the Committee who 
 drew up the resolutions adopted by that Committee. We labored for hours, 
 intending if we could to erect a platform upon which every national man 
 in every portion of our bsloved country could stand. We did so, as I verily 
 believe. That Convention recommended for the Presidency a distinguished 
 citizen of my own State, G-ov. Johnson. I am only sorry that I have not 
 the resolutions in my pocket. But I well remember what was declared in 
 the resolution ; it recommended Gov. Johnson for the Presidency, and after 
 declaring that he was our first choice, we pledged ourselves to give our 
 hearty support to the nominee of the party whether he lives in the North or 
 the South, (applause,) provided he cordially indorses the Cincinnati plat- 
 form. 
 
 I have no fears that this Convention will nominate a candidate that does 
 not cordially indorse the Cincinnati platform. Upon the principle of that 
 platform we have gone into every contest for the p'ist twelve years, and we 
 have achieved triumph after triumph. I trust that never while the feeling 
 of gratitude warms my bosom towards the gallant men of the North, who 
 have fought our battles, will I ever be found acting otherwise than with the 
 Democratic party. I do not remember any time when the gallant Democrats 
 of the North were called upon to come to our rescue that they did not march 
 forth by our side. There has been no unconditional resolve on the part of 
 the Tennessee delegation, and I trust that better counsels will prevail. They 
 are my friends of days past ; we have labored shoulder to shoulder against 
 the common enemy, and I trust that in the approaching canvass it will not 
 be necessary for us to turn our shields against them. But if the battle must 
 come, let it come ; I am prepared to do my duty. (Applause.) This is not 
 of my seeking ; I have witnessed these indications for some time past ; I see 
 that there is obliged to be a battle among the Democracy; that somebody 
 must be beaten. I shall discharge my duty as a Democrat, and a National 
 Democrat, let the result be what it may. (Loud applause.) I shall follow 
 
148 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 my convictions of right. T have given no vote that I did not believe was- 
 right in itself, that I should not believe to be Democratic ; and I am proud 
 .to see sitting around me the representatives from the 4th Congressional dis- 
 trict — the Memphis dis'rict — who are my friends. They will not abandon 
 ■their post. I am the only representative who is here, or who has been here 
 from the Congressional district which I have the honor to represent. That 
 makes two votes. My friend sitting by my side is the sole representative 
 from the Knoxville district in the State of Tennessee, the only representative 
 from that district who is here or who has been here during the sittings of this- 
 (Convention. That makes three votes, and here is my fiiend Mr. Cooper 
 (laughter and loud applause), who is the editor of a Democratic newspaper in 
 another Congressional district, and I know that he does not believe in bolting. 
 (Applause.) And I see by my side another friend, his colleague, and if 1 
 were to see him leave it would cause me sorrow. I do not believe that he 
 will do it, I shall believe it when I see it, and not before. I have felt it my 
 duty to say this much, and now 1 take my seat. 
 
 Mr. Jones, of Tennessee. I shall not detain the Convention long. I de- 
 sire to state that I have been connected with this Convention from its very 
 beginning. I was in the city of Charleston before this Convention assembled; 
 I staid there until it adjourned to this place ; I voted for that adjournment; 
 I counseled it, because I believed it would tend to harmonize the great De- 
 mocratic party, the national party of this country. And although I have 
 been a Democrat ever since I first drew milk from my mother's breast, 
 (laughter and applause,) I do not believe that I am aged and experienced 
 enough to undertake the work of breaking up the Democratic party. (Ap- 
 plause.) I went back from Charleston and reported, my action to my constit- 
 uents. I supported Gov. Johnson, the choice of Tennessee, to the very lasi, 
 even after every other Tennesseean had pulled down his flag. I believe that 
 the people of Tennessee, and especially the Democracy of the Gibraltar of the 
 Knoxville district, supported me in the course I have pursued. What 
 grounds had Alabama and all those other States for leaving this Convention? 
 They said they left because they could not get Congressional protection, and 
 4he words had hardly came from their lips in the Convention before you 
 could hear them upon the streets saying that if a certain man was not nom- 
 inated they would support the nominee. Then there is a contest here about 
 men, it would seem. I have never cast my vote for that individual. 
 
 But I do think that gentlemen have attempted to break up the Democratic 
 party upon hostility to a man and not upon principles that affect the interests 
 of the South. (Applause.) I do hope that the Tennesseean delegation who 
 have retired to consult, will, with the wisdom and the philosophy of old, and 
 with the patriotism of a Washington who fought and bled for his country, 
 with the devotion of that great man who said " the Union must and shall be 
 preserved " will reconsider their action and come back into this Convention. 
 
 Mr. Smith, of California, rose and addressed the Convention, but his 
 remarks being of an uncivil and personal character, he was called to order by 
 several delegates. 
 
 The President. The gentleman is not in order — the Chair is constrained 
 to say. 
 
 Mr. Smith. Very well, then, I will withdraw from the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Stevens, of Oregon. I can say in behalf of the delegation from Ore- 
 gon, that I have a most melancholy duty to perform. It is somewhat signi- 
 ficant, Mr. President and gentleman of this Convention, that that district of 
 ^country which is entirely aloof from the theater of this turmoil feels com- 
 pelled to take a certain decisive step. I participated in the proceedings of 
 the Convention at Charleston, and I have done my part as well as I could at 
 •Baltimore. At no period at either place have I allowed my feelings to get 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore, 149 
 
 '.-> 
 
 the better of my judgment, and I approach this question and this exigency 
 with as much coolness and am prepared for it with as much deliberation as I 
 ever approached any event in my life. Mr. President, there is remarkable 
 .significance in the fact that the Democratic party on the Pacific coast feel 
 compelled to take this course. We have a growing empire on that coast 
 that has been wrought out by the sacrifice of the blood and the peril of the 
 la->t twelve years. On every route that leads from the Mississippi valley to 
 that Western shore the bones of your emigrants are scattered. At every step 
 almost, the tombstones of the suffering, way-worn travelers are found. V\ e 
 are still on that Western coas k , planting our footsteps in blood in endeavoring 
 to develop the country. We have come to this Convention and we have 
 labored earnestly to bring about harmony. We have sought to stand upon 
 principles alone. We did hope when this Convention re-assembled at Balti- 
 more, that it would bring together the Democratic party in every sovereign 
 State. 
 
 We find ourselves grievously mistaken. By your action to-day, gentlemen 
 as much entitled to seats as ourselves, in our opinion, are excluded from the 
 floor. We do not mean to impugn the motives of others, but are conscious 
 that a most grievous wrong and insult has been given to sovereign Sta r es. 
 Those States are the weak parties* in this contest, and we have resolved to 
 stand by them and assert th«;ir rights. I now announce that the delegation 
 from Oregon have come to the conclusion to withdraw from the deliberations 
 and take no further part in them. 
 
 Mr. Moffatt, of Virginia, concluded the remarks be was about to make, 
 when called to order by Mr. Schell, of New York. 
 
 Mr. Davis, of Virginia, announced his determination to remain in the Con- 
 vention, and give his reasons therefor. 
 
 Mr. Riley, of Pennsylvania, moved to adjourn. 
 
 Mr. McCook called for the vote by States on the motion to adjourn. 
 
 Appeals were made to the gentleman to withdraw the call, but without avail. 
 
 Mr. IM offatt begged leave to announce the introduction into the Convention, 
 of Col. Didard, as an alternate from one of the Eastern Districts of the State 
 of V'rginia. 
 
 The vote was taken bv States on the motion to adjourn, and resulted as 
 follows : -Ayes 18}£, nays 210>£. 
 
 So the motion to adjourn was rejected. 
 
 IVbr. Cessna, of Pennsylvania. 1 now a^k the Chair to ascertain from the 
 Convention, whether or not there is a second to my demand for the previous 
 question upon the resolution to proceed to ballot for candidates for the Pres- 
 idency and Vice Presidency. 
 
 Mr. Claek, of Missouri. I desire to be heard on the part of Missouri 
 before that question is taken. The object of my rising now is to ask per- 
 mission for a portion of the delegation from Missouri to consult as to their 
 further action. I am the Chairman of that delegation, but I do not ask th's 
 for myself; my purpose is fixed. But it is due to my colleagues who desire 
 an opportunity for consultation that they should be allowed a little time for 
 that purpose. I therefore request that instead of the Convention proceeding 
 with their business to-night, they will adjourn until to-morrow morning. 
 This is an important crisis in our history. We must have some consultation 
 before any other vote is taken. I propose this to the gentleman from Penn- 
 sylvania (Mr. Cessna,) that as there are several delegations who desire to con- 
 sult before lurther action, that the previous question be sustained, and then 
 the Convention adjourn, and they proceed at once in the morning to business, 
 with the understanding that we will then announce our determination. 
 
 Mr. Cessna, of Pennsylvania. I will state to the gentleman from Missouri 
 (Mr. Clark.) that so far as my own views are concerned, whatever may be 
 
150 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 the wishes of the majority of the Convention, which I cannot undertake to 
 explain, the purpose for which I made my motion was, that we might get 
 through as much of the preliminary business as possible to-night I would 
 
 not myself be willing to withdraw the demand for the previous qu stion, or 
 delay in any way the action of this Convention before we reach that pant, if 
 we ever do reach, it, at which the previous question shall have been seconded 
 and the main question ordered, in order that if this Convention shall then be 
 disposed to adjourn, the first business to-morrow morning shall be balloting 
 for nominations. But I have no right to say what the majority of this Con- 
 vention will do. 
 
 Mr. Clark. I have no right to press this matter. If it is not agreed that 
 this Convention will adjourn after ordering the previous question, 1 will pro- 
 ceed now, but I would prefer to wait. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, said that it was his understanding that the pre- 
 vious question had been seconded. 
 
 After some consultation, it seemed to be understood that the previous 
 question had been seconded, and the question was upon ordering the main 
 question to be now put. 
 
 Mr. Craig, of Missouri. I hope the suggestion of my colleague, (Mr. 
 Clark,* may be adopted, and fearing that at least the course of one delegate 
 from Missouri may be misapprehended, I w r: ll say, that although 1 am proud 
 to follow almost anywhere my distinguished colleague may lead, I never will 
 follow htm out of a Democratic Convention, or out of the Democratic party. 
 
 Mr. Clark. As the remarks of my colleague (Mr. Craig) might place me 
 in a false position, I will announce now what I would not have done but for 
 his remarks. I remarked w-hen I got up before that my own purpose was 
 fix-'d, and the de'ay I asked was in behalf of a portion of the Missouri dele- 
 gation, who wanted time to consult. My own purpose is fixed. For weal 
 or woe, as the representative of a large constituency in this Convention, and 
 as the representative in the Congress of the United States of 100,000 people, 
 and having to vote in the Mouse of Representatives for President, if the ques- 
 tion ever g >es to tha,t House. I am in this Convention, and intend to stay in 
 it. [Gr at applause.] I place myself upon the organization of the great 
 party of which I am an honorable member, and will have to throw myself 
 upon the gjod sense and patriotism of my constituency, in whatever theater of 
 action they may place me, to justify me in adhering to the old time ho^ired 
 usages of the party which have brought us renown and glory in this ^reat 
 Union. [Renewed applause. J 
 
 I will not extend my remarks, but will ask this Convention to adjourn, as 
 the demand for the previous question has been recorded. 
 
 Mr. Clark withdrew the motion to adjourn, at the request of Mr. Gaulden, 
 of Georgia. 
 
 A Delegate from Virginia asked if the alternates of the Virginia delegation 
 would be allowed ro hold the seats of those delegates who had withdrawn 
 from this Convention. 
 
 Cries of "yes, yes." 
 
 The President. The Chair does not understand that that is a question 
 competent for him to determine. 
 
 The Delegate from Virginia. I wish to say, in addition, that as the Vice 
 President for Virginia has also seceded, we have elected Hon. William G. 
 Brown in his place. [Applause.] 
 
 Mr. Gaulden, of Georgia, here announced his determination to continue to 
 slcz in this Convention, and addressed the Convention in an eloquent manner, 
 advocating the maintenance of the integrity of the National Democratic party. 
 
 Mr. Whitney, of Massachusetts. I am instructed by a majority of the 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 151 
 
 Massachusetts delegation, to ask leave of this Convention to retire for con- 
 sultation 
 
 Mr. Sailsijury, of Delaware, announced that on a future ballot the Dela- 
 ware delegation should decline to vote, resuming the right to change their 
 course at any time. 
 
 Mr. Steele, of North Carolina, nave his reasons for continuing to act in the 
 Convention. 
 
 Mr. Swing, of Tennessee. Mr. President, the majority of the delegation 
 from Tennesseo, who asked the induk r e r ice of thi-. Convention to ret re for 
 consultation, have done so, and as tie result "f their d« liberations I haY3 to 
 announce that nineteen out of the twenty-four representatives have deck e i to 
 retire, and five t > remain. 
 
 Mr. Clajrobne, of Missouri. For nearly three weeks, 1 have li;-tened 
 patiently to everything tha- has been said in tr.i= Convention, both at Charles- 
 ton and Baltimore. 1 de-ire now to state the reasons for pursuing thf course 
 l hat 1 now take, so far as my connection with this Contention is concerned; 
 a"d let me say, I hope there vvi'l be no adjournment to-night, until we shall 
 make a national nomination. [Applause.] 
 
 1 have ever been taught to beliew that the cardinal prmctple of Democracy 
 is, that the majority shall govern. To day, I have seen the majority of the 
 Committee on Credentials report to admit certain delegates, and exclude others, 
 and the majority of tb« J Committee adopt that report. To-day, for the first 
 time in tho history of Democrcy, I have seen the mother of States starting 
 madly from a National Convention. I am a Southern man, born and raised 
 beneath the sunny sk} r of the South. 
 
 X<>t a drop of blood in my veins ever flowed in veins north of Mason and 
 Dixon's line. My ancestors for 800 years sh j ep beneath the turf that- shelters 
 the h^nrs of Washington, and I thank God that they rest in the graves of 
 honest slave-holders. [Applause.] Sir, it has been the fortune of a distin- 
 guished candidate at Charleston to be reproached with having, like Esau, sold 
 his birth-right for a mess of pottage. They tell me I am a traitor to the insti- 
 tutions of the South because T voted there and shall vote here for S'ephen A. 
 Donslas, I hu 1 back the ephithet. 
 
 When the delegation from Alabama withdrew from the Charleston Conven- 
 tion unde -- the instructions of their State, I felt, that he heavens should have 
 been hung in crape, fori feared that the example of the distinguished son of 
 that State would work the ruin of the national Democratic party of the 
 country. But since tl en, Southern Btte after State has closed up the ranks, 
 and the Democracy is still, I brieve, omnipotent and triumphant. 
 
 Sir, I trust this Convention will soon proceed to the nomination, and that 
 to-morrow will witness the Democratic party united and harmonious, and that 
 the shout will go up from every hill and valley in ihe land announcing the 
 triumphs of the party that still car; ies before it, as its shield, the Constitution, 
 and tha- strike;- and crosse-s swords with the enemies of tint Constitution and 
 the Union. [Appliuse] The Democratic party has' passed through ordeals 
 before, and it will piss this one, as sure as there is a God in heaven. The 
 success that attended with our fathers in the revolutionary str ggle will be 
 ours in this great struggle, and we shall be victorious over every foe. 
 
 The gentleman concluded his remarks by saying, that with Douglas, Missouri 
 would give twenty-five thousand majority. 
 
 Cries of "question, qmstion 
 
 The President. Sh ill the mi in question be now pu ? 
 
 Toe motion ''shall the main question be now put," to go into a nomination 
 of candidates for President and Vice President was carried. 
 
 The President. The motion has been carried. Will the Convention now 
 vote upon the main question ? 
 
 Mr. Cessna, of, Pennsylvania. I move an adjournment. (Cries of " No, no/') 
 
152 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Mr. Clars: T will claim the right fco m ;ke the statement I proposed 'n the 
 morning. 
 
 The President. A motion to adjourn has been made. All who are in fiver 
 of it will vote aye, &r. 
 
 The vofe b inr taken viva voce, the President decided that the question hnd 
 bteen determined in the affirmative, whereupon the Convention, at 10:30, 
 adjourned. 
 
 List of Delegates for the State of Alabama, in the National Convention, with 
 their Post Office addresses. 
 
 W. II K Wyatt. Aut uigaville. J. 0. Pradley, Hmtsville. 
 Bush Jones Uuioutown. Jam«w Williams, Bridgeport. 
 
 Wii Ham Garrett. Suc-»pot«iy. A J. McGiuney, Ljwnde^boro. jW. S. Throckmorton, Tuscumbia 
 
 John Foi-svth. Mobi'e 
 
 ftobt A Biker, Summer-field. 
 
 John J Seibie , Montgomery. John W. Wornack Eutaw- jThomaa B. Cooper. Center- 
 
 L. V B Martiu, L'uscaiooaa. I'^wis £ Papons, Talladega. 
 
 O. H Ryaum, Cou.-tlaid [William Jenkins, Mardeiville. 
 
 Hug i Monroe, Mobile. U<imu i D. Weaklev, Kiorence. JBenj H irrison, Montgomery. 
 
 T- M. Mathews, Ca.mba. I 
 
 D. <J. Humphrey.-. Hunisviil 
 Sidney 0. Poaoy. Florence. 
 
 SIXTJEi X5A.-3T. 
 
 Saturday, June 23, 1860. 
 
 At 10>£ o'clock, the President, Hon. Caleb Gushing, took his seat and 
 called the Convention to order, when the Rev. Dr. Uummings opened with 
 prayer. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Dodge, of Iowa, the reading of the journal of yesterday 
 was dispensed with. 
 
 At the request of Mr. Garrett, of Alabama, the Secretary read a cor- 
 rected list of the Alabama delegation as admitted to this Convention. 
 
 Mr. Garrett also announced that the delegation from Alabama had chosen 
 Hugh Monroe Vice President, and Bush Jones Secretary for the State of Ala- 
 bama 
 
 Mr. Caldwell, of Kentucky. After the withdrawal of the Kentucky 
 delegation last evening, we held a hurried consultation, and, under the cir- 
 cumstances, hastened back to the hall for the purpose of announcing our de- 
 termination. After making one or two ineffectual efforts to be heard by the 
 President, an adjournment intervened before I succeeded. It is proper that I 
 should state that after the meeting that we had last evening, the night inter- 
 vened, and upon a consultation this morning there were some slight changes 
 in the opinions of some of our delegation, and it is my duty now to report to 
 the Convention the determination at present arrived at. The circumstances 
 in which we are placed are exceedingly embarrassing, and we have not there- 
 fore been enabled to come to an entirely harmonious conclusion. The re- 
 sult is, however, that the delegates of Kentucky remain in the Convention. 
 (Applause.) There are ten delegates who withdraw from the Convention. 
 
 The exact character of their withdrawal is set forth in a single paragraph, 
 with their names appended, which I shall desire the Secretary to read before 
 I sit down. There are five others —completing that delegation — who desire 
 for the present to suspend their connection with the action of this Convention. 
 I need not go into auy reasons for it, because from the remarks that I made 
 last evening our views will have been understood. I will add here, that 
 there may be no misunderstanding, that I myself am one of those five, and 
 we have also signed a short paper, which I shall also ask the secretary to 
 read to the Convention. 
 
 Not desiring to detain the Convention longer, it only remains for me to say 
 that having placed in nomination before this Convention a distinguished and 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore, 153 
 
 favored son >f Kentucky, being actuated in our withdrawal by circumstances 
 that impel us to think that it is our duty to retire for the present. I also 
 deem it my duty in justice to that distinguished, patriotic, and national Dem- 
 ocrat, to withdraw his name from before the Convention, which I now do. I 
 will ask the Secretary to read the papers I have indicated, and also one which 
 a gentleman of our delegation has handed me, which he desires to be read. I 
 ask that the three papers be read. 
 
 The first paper, signed by James G. Leach, was then read 
 
 Mr. Payne, of Ohio, said he considered the paper just read an abuse of the 
 privilege of this body, and an insult to its members; and he moved that it be 
 returned to the gentleman who signed it, and be not received by the Conven- 
 tion ; and he save notice that he should object to any communication, from 
 any source, reflecting upon the action of this body. 
 
 Mr. Leach disclaimed any intention of disrespect. 
 
 The question being taken on the motion of the gentleman from Ohio, de- 
 clining to receive the paper, it was agreed to. 
 
 So the Convention declined to receive the paper. 
 
 The Secretary then read the communication signed by the retiring and 
 remaining delegates from Kentucky, as follows : 
 To the Hon. Caleb dishing, President of the Democratic National Convention, 
 
 assembled in the city of Baltimore : 
 
 The Democratic Convention for the State of Kentucky, held in the city of 
 Frankfort, on the 9th day of January, 1860, among others, adopted the fol- 
 lowing resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That we pledge the Democracy of Kentucky to an honest and 
 industrious support of the nominee of the Charleston Convention. 
 
 Since the adoption of this resolution, and the assembly of this Convention, 
 events have transpired not then contemplated, notwithstanding whirh we 
 have labored diligently to preserve the harmony and unity of said Conven- 
 tion, but discord and disintegration have prevailed to such an extent that we 
 feel that our efforts cannot accomplish this end. 
 
 Therefore, without intending to vacate our seats, or to join or participate in 
 any other Convention or organization in this city, and with the intention of 
 again co-operating with this Convention, should its unity and harmony be 
 restored by any future event, we now declare that we will not participate in 
 the meantime in the deliberations of this Convention, nor hold ourselves or 
 constituents bound by its action, but leave both at full liberty to act as future 
 circumstances may dictate. 
 
 N. W. WILLIAMSON, 
 G. A. CALDWELL, 
 
 Delegates for State at large. 
 W. BRADLEY, 
 SAMUEL B. FIELD, 
 THOMAS J. YOUNG. 
 
 Resolved, That the Chairman of our delegation be instructed to inform the 
 Convention in our behalf that in the present condition of that body we deem 
 it inconsistent with our duty to ourselves and our constituents to participate 
 further in its deliberations. Our reasons for so doing will be given to the 
 Democracy of Kentucky. 
 
 JNO. DISHMAN, J. S. KENDALL, 
 
 JOS. B. BE^K, D. VV. QUARL&S, 
 
 COLBERT CECIL, L. GilEENT, 
 
 R. M JOHNSON, CAL. BUTLER, 
 
 R. NICKEE, JAS. G. LEACH. 
 
 Mr. West, of Connecticut, inquired what motion was now pending ? 
 
154 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 The President. The motiou to proc3ad to the vote for candidates for 
 President and Vice President of the United Suites. 
 
 Mr. Wkst. I hope the motion will now be put. 
 
 Mr. Reed, of Kentucky. I do not rise to make a speech -God knows I 
 am tired of speaking— but simply to announce the fact that I, as one of the 
 Kentucky delegation, together with others, have seen no cause as yet tor 
 abandoning this Convention. (Applause.) I read in the history of the an- 
 cient city of the plain that an angel of the Lord was sent to inquire whether 
 there were any righteous men to be found that that city might be save«i, the 
 promise being that if fire could be found it should not be destroyed. (Ap- 
 plause.) I am happy to say that from Kentucky there are not only five but 
 nine men who will stand by this Convention. (Applause.) It is a Demo- 
 cratic Convention. It belongs to the Democratic party. We, of Kentucky, 
 stand here opposing secession and sectionalism North and South. We will 
 stand with you as a wall of fire in opposing both extremes. (Applause.) We 
 will rally upon the principles of equal rights and exclusive privileges to none. 
 We will form a nucleus here around which all conservative men of both sec- 
 tions can rally and save the nation. I am not going to abandon the Conven- 
 tion because it is apparent that one of our glorious chieftains is not likely to 
 receive the nomination. (Applause.) No. I have gratitude in my heart to 
 the man whose pathway from the city of Washington to his house in the far 
 West is lighted by his o v\*n effigies. (Applause.) We in Kentucky owe to 
 him, and to the North and West, our homes and firesides. Gentlemen who 
 own a hundred slaves each say I am right. I will go home to my constitu- 
 ents and to the campaign, and camp-fires will he lighted in the mountains 
 and valleys, and in less than seventy days you will hear a shout that will 
 turn the course of affairs and set things right. (Applause.) We will take 
 this matter out of the hands of politicians and the Administration and return 
 it to the people. (Applause.) I stand pledged to stand by the nominee of 
 the Convention by solemn resolution binding upon me and every Kentuckian. 
 I will stand by it though the heavens fall. (Applause.) I have been a 
 Democrat from my infancy. I regard this as a strife between Democracy and 
 Federalism. Non-intervention I regard as Democracy, and Congressional in- 
 tervention as Federalism. (Applause.) 
 
 My colleague (Mr. Caldwell) has withdrawn the name of Mr. Guthrie, the 
 choice of Kentucky. I put his name again in nomination — Kentucky's favor- 
 ite son. 
 
 Mr. Clark, of Missouri. Before the Convention proceeds to a ballot, in 
 accordance with my promise of last night, I desire to state what is the con- 
 clusion the Missouri delegation have reached after consultation. 
 
 Mr. King, of Missouri. I would like.»the gentleman, in making that an- 
 nouncement, to state that it is the action of but a part of the Missouri dele .a- 
 tton. A number of us here had no desire to consult. I wanted to cons .1: 
 with no one. 
 
 Mr. Clark. My colleague would have had no need for an explanation if 
 he had had a little patience. I announced to the Convention yesterday tha- 
 there was a portion of the Missouri delegation who asked me to request of the 
 Convention time for consultation. I did not include myself, nor did I include 
 my colleague. That portion of my delegation have consulted, and it is my 
 dutv now to announce to the Convention the conclusion of that consultation. 
 I have to announce that two of the Missouri delegation desire to withdraw 
 from this Convention. In doing this, I claim that it is right that they 
 should take the responsibility, and that the honor attaching to such, a move- 
 ment should be theirs entirely. 
 
 Mr. Hill, of North Carolina. Mr. President, the Convention has know- 
 ledge that on yesterday a portion of the delegation from North Carolina re- 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 155 
 
 tired for reasons satisfactory to themselves. At the time I thought my col- 
 leagues were wrong, having perceived no sufficient reason in the action of this 
 Convention to justify a retirement from the Convention. Since that time I 
 feel it due to my constituents and the State to which I owe allegiance to join 
 my destiny to theirs. 
 
 I part \< ith my brethren here to-day, as the gentleman from Kentucky 
 s.id, more in sorrow thau in anger; hut a sense of duty requires that I de- 
 clare that I no longer can take part in the proceedings of this Convention. 
 
 Mr. Jones, of Teunessee, rose to correct some newspaper report of his re- 
 marks, and also to announce that instead of nineteen delegates retiring from 
 the Tennessee delegation, but thirteen had withdrawn from the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Jones of Pennsylvania, raised the point of o-der that no speeches 
 were in order, as the previous question had been called on the resolution of 
 Mr. Cessna, of Pennsylvania, to proceed to the ballot for nomination of Presi- 
 dent and Vice President. 
 
 The President ruled that no gentleman could proceed with any remarks 
 without the unanimous consent of the Convention. 
 
 Several Delegates asked Mr. Jones, of Peunsylvonia, to withdraw his ob- 
 jection, but he refused to do so. 
 
 The President said he had received two papers which he deemed it as his 
 duty to communicate to the Convention. One was a paper signed by Mr. 
 Sturman, of Arkansas, and the other a paper from the State of Georgia. 
 
 Objection was made to the reading of the papers. 
 
 Mr. Sturman, of Arkausas, desired leave to state why he retired from the 
 Convention. 
 
 Mr. Jones, of Pennsylvania, insisted upon his point, that pending the ques- 
 tion before the Convention no gentleman was in order to address the Conven- 
 tion. 
 
 The President ruled that the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Sturman) 
 could not proceed, as objection had been made. 
 
 Mr. Cessna, of Pennsylvania, called lor the vote upon his resolution to 
 proceed to nominate candidates for President and Vice President. 
 
 The President. Gentlemen of the Convention, a motion has been mnde 
 by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Cessna,) to the consideration of 
 which the Chair will now proceed. 
 
 Bat before doing so, I beg the indulgence of the Convention to say that 
 whilst deeply sensible of the honor done me by the Convention in placing me 
 in this chair, I was not less deeply sensible of the difficulties, general and 
 personal, looming up iu the future to environ my path Nevertheless, in the 
 solicitude to maintain the harmony and union ol the Democratic party, and n 
 the face of the retirement of the delegations of several States, I continued 
 at my post, laboring to that end, and in that sense had the honor to meet you, 
 gentlemen, here in Baltimore, hut circumstances have since transpired which 
 compel me to pause. The delegations ol a majority of the States ot this 
 Union have, either in whole or in part, in one form or another, ceased to par- 
 ticipate in the deliberations of this body. At no time would any considera- 
 tion of candidates have affected my judgment as to my duty. And I came 
 here prepa.ed, regardless of all personal preferences, cor. dally to support the 
 nominations of this Convention, whosoever they might be. But under the 
 present circumstances I deem it a duty of self-respect, and I deem it still more 
 a duty to this Convention as at present organized — I say j deem it my duty 
 in both relations, whilst tendering my most grateful acknowledgments to 
 gentlemen of all sides, and especially to those gentlemen who may have dif- 
 fered with me in opinion in any respect— whilst tendering my most grateful 
 acknowledgments to all gentlemen for the candid and honorable support 
 which they have given the Chair, even when they differed in opinion upon 
 
158 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 rulings, and whilst tendering also the gentlemen present my most cordial re- 
 spects and regards, not knowing a single gentleman upon this floor as to whom 
 I have other than sentiments of cord'ality and friendship — I dee.m it my duty 
 to resign my seat as presiding officer of this Convention. [Applause.] I deem 
 it my duty to resign my place as presiding officer of this Convention in order 
 to take my seat, on the floor as a member of the delegation of M >ss <c msetts, 
 and to abide whatever may be its determination in regard to its further action 
 in this Convention. And I deem this above all a duty I owe to the members 
 of the Convention as to whom my action would no longer represent the will 
 of the majority of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Cushing- here left the chair, and took his place with the Massachusetts 
 delegation. 
 
 Hoi. Divid Tod, of Ohio, immediately assumed the chair and was greeted 
 with enthusiastic and hearty cht ers. After order was restored, he t-a'd : 
 
 As the present presiding officer of this Convention by common consent of 
 my brother Vice Prcs'dents, with great diffidence I assume the chair. When 
 I announce to you that for 34 vears I have stood up in that district so long 
 misrepresented by Joshua R. Giddings. with the Demmocratic banner in my 
 hand, [npplius ,] I know that I shall receive the good wishes of this Conven- 
 tion, at l^ast, for the discharge of tbe duties of the chair. If there are no 
 p/fvileged questions intervening, the Secretary will proceed with the call of 
 the S'ates. 
 
 Mr. Butler, of Massachusetts, addressed the chair. 
 
 Objection was made to his speaking. 
 
 The Pke^dent. The gentleman .from Massachusetts will take his seat. 
 
 The Secretary proceed d to call the States amid great confusion and strug- 
 gles for the floor. 
 
 Mr. Stoughton, of Vermont, challenged the vote of that State. 
 
 The President. That cannot be entertained before the result is announced. 
 The Chair appealed to the honor of members of the Convention to preserve 
 order until the vote was taken. 
 
 Mr. Butler. I assure the Convention that I will not detain them but a 
 mom,enr. 
 
 Tne President. Objection b^ing made, the gentleman from Massachusetts 
 must take his seat. 
 
 Mr. Butler. I desire to present, as a question of privilege, a protest re- 
 spectful in its character and terms to this Convention. I ask for Massachu- 
 setts the same respectful hearing that has been given to everybody else. 
 
 The PRssiDEn-r. Is the objection withdrawn? 
 
 Several Voices. "No, no." 
 
 Many Delegates appealed in behalf of allowing Mr. Butler to p'oceed. 
 
 The President directed the cdl to pioeeed. 
 
 The resolution ordering the Convention to proceed to vote for candidates for 
 the o^ioe of President and Vice President of the United States was adopted. 
 
 The President then directed the Secretary to call the Sta f es for the purpose 
 of recording their votes for a cand date for the office of President of the Uni- 
 ted States. 
 
 Mr. Claiborne, of Missouri, appealed to the Convention to allow Mr. But- 
 ler to address them. 
 
 Mr. Sayles, of Rhode Island, seconded the appeal. The privilege had 
 been accorded to every State. 
 
 Objection being still made, the Secretary proceeded to call the States. Mas- 
 sachusetts being called — 
 
 Mr. Butler said : Mr. President, I have the instruction of a majority of 
 the delegation from Massachusetts to present a written protest. I will send 
 it to the Chair to have it read. And further, with your leave, I desire to s'>y 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 167 
 
 what I think will be pleasant to the Convention. First, that while a majority 
 of the delegate! from Massachusetts do not purpose farther to participate in 
 the doings of this Convention, we desire to part, if we may, to meet you a* 
 friends and Democrats again. We desire to part in the same spirit of manly 
 courtesy wi*h which we camo together. 
 
 The following ia the protest of the Massachusetts delegation : — 
 
 Massachusetts Delegation, Baknum's Hotel, ) 
 Baltimore, June 22, 1860. \ 
 To the President of the Convention . 
 
 The undersigned, a majority of the delegates from Mass ichusetts to the 
 National Democratic Convantion, in view of the action this day taken by the 
 Convention in excluding the Hon. Benj. F. Hallett from the seat occupied by 
 him as a delegate from the Fifth Congressional District of our State, and the 
 assignment of his seat to Mr. K. S. Chaffee, who was selected only as a sub- 
 stitute by the District Democratic Convention which elected Mr. Hailett as 
 one of the delegates, do hereby protest against the action of this body in thus 
 excluding an old, faithful and most efficient servant of the National Demo- 
 cratic cause — a regul rly elected and commissioned delegare, for circum- 
 stances arising from a mournful domestic affliction which prevented him from 
 attending the earlier sittings of this body, and caused the substitution of Mr. 
 Chaffee in his place. 
 
 We therefore desire to lay before the Convention our respectful protest 
 against the aforesaid action, and also our request that it may be entered upon 
 the records. 
 
 JAS S. WHITNEY, Del. at large. C. S. GUSHING, Del. at large. 
 
 W. C. N. SWIFT, 1st Dist. P. W. LELANL), 2d Dist. 
 
 ALEXANDER LINCOLN, 2d Dist. BRADFORD L. WALES, 3d Dist. 
 
 JAMES RILEY, 4th Dist. ISAAC H. WRIGHT, 4th Dist. 
 
 CORNELIUS DOHERTY, 5th Dist. GEO. R. LORING, 6th Dist. 
 
 E. S. WILLIAMS, 6th Dist. GEO JOHNSON, 7th Dist.* 
 
 BENJ. F. BUTLER, 8th Dist. A . W. CHAP1N, 10th Dist. 
 
 D. N. CARPENTER, 11th Dist. 
 
 A portion of the Massachusetts delegation here retired. 
 
 Mr. Dawson, of Pennsylvania, asked leave for the Pennsylvania delega- 
 tion to retire for consultation merely in reference to their choice for the Pres- 
 idency? 
 
 The request was granted by unanimous consent. 
 
 The Secretary then proceeded with the call, callir.g again the State of 
 Massachusetts. . 
 
 Mr. Stevens, of Massachusetts, said — I am not ready at this moment to 
 cast the vote of Massachusetts, the delegation being in consultation as to 
 their rights. But I cannot permit the call of Massachusetts to be made 
 twice without some response, and in doing so I propose to reflect in no way 
 upon the action of those delegates who have withdrawn. It is my convic- 
 tion that should I withdraw from this Convention it would meet with the 
 deepest reprobation of my constituents. (Applause.) I profess, as one of 
 the delegates at large, to know the sentiments of the people of Massachu- 
 setts, and I say that they are for the principle of non-intervention and for 
 Stephen A. Douglas. (Applause.) Our party has been laboring hard to 
 stem the side of abolitionism and fanaticism. The Democracy of Massachu- 
 setts never split upon an} 7 platform, and are ever ready to maintain the in- 
 tegrity of our organization. 
 
 At the call of the State of Maryland, 
 
 Mr. Brent said — Before my vote is cast I desire to submit an explanation. 
 Not one word would have passed my lips but for the remarks of my col- 
 
158 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 league yesterday (Mr. Johnson). The Democracy of Maryland, assembled 
 in this city, by a platform of resolutions passed in March, 1860, unanimously 
 declared that they would plant themselves on the doctrine of non-inerven- 
 tioji by Congress with slavery in the Territories, reaffirming the Cincinnati 
 platform, and declaring at the same time that a difference of opinion upon 
 questions of Territorial and Congressional power was a matter of 1 deration. 
 After that declaration I have no hesitation in standing tipon the Charleston 
 platform, and standing on that platform I cast my vote for Douglas. 
 
 At the call of the State of North Carolina, 
 
 Mr. Dick, of North Carolina, said — I stand alone for North Carolina. I 
 stand by the national Democracy and by the gallant champion of the North- 
 West. 
 
 Mr. Jon t es, of Pennsylvania, insisted that gentleman should not be allowed, 
 in explaining their votes, to make stump speeches. 
 
 Mr. Dick. I had hoped that I could claim the courtesy of the Convention 
 after patient, anxious, silent waiting for sixteen days. I have a birth-right 
 amidst, the national Democracy which I never intend to forfeit. (Applause.) 
 
 Although my friends have gone — friends with whom I have heretofore 
 rallied in many a fiercely fought contest, I bid them good bye with sorrow, 
 saving naught against their motives. They have gone from us, and, as I 
 think, with strange gods, but 1 intend to worship where I have done hereto- 
 fore. My constituents sent me here knowing that I would vote for Stephen 
 A. Douglas. (Applnuse.) I have seen no cause of secescion. I stand by 
 the Northern Democracy that have stood by me in the hour of trial. Soon a 
 great battle is to be fought, which, in all probability, will decide the desti- 
 nies of my country. I see arrayed three hostile armies — one disorganized, 
 the other two organized with their chosen leaders. True, one is but a small 
 army, with no ammunition, and with old rusty guns long since condemned. 
 (Laughter.) But the other is a foe to be dreaded. They are falling into 
 line and advancing. They have an experienced chieftain, and above their 
 heads waves the dark banner of treason and disunion, stained with the blood 
 of Virginia's sons. (Applause.) 
 
 Mr. Jon t es, of Pennsylvania, raised a question of order. 
 
 The Prrsioent ruled that the gentleman had a right to proceed, but it 
 rested with himself whether he exceeded the bounds of the courtesy extended 
 to him by the house. 
 
 North Carolina was again called. 
 
 Mr. Dick resumed. I expect to sta^d upon the deck of the old Democratic 
 ship, launched eighty- four years agb, freighted with the hopes and interests 
 and destinies of the country, as I have stood upon her when ''she walked 
 the waters like a thing of life, " and seemed to dare the elements to strife. 
 Now, in the midst of storms and tempests, I expect to stand by her, and I 
 hope and believe she will outride the storm, and lead us to the haven of a 
 glorious destiny. [Applause.] But if she must go down amid the dark 
 waters of division and sectionalism, I expect to cling to the last spar that 
 floats upon the troubled waters, and go down with the hopes and interests of 
 the country. Believing, as I do, that old North Carolina will do all she can, 
 she now casts her one vote in this Convention for Stephen A. Douglas. 
 [Applause.] 
 
 When the State of Georgia was called, 
 
 Mr. Gaulden, of, Georgia, took the floor and said : I hold in my hand 
 some resolutions of the Benning delegation, from Georgia, which has been 
 admitted by a vote of this Assembly, to seats upon the floor. 
 
 Mr. Gaul den read the resolutions and continued his remarks : — 
 
 Now these learned gentleman of the majority seem to have been very much 
 disgusted at the course I have pursued here. I have as much pity and con- 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 159 
 
 e 
 
 tempt for them as they possibly can have for me. Majorities have no terrors 
 fot me. I was notified by the Secretary of the Georgia delegation, to meet 
 them at their room yesterday evening, with an Intimation that they were dis- 
 posed 10 put me on trial, and see whether I was worthy to go with them. I told 
 him that if that was the idea I plead to the jurisdiction, and was responsible 
 to the State of Georgia, and not to them. However he gave me to understand 
 that that was not really the idea, but that they merely wanted to see me down 
 there; I went, but it soon become obvious that thev desired to put me in a 
 position where I would be obliged to go with them. I told them I considered 
 myself a delegate to this Convention under my original appointment to 
 Charleston ; I had gone there and refused to secede. Two Conventions in 
 Georgia, their Convention and another, had indorsed me and sent me here, 
 aud that I claimed the right to participate in the proceedings of this Con- 
 vention, and under the decision at Charleston to cast a pro rata vote. I 
 distinctly warned them that I would not be bound to go with them final y in 
 atiy course they might pursue ; that I belonged to the great National Demo- 
 cratic party of the United States, and was here representing the State of 
 Georgia, under their indorsement, and had the right to act with them up to 
 a certain time, but reserved to myself the right, when the final rupture came, 
 to go where I pleased, and act upon my individual reponsibility. We had 
 a great deal of discussion, they trying to bring me down to pledges, which I 
 scorned then as I do now, and have as much disgust for them as they can 
 have for me. 
 
 I told them that under the peculiar circumstances of the case, though I 
 claimed the right to participate in the proceedings of this Convention, and 
 should do so, I would not attempt to cast the vote of the State of Georgia. 
 That is the only pledge I made them. That seemed to be their holy horror; 
 they seemed to have a terrible dread that I would come here, under my 
 Charleston appoinment, and cast (he whole ten votes of Georgia. I told 
 them I would not do that ; that under the peculiar circumstances of the case 
 I doubted my right to vote at all ; and that until I gave them formal notice 
 of the final dissolution of all connection bet • een them and me, I would not 
 attempt to cast a vote at all. But I did reserve to myself the right to come 
 here and participate with what I believed to be the National Democracy of 
 these United States, the men with whom I cast my fortunes, and upon whom 
 in my humble judgment, depends not only the perpetuity of this Union, but 
 the perpetuity of civil liberty itself. I told them I considered it a duty lowed to 
 myself and this Convention, and to the country not to come here and cast 
 the vote of the State of Georgia at any rate until the connection between 
 them and me had been dissolved. And I now publicly do dissolve all con- 
 nection between that delegation and myself. [Applause.] I trust I shall be 
 excused for the present from voting. 
 
 When the State of Alabama was called, 
 
 Mr. Parsons, of Alabama, said : I have been instructed by my delegation 
 to announce briefly the principles which have governed us in the result to 
 which we have come. Coming from the extreme South, representing a Con- 
 servative constituency, devoted to the Constitution and rights of the several 
 States in this Union, we look to the preservation of those rights now with" 
 more than ordinary solicitude by clinging to the Democratic organization. 
 We prefer non-intervention and union to intervention and disunion. [Ap- 
 plause.] And in urging this I am confident I speak the sentiments of a large 
 mi jority of the people of Alabama. [Applause.] We come here prepared 
 to see the most desperate efforts to break up the Democratic party. Shall 
 that be done ? [Cries of " no, no. "] Shall it be said that in 1860, here in 
 Baltimore, the grave of this Union was dug ? The Star Spangled Banner still 
 waves over us — shall it still continue to wave ? [Applause, and cries of 
 
100 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 "yes, yes."] You will find a response come up from the Gulf States — the 
 Cotton States — such as never before has been heard since this Republic was 
 established. [Applause.] You have been told by distinguished gentlemen 
 of our State that we do not speak the sentiments of our people. We appeal 
 to the verdict of the ballot box. We made the issue with them in 185U and 
 1854, and we tell them to take warning from the result of that issu ■;. The 
 struggle for disunion is putting forth its last efforts. But the people will 
 rally around us. 
 
 Such being the principles and convictions we entertain in the depths of our 
 hearts, we cast our votes as a unit — nine votes for Stephen A. Douglas. 
 [Loud applause.] 
 
 Wheu the State of Louisiana was called, 
 
 Hon. Pierre Soule, of Louisiana, rose and was received with enthusiastic 
 cheers and applause. After silence had been restored, the gentleman pro- 
 ceeded as follows : 
 
 Though mindful of what she owes to her sister States of the South, and 
 ever ready to act in concert with them, when actual aggression shall call for 
 actual resistance, Louisiana is unwilling to risk her future and the future of 
 this Union upon impracticable issues and purely theoretical abstractions. She 
 cannot he so far oblivious of past services as to disown that fearless and in- 
 domitable champion of popular rights and of State equality, who, in that 
 great and memorable struggle which initiated, in his S r ate, the war now so 
 unrelentingly waged against him, bore so gallantly the brunt of the battle, 
 victoriously vindicating the rights of the South against infuriated opponents, 
 and, by the lurid glare of his burning effigies, rode triumphant the storm 
 wlrch unprincipled and discredited politicians, in league with the high priests 
 of Black Republicanism, had raised around him : — Louisiana casts her vote 
 for Stephen A. Douglas. 
 
 When the State of Arkansas was called, 
 
 Mr. Sturman, of Arkansas, said — I am positively instructed to vote for a 
 certain platform, and one of a certain set of men on that platform, and, there- 
 fore, failing in that, I must retire from this Convention. 
 
 Mr. Flournoy, of Arkansas. It was not my purpose, knowing the impa- 
 tience of this body, to have made anything like a speech on this occasion; but 
 the hearty welcome you give me inclines me to believe that you will hear 
 me patiently for a few minutes. 
 
 First, let me explain my position as connected with this Convention, for it 
 is rather a delicate one. I was nominated as a delegate for the Charleston 
 Convention when it was known that I was called the head and front of the 
 Douglas party in my State. It was a personal compliment, for I believed 
 that I was in a minority in that Convention. But, sir, it was not a hopelesj* 
 minorit} 7 — it was a strong one. for they were afraid to make an issue before 
 the Convention, which was strong enough to have voted down any anti- 
 Douglas resolutions. I will explain how those resolutions were pa>sed upon 
 us. We had kept a boat some thirty- six hours waiting, as the only mean? 
 by which we could get home, waiting for the Convention to close. When 
 we got through with the appointment of delegates and other business we took 
 our leave. Before we got to the boat those instructions were passed 
 
 Though I did not feel bound to follow those instructions, still I did respect 
 them at Charleston and carried them out to the letter — though it frequently 
 brought Flournoy, the individual, in conflict with Flournoy, the delegate. 
 (Laughter.) I am at this moment peculiarly circumstanced in regard to that 
 matter. When I came here this morning I expected to follow out my con- 
 victions and to vote for Douglas on the first ballot, I was instructed before 
 I went to Charleston to vote for Mr. Breckinridge, amongst others ; but I 
 have exhausted the instructions, except that I have not had an opportunity 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 16 i 
 
 to vote for Mr. Breckinridge, and as I wish to have a record wthout impeach- 
 ment, I propose to cast my own vote for him. 
 
 If I can be indulged a moment longer, I desire to say that I am a Southern 
 man, born and reared amid the institution of slavery. 1 first learned to whirl 
 the top and bounce the ball with the young African. Everything I own on 
 earth is the result of slave labor. 'I he bread that feeds my wife and little 
 ones is produced by the labor of slaves. They live on my plantation with 
 every feeling of kindness as between master and slave. Sir, if I could see 
 that there is anything intended in our platform unfriendly to the institution 
 of slavery —if I could see that we did not get every constitutional right we 
 are entitled to, I would be the last on earth to submit in this Union; I would 
 myself apply the torch to the magazine and blow it into atoms before I would 
 submit to wron*. (Applause.) But I feel that in the doctrine of non-inter- 
 vention and popular sovereignty are enough to protect the interests of the 
 South. I would scorn to entertain the belief that this heart could not era- 
 brace the whole of this mighty Union —that it was so narrow and contracted 
 as to recognize only the flag of a section in the stars and the stripes. Sir, it 
 is the flag of the whole countrj 7 . (Applause.) 
 
 Under the circumstances, I cast one-half a vote for Breckinridge and one 
 vote for Douglas. 
 
 At the call of the State of Michigan, 
 
 Mr. Stuart responded — Michigan will not detain this Convention long in 
 giving arguments in favor of her devotion to the party and the Union. She 
 will manifest it by conforming to the usages of the Democratic party, and 
 abiding by the result of all Conventions in which she takes part. She caste 
 six votes for Douglas. 
 
 At the call of the State of Iowa, 
 
 Mr. Dodge said — Mr. President, knowing, as I do, the impatience of this 
 Convention, I will not at this stage of the proceedings detain you long. My 
 colleagues have expressed a wish that I, as a North-Western man, should 
 make some reply to the remarks of the gentlemen from Alabama (Mr. Par- 
 sons), and Louisiana (Mr. Soule). Their language is that of true Democrats 
 and patriots, and has imparted joy and gladness to the hearts of every mem- 
 ber of this Convention, and to none more than to the delegation from Iowa. 
 
 It was my fortune to have served in the Senate with my eloquent friend 
 from Louisiana at the time of the passage of the measures to which he has 
 referred. My votes, I can aver, were given to sustain what I deemed to be 
 sound, constitutional principles, and are perhaps a true reflex of the senti- 
 ments of the Democracy of my section of the Union and of our distinguished 
 candidate for the Presidency. How strange and unnatural, that Stephen A. 
 Douglas, covered with wounds inflicted by fanatical aholitionists, should not 
 be esteemed a true friend of the South, or that the gallant old warrior and 
 veteran of Democracy (Col. Richardson), the indefatigable and self-sacrificing 
 friend of Judge Douglas on this floor, should now be regarded with feelings 
 of opposition, if not hostility, by Southern men. 
 
 In war he has periled his life in defense of a Southern State. In the House 
 of Representatives he fought the most memorable legislative battle on record, 
 to relieve the South from the odious and unconstitutional Missouri restriction. 
 To Dougias in the Senate and Richardson in the House, do the South owe, 
 more than to any other two living men, that great measure of deliverance and 
 justice — the repeal of the so called Missouri Compromise. Sir, the Democ- 
 racy of the North- West have been alike true and loyal to the whole country. 
 We have risked everything to do justice to our brethren of the South, and 
 we think that the time has now arrived when they should be willing to haz- 
 ard something for our sake. We know that the candidate whom we present 
 is a man in whom all sections can safely confide. (Applause.) Judge Doug- 
 
lo2 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 las has earned tor himself, by his unconquerable energy, untiring industry, 
 and extraordinary talents, united to an undying attachment to the Union, i 
 reputation ai d a name which will adorn the brightest pages of our country'* 
 histoiy. (..Applause, j 
 
 Never, since the days of General Jackson, were the people, the Democratic 
 voters, so overwhelmingly in favor of any man for the Presidency. (Ap- 
 plause.) His supporters in the North- West are the men whose pride and 
 glory it was and is to have voted against the " Wilmot Proviso" in all its 
 shapes and phases— to have voted for all the Compromise measures of 1850, 
 the Fugitive Slave Law includ d— and for the Kansas and Nebraska Bill of 
 1854:. The mal-administralion of affairs in Kansas, and the audacious inter- 
 ference of the people of Massachusetts arid Missouri in the affairs of that 
 Territory, caused the overthrow of the Democratic party in the North- West, 
 while it only gained Kentucky and Tennessee in the ^outh. Surely States 
 which owe their redemption from the opposition to our self-immolation for 
 them, should be slow to ask us to join in'forming new issues, such as must 
 prove disastrous both to our party and country. 
 
 Allow me to say en passant that Delaware was for the " Wilmot Proviso" 
 when Iowa was helping to fight the battle of the South against it. Our fa- 
 thers were defeated for voting with your fathers for the Missouri restriction of 
 1820; their sons have been overwhelmed with defeat for voting with you for 
 its repeal. Let us, now that all obstacles are removed, strictly adhere to the 
 wise and just principle of non-intervention, leaving to the people interested 
 the right to determine their domestic institutions in their own way, subject, 
 of course, to the Constitution of the United States. (Applause.) 
 
 The Democracy of the North- West believe Mr-. Douglas to be eminently 
 qualified for the Presidency, and worthy to fill that exalted station; but we 
 would not be his friends or supporters if we did Rot know him to be in favor 
 of the equality of the States and of even and exact justice to the people of 
 every one of them. If he had the slightest taint of abolition about him, or if 
 all his past life were not a guaranty that he would use the army, navy, and 
 evj,ry power with which he may bo clothed for the protection of the South, 
 and do it justice in the formation of his Cabinet and the distribution of his 
 patronage, we would, instead of supporting, scorn and spurn him. Iowa casts 
 four votes for Stephen A. Douglas. (Applause.) 
 
 Before the vote was anounced, 
 
 Mr Stoughton, or Vermont, challenged the vote of that State. 
 
 Mr. Smith. It becomes necessary for me to say that Vermont votes as a 
 unit for Douglas, until directed otherwise by a majority of delegates. And 
 the instructions by which we are governed apply to the delegate who declines 
 to vote with us. [Mr. S. here read the resolution of instruction to cast the 
 vote for such candidate as a majority of the delegates shall, after consultation, 
 select.] I submit that with such instructions, the gentleman is not at liberty 
 to decline to vote so long as he remains in it. 
 
 The Peksident. The Chair is of opinion that the Chairman'of the dele- 
 gation is authorized, in view of the action at Charleston, to cast the entire 
 vote of the State, so long as all the delegation are present. 
 
 Mr. Stevens, of Massachusetts, here rose and stated that, although some 
 of the delegation from Massachusetts had withdrawn, he was instructed by 
 the remainder of the delegation to cast the entire vote of the State. 
 
 Mr. Bissell. of New York, rose to a question of privilege. He desired 
 the Secretary should announce the vote of the State of Pennsylvania. 
 
 The Secretary announced it. Douglas 10, Breckinridge 3, Guthrie 3, and 
 Seymour 1. 
 
 Mr. Bissell. I did not hear the name of Seymour announced from the 
 Chairman of the delegation. Sir, I have been from the first instructed to 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 
 
 168 
 
 withdraw his name as a candidate, whenever presented. [Applause.] I will 
 now beg leave to road his letter addressed to me : 
 
 "Utica, June 14, 1860. 
 
 Gentlemkn : — Allusion having been made to my name in connection with 
 the nominations to be made at Baltimore, I wish to state in writing what I 
 have heretofore said to you in conversation, that I am averse to being placed 
 in nomination by the National ^Democratic Convention. I do not suppose my 
 nunc will be presented on that occasion, but if it is, I request that you will, 
 a> delegates from this district, withdraw it from consideration. I cannor, 
 under any circumstances, be a candidate for the office of President or Vic« 
 President. Yours, truly. HOKATIO SEYMOUR." 
 
 To Messrs. John Stryker t D. P. BisselL Delegates, <$fc. 
 
 The reading of the letter was followed by applause. Mr. B. then proceeded 
 to say : 
 
 It is due to Mr. Seymour to say that he has ever expressed to me, his 
 neighbor and friend, the same feeling. I withdraw his name, as his friend 
 and neighbor. 
 
 One of the delegates from Maryland desired to withdraw his vote for 
 Breckinridge, and to decline to cast any vote. The Chairman of the dele- 
 gation bad made a mistake in annnouncing half a vote for Breckinridge. 
 
 The delegation from the Slate of Pennsylvania, desired to have placed upon 
 the records of the Convention, the manner in which the several delegates 
 from that State cast their votes, and the Chairman of the delegation filed the 
 following statement : 
 
 Messrs. Ca-sidy. Cessna, Coffroth, Cunningham, Gibson, R. \f., Grant, Grey, Griffith, Halderman, 
 Montgomery, N'ill, Painter, Kufsnyder, Ross, Shattuck, Smith, Ward, Weir, Wilson, Wright, voted 
 for Stephen A. Douglas. 
 
 Messrs. Baker, Bigler. Bradford, Dent, Ent, Evans, Guernsey, McHenry, McKibben, Megargee, 
 Packer, Piummt-r, Kandall. RobertB, Phillips, Swan-, flottenstein, declined to vote. 
 Messrs. Bloo 1 andGlossbrenner voted for Horatio Seymour. 
 
 Messrs. Brodhead, (Jlymer, Hughes, Jones, Van z^ant, Lauer, voted for James Guthrie. 
 Messrs. Campbell. Dawson, Gibson, J. A., Gloninger, McKee, Magee, Reilley, voted for Breckin- 
 ridge. 
 
 RESULT OF THE FIRST BALLOT. 
 
 The Secretary here announced the result of the first ballot as follows : 
 Whole vote cast, I90i. 
 
 o o 
 
 <- — 
 
 Maine 
 
 N"w Hampshire 
 V-jrm -*nt 
 Massachusetts .. 
 Rhode Island.... 
 
 Connecticut 
 
 New York 
 
 New Jersey 
 
 Pennsylvania... 
 
 Maryland 
 
 "Virginia 
 
 ¥onb Carolina. 
 
 Aiabama 
 
 Louisiana . 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 19 
 
 * 
 
 ! 35 
 
 \% 
 
 5 pr a 
 
 81i 
 
 % i \n 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 os' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 OH, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Arkansas. 
 Missouri .. 
 Tennessee 
 Kentucky 
 
 Ohio 
 
 Indiana .. 
 
 Illinois 
 
 Michigan . 
 Wisconsin. 
 
 Iowa 
 
 Minnesota 
 
 Total.. 
 
 *J 
 
 •5- 
 
 -=) 
 
 H 
 
 *3 1 
 
 *a 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 c 
 
 
 ~. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 QQ 
 •a 
 
 3* 
 3 
 
 prt 
 a> 
 
 -a 
 
 H 
 
 3* 
 
 c 
 3 
 
 I 
 
 — 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 H 
 c 
 
 3 
 
 a 
 
 > 
 
 g 
 
 m 
 
 r. 
 
 c 
 
 > 
 
 a 
 
 OQ 
 
 U 
 
 
 a 
 
 o 
 
 
 3 
 
 w 
 
 a 
 
 ft 
 
 a 
 
 
 K- 
 
 
 o 
 
 P? 
 
 
 
 0% 
 
 3 
 t 
 
 9 
 
 o 
 
 D 
 m 
 
 
 c 
 
 CO 
 
 i 
 
 51 
 
 
 rr 
 
 3 
 
 
 | 
 
 1 
 
 0}< 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 •o ( 
 
 
 
 
 4>S 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ( 
 
 %, 
 
 (' 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 
 (1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 V, 
 
 
 
 23 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o t 
 
 > 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 
 (1 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 
 
 
 2% 
 
 oy 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 173^ 
 
 5 
 
 % 
 
 1 
 
 Y* 8 
 
 
 1 
 
164 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Mr. Church, of New Yor>k. Mr. President, I offer Tor the consideration of 
 the Convention the following resolution — 
 
 Mr. Flournoy. I want to insist that we take at lea^t another ballot before 
 -we pass any resolution, for we can make it stronger, a great deal. 
 
 Many Delegates. "Agreed," "agreed," "another ballot." 
 
 Mr. Church. Let me say to my friend that he can make it just as strong 
 as he pleases upon this resolution. , 
 
 Cries of "read it," '-read it." 
 
 The resolution was then read, as follows : 
 
 "Resolved, That Stephen A. Douglas, of the Stale of Illinois, having now 
 received two-thirds of all the votes given in this Convention, he is hereby de- 
 clared, in accordance with the rules governing this body and in accordance 
 with the uniform custom and rules of former Democratic National Conven- 
 tions, the regular nominee of the Democratic party of the United States for 
 ?the office of President." [Loud applause ] 
 
 Mr. Church then stated that this resolution came under the order of the 
 previous question. 
 
 Mr. Jones, of Pennsylvania, rose and was proceeding to speak r when 
 
 Mr. Gorman, of Minnesota, called the gentleman to order. 
 
 Mr. Jones then insisted that the resolution was out of order. 
 
 The President ruled that it was in order. 
 
 Mr. Jones. I insist that it cannot be submitted without giving one day'* 
 notice, under the rules adopted at Charleston. 
 
 Mr. Church. The original rule of this Convention required that when 
 two-thirds of all the votes were cast for auy candidate, that candidate shall 
 be declared the nominee. During the sitting of the Charleston Convention, 
 after the secession, a resolution was offered instructing the President to declare 
 no person nominated until he had received two- thirds of all the votes of a full 
 Convention. A question of order was raised that it required one day's notice. 
 The Chair ruled that the resolution was only one of instruction to the Chair- 
 man of that Convention, in regard to the original rule, and that it did not alter 
 or change that rule. Now my resolution is one changing the instructions to 
 the presiding officer, and, as such, it is strictly in orde-, according to the decis- 
 ion heretofore made. 
 
 Now T desire to say a single word with reference to the action of the dele- 
 gates from New York upon the question of the number of votes required to 
 nominate a candidate. New York came to this Convention for peace and 
 harmony. We represent a larger constituency than any other delegation- 
 numbering 200,000 honest, loyal, faithful Democrats — and from the first 
 assembling of the Convention .at Charleston down to the present moment, for 
 sixteen long days and nights, have we honestly and faithfully end avored to 
 carry out the instructions of our constituents. We have yielded everything 
 but personal honor in order to heal up the divisions of the Convention. One 
 question after another has been presented to us, and we have been asked to 
 yield this point, and that point, and the other point, and we have never failtxi 
 to respond whenever we have been asked until we were required to yield ev- 
 erythidg which distinguishes our manhood — nay more, everything which dis- 
 tinguishes the manhood of the 200,000 Democrats behind us. [Applause.] 
 When we came to that point — though we say it with pain, and sorrow, and 
 anguish — when we were asked to admit, without question or exaniinatioa, 
 the whole body of seceders who came here to our doors — not repentant, not 
 determine I to abide by our action, bnt demanding the surrender of our prin- 
 ciples into their hands — when we were asked to do that, and, besides, to give 
 up our candidate and the candidate of the choice of the Democracy of New 
 York— a candidate who will sweep New York as with a whirlwind — 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 165 
 
 '^applause] — wb en we were asked to do all that, we said firmly we cannot in 
 honor comply with your demands. 
 
 Now, in relation to this resolution. After the secession at Charleston wo 
 were asked by those Southern States who did not secede to unite with them in 
 preventing a dissolution of this body, and in making some adjustment of the 
 various difficulties with which we were surrounded. We were told by those 
 gentlemen that, if we would pass a resolution of instructions to our presiding 
 officer, that it should require two-thirds of a full Convention to nominate, and 
 also, when we got through, make some slight amendment to our platform, 
 thev would remain in the Convention, stand by its action, and fight the secederx 
 and disuniomsts to the very bitter end. They told us that the question wax 
 brought before our delegation of altering the rule of the Convention in relation 
 to the number required to nominate. We were opposed to it, we thought it an 
 outrage to require two-thirls even of the body deliberating to nominate. New 
 York has often given its vote in National Conventions to repeal that rule. I 
 remember well, when in 1841:, New York had a favorite candidate of her own, 
 and when this rule was thrust upon us and enforced for the purpose of defeat- 
 ing that candidate. We have always been opposed to the two-third rule. But 
 by the construction we were asked to give that rule we were asked to increase 
 Hie number necessary to nominate from two-thirds to five-sixths of the Conven- 
 tion. We thought that was outrageous, undemocratic, despotic, wrong. But 
 we said— I said to our delegation, in God's name let us sacrifice all we can for 
 peace and harmony. Kentucky, that gallant State, has held communion with 
 us ; Tennessee, the land of the hero Jackson, who had more worshipers in 
 New York thau — I was going to say — in all the rest of the Union besides ; all 
 these States have communed with us, and they have asked this of us as a 
 peace offering. I advised it to be done ; we agreed to do it ; we did it, and we 
 did it as a peace offering, for harmony and for no other purpose, and not because 
 it was in accordance with our wishes. It seems now that this peace offering 
 has been spurned. Notwithstanding the sacrifice we have made for peace and 
 harmony, we have had no peace and had no harmony. 
 
 And now, gentlemen, I am willing, the New York delegation is ready to take 
 all the responsibility of this resolution which [have offered. [Great applause.] 
 No State will go further now or hereafter to unite or cement the Democrats 
 party, to heal up the unfortunate division which has been made. Yet I say, in 
 behalf of the glorious Democracy of the Empire State, that we will stand by 
 the right and fight it through. [Renewed applause.] The difficulties which 
 have attended this Convention have been most unfortunate ; but the worst 
 result that can happen is that those gentlemen, by their action, will have 
 elected a Black Republican President of the United States. And if that result 
 shall happen, then I say that they, and they alone, will be responsible for that 
 result. [Loud applause.] 
 
 Mr. Jones, of Pennsylvania. When the gentleman from New Yoik (Mr. 
 Church) speaks of " those gentlemen," does he refer to those here who refuse 
 to break down the previous action of this Convention, or to those who have 
 seceded ? 
 
 Mr. Church. I speak of those who have retired from this Convention, who 
 have violated the obligations which every man is under who enters into a 
 Convention to abide in firmness, in honesty, in good faith by its action, and to 
 support its nominees [applanse :] and I say if this division, caused by themselves 
 merely because we have decided the cases of contesting delegations, sh;dl 
 cause the defeat of the party, the}' alone will be responsible. They say we 
 decided wrongly. Suppose, merely for the sake of the argument, that we have, 
 we had a right to decide, and when that decision was made by a majority of 
 the Convention, even- good Democrat was bound to acquiesce in it. [Applause.] 
 Why, sirs, it is a new theory, a new doctrine, that a minority of the Convention, 
 
166 Democratic National Convention, 
 
 or any portion of that minority, have the right to set up their judgment against 
 that of the majority of the Convention. And even if it should be admitted 
 that we were wrong in our decision, that is no reason for seceding from thi* 
 Convention, yet that is the only reason I haveheard for the secession here. 
 
 The aeceders at Charleston said they went out of the Convention because we 
 had not adopted principles that they could stand upon ; that they differed with 
 us upon vital principles, and yet they came, back to our doors and asked admis- 
 sion, although we had refused to change the principles we had adopted. 
 
 I have but one or two remarks more to make. All that I have said is in 
 grief rather than in anger. Sir, no portion of the Democracy of this country 
 have fought Black Republicanism with more courage and more fidelity than 
 the Democracy of New York. 
 
 The Chair informed the gentleman that his time had expired. 
 
 Mr. Davis, of Virginia. On the ballot taken to-day, as I understand the 
 announcement from the Chair, some 190 votes were cast in this Convention. 
 Now how in the name of common sense do you expect to get two-thirds of the 
 votes of the Electorial College ? If the Democratic voters of the United Siates 
 were asked to-day their choice for the President of the United States, nineteen- 
 twentieths would say Stephen A. Douglas, of Illinois. [Applause.] I have 
 no doubt that every village post office in the United States has been eagerly 
 watched since the sitting of this Convention, and the inquiry made by many 
 men, " what is the Convention doing ? '' If the delegates to the great National 
 Democratic Convention were as true and generous as the people who have ap- 
 pointed them, they would have nominated Stephen A. Douglas long since. 
 [Applause.] We are called upon now to do what w T e ought to have done at 
 Charleston, otherwise we must stay here and ballot and ballot, and ballot with- 
 out ever nominating. If we had adopted this resolution at Charleston, as we 
 ought to have done, we would have concluded long since. 
 
 Mr. Hoge. of Virginia, asked leave, on the part of the Virginia delegation, 
 for five minutes to consult, at the end of which time he thought they could 
 present a proposition that wolud settle this whole matter ? Leave was granted. 
 
 Mr. Dunning, of Indiana. The State of Indiana having voted 58 times for 
 Stephen A. Douglas, as many other States have done, I desira to say that I hope 
 the resolution will be so amended as to declare him the unanimous nominee of 
 the Democratic party, as he is the unanimous choice of the honest voters of 
 the Democratic party of this great country, 
 
 Mr. Gittings, of Maryland. I rise to enter a protest on the part of the 
 constituency I represent ; and a large portion, almost the entire majority of the 
 Democratic voters of the State of Maryland, against this resolution. The rule 
 was laid down at Charleston that two-thirds cf the electoral college — 202 votes 
 should be required to nominate. I am not prepared to say whether or not 
 before that Convention had proceeded to buisness I would have voted to 
 rescind that rule and have a candidate nominated by a bare majority, 
 
 Mr. Gallagher, of Connecticut. As I understand this motion, the Pres- 
 ident of this Convention at Charleston decided that it required two-thirds of 
 all the votes of the electoral college to nominate, notwithstanding several 
 States had seceded from the Convention. From that decision an appeal was 
 taken, and by the vote of New York, I am sorry to say the Chair was sus- 
 tained, and all that is now necessary is to rescind the vote sustaining the decision 
 of the Chair. 
 
 The Chairman (Mr. Tod, of Ohio.) The Chair will explain. The reso- 
 lution passed at Charleston, as understood by the. then President of this Con- 
 vention, as understood by the present occupant of the Chair, was not a change 
 in the rule requiring two-thirds of the vote given to nominate, but merely a 
 direction to the Chair from the Convention not to dec' are any one nominated 
 until he had received two- thirds of the votes of the electoral college. And 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 1^7 
 
 the present occupant of tue Chair will not feel at liberty, under that direc- 
 tion, to declare any one nominated until he gets 202 votes, unless the 
 Convention shall otherwise instruct him. But the Chair does not under- 
 stand Ihe original rive, requiring two-thirds of the votes cast necessary for a 
 nomination, to have been altered in the slightest degree at Charleston. 
 
 Mr. Gittixos. I hope we will adhere to the rule. I have voted fifty 
 times for Mr. Douglas, and will vote fifty times more for him, if that will 
 secure his nomination. I hope he will be nominated. There are delegates 
 enough here to make two thirds of the electoral college, if they will only 
 vote. I do not believe any man who remains here is inclined to be factious. 
 Thank God the factious men, a-: I believe, have all gone hence. [Applause.] 
 I hope that this resolution will be withdrawn for the present, at least, so that 
 we can have a few more ballots, and see what we can do. I think it is pre- 
 mature, and I appeal to my friends of the Douglas party, not to press it now, 
 for you have always been fair and consistent. I served for two days on the 
 Committee on Credentials, and I say to you and to the world that the only 
 spirit of compromise, the only desire for harmony, came from the Douglas men 
 on that Committee. Upon one particular point, where their feelings were, 
 perhaps, more enlisted than upon any other question, upon my appeal, know- 
 ing I was conservative in my views, the gentlemen from Illinois and Ohio on 
 that Committee were kind enough to change their votes for the sake of har- 
 mony. 
 
 Mr. Hoge, of Virginia. The voice that has heretofore been uttered from 
 Virginia in this Convention, is the voice of politicians — not the voice of the 
 people. [Applause.] While we are deserted by the politicians, you will 
 find that the voice of the people of Virginia will be pronounced in favor of 
 the nominees of this Convention. [Applause.] 
 
 Now, in reference to the resolution before us, I honestly believe when the 
 rule was changed at Charleston it was miquitously done, though I submitted 
 that the vote of Virginia should be cast as a unit for that change. I did it 
 hoping that good might come out of evil. Now if it be true that any gentle- 
 man has remained in this Convention and refused to vote, and thereby de- 
 prived the members here — who desire to act conscientiously — of the 
 opportunity to make a fair and regular nomination according to the rule 
 adopted, if, after another opportunity is afforded them, they do not vote, I will 
 submit a motion on behalf of the Old Dominion to declare the nomination 
 unanimous. I, therefore, on behalf of the Virginia delegation, and my friend 
 from Maryland (Mr. Gittings,) and the rest of us who stand here deserted by 
 our late colleagues, entreat that an opportunity may be given to every gentle- 
 man present to vote. And ihen if they decline to vote, I will treat them as 
 out of the Convention ; and if there is not enough votes then given to make 
 up a two-third vote of the elctoral college, 1 will myself move to declare the 
 nomination unanimous. [Applause.] 
 
 Mr. Church, of New York. There seems to be a disposition on the part of 
 several gentlemen to have another ballot. [Cries of " yes !" "yes!"] And 
 New York, standing as she has stood from the beginning in this Convention, 
 will not stand in the way of any fair and honest proposition. [Applause ] 
 I therefore will withdraw the resolution I have offered, and suggest that we at 
 once proceed to another ballot for President. 
 
 The Secretary then proceeded to call the roll of States for the second 
 ballot for a candidate for the office of President of the United States. 
 
 When the State of Arkansas was called, 
 
 Mr. Flotjrnoy, of Arkansas, said that he now considered himself absolved 
 from the instructions of his State Convention, and had great pleasure in casting 
 the vote of Arkansas for Stephen A. Douglas. 
 
 When the State of Minnesota was called, 
 
168 
 
 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Mr. Gorman, of Minnesota, said that a portion of his delegation being absent 
 or declining to vote, in behalf of the majority of that delegation, he cast the 
 four votes of Minnesota for Stephen A. Douglas. 
 
 Mr. Becker, of Minnesota, annoanced that he and two of his colleagues had 
 vacated their seats in the Convention. 
 
 The call of the States having been concluded, the fallowing was announced 
 a* the result of the 
 
 SECOND BALLOT. 
 
 Whole number of votes actually cast, 194j^, as follows : 
 
 Maine 
 
 Ni.-w Hainpbhire 
 
 Vermont 
 
 Mansachu-'etts .... 
 
 Rhode Island 
 
 Connecticut 
 
 N*w York... 
 
 New Jersey 
 
 Pennsylvania 
 
 Maryland 
 
 Virginia 
 
 North Carolina. . 
 
 Alabama 
 
 Louisiana . . . 
 
 , c;^ 
 
 33 
 
 Cf 
 
 o - 
 
 cS "3 
 
 s^ 1 
 
 1 qSi '-a 
 
 i %2 
 
 K% 
 
 % 1 
 
 B 'x 
 
 S '-, 
 
 
 
 
 ! • er 
 
 ! i re 
 
 ^3 
 
 : 3 ' 
 
 1 ' s 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 ' > 
 
 
 
 i 7 
 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 11 
 
 o 
 
 ! 5 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 1' 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 o 
 
 | 
 
 -Hi 
 
 0>£ 
 
 I 
 
 35 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 '21* 
 
 
 
 ! 
 
 ID 
 
 7 
 
 2% 
 
 2Vz 
 
 u 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 j 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 o I 
 
 Arkansas . 
 •iissouri .. 
 Tennessee 
 Kentucky . 
 Ohio 
 
 Indiana... 
 Illinois ... 
 ichigan . 
 Wisconsin 
 
 Iowa 
 
 Minnesota 
 
 ■d -n 
 
 m 
 
 c o 
 
 2 1 
 
 «£ *j 
 
 CT5 *J1 
 
 w -3 
 
 
 
 K'ST 
 
 
 « 3 
 
 3 
 
 ' > 
 
 r-9 1 
 
 
 
 
 ix ■ 
 
 
 
 4K 
 
 o . 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 23 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 181 & 
 
 VA 
 
 
 
 IX 
 
 
 
 IX 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ft 
 
 
 
 
 5X 
 
 Mr. Hoge, of Virginia, obtained the floor. 
 
 Mr. Clask, of Missouri. Will the gentleman allow me to say a word before 
 he proceeds ? 
 
 Mr. Hoge. Certainly, with pleasure. 
 
 Mr. Clabk. It is known to this Convention that at Charleston as well as 
 here, I have never cast a vote for Stephen A. Douglas. I have taken my 
 course at Charleston and here, in obedience to what I thought were the wishes 
 of my constituents, although in that I may have been mistaken. I endeavored 
 to place in nomination a gentleman agreeing in aU particulars more fully, as I 
 thought, with the wishes of Missouri than Mr. Douglas. I have never had any 
 hostility towards Mr. Douglas, but have always regarded him — and have so 
 announced in Congress and elsewhere — as a great and patriotic statesman. 
 [Applause.] I should feel the interests and destinies of my country entirely 
 safe in his hands and under his administration. [Renewed applause.] I have 
 my personal preference, in obedience to what I consider the will and sentiment 
 of the State I in part represent. I was commissioned to the National Demo- 
 cratic Convention, and I know of none but this one, [Applause.] I have 
 linked my destiny to this, and as I said yesterday, for weal or woe, I shall live 
 and die in the Democratic party. With that view, in order that we may end 
 our labors here, and give the country repo-e, until they begin to shout for 
 victory, I intend to second the motion of the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr, 
 Hoge,) to declare Stephen A. Douglas the nominee unanimously of this 
 Convention. 
 
 Mr. Hoge, of Virginia. Before I submit the resolution I promised, I desire 
 >o submit one single remark. The Virginia delegates who remain in this, 
 the National and the only National Convention of the Democratic party, have 
 cast only the individual vote of their respective districts. We have not 
 attempted to cast the vote of any gentleman who has left here, and I feel the 
 utmost confidence that those gentlemen will not undertake elsewhere to cast 
 any votes but their own. 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 169 
 
 I now beg leave to submit the following resolution, being tho same as that 
 © If ere d by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Church,) with a slight modifica- 
 tion that he and I have made : 
 
 '' Resolved unanimously, Thai Stephen A. Douglas, of the State of Illinois 
 hiving now received two-thirds of all the votes given in this Convention, he \% 
 hereby declared, in accordance with rules governing this body, and in accord- 
 ance with the uniform customs and rules of former Democratic National Con- 
 ventions, the regular nominee of the Democratic party of the United States, for 
 the office of President of the United States." 
 
 Mr. Seymour, of New York. I and some of my friends have occupied a 
 somewhat peculiar position both at Charleston and here. We have among us 
 a distinguished Democrat whose name has been frequently mentioned as the 
 ■tandard-bearer of the Democracy in this campaign. I have known him long, 
 st >od by his side through many contests, and was prepared to stand by him if 
 he was the choice of the Democratic party at this time. And I have felt bound 
 from time to time, during the deliberations of the New York delegation, to cast 
 my vote for him. But now I feel, and I say it with great gratification, that I 
 should be speaking the sentiment of my constituency, and the sentiment of the 
 entire Democracy of the Slate of New York more correctly, if I should coincide 
 with my political friends, which I most cheerfully do, in the vote now about 
 tobe pronounced. [Applause.] And I rejoice that it is to be pronounced in a 
 tone that will reach every heart in this confederacy. Stephen A. Douglas, of 
 Illinois, for ten years in the Senate of the United States, has been the champion 
 and the leader of the Democracy, and he is now, as I believe, to be the 
 houored instrument of one now more glorious triumph of the old Democrac}-. 
 [Applause.] Whatever disturbances and disruptions may have exhisted, by 
 the vote now to be given it will appear that the good and true men who have 
 remained here will with one voice, hail the name of their standard-bearer, 
 Stephen A. Douglas, of Illinois [Loud applause.] 
 
 The reading of the resolution being called for, the Secretary again read it. 
 
 Mr. Mason, of Kentucky. Mr. President — The resolutian offered by the 
 gentleman from New York would bear criticism. Now, if you will not say in 
 the resolution that this is the rule which has heretofore governed the Demo- 
 cratic party — because you voted at Charleston, that it was not, and for our ac- 
 commodation ; if you will not make this new construction, but simply declare 
 that, under all the circumstances, Mr. Douglas ought to be the unanimous nom- 
 inee of this party, I should not be surprised if the Siate of Kentucky would 
 agree with you, and that quite likely you may get the vote of that State, though 
 I cannot say it with certainty. 
 
 Mr. Richardson, of Illinois. There has never been a nomination for Presi- 
 dent under any other construction than that made by my friend from New York 
 in his resolution. It is true you agreed at Charleston that you would not do it 
 this time, but always heretofore you have nominated the candidate by a two- 
 third vote. Mr. Stevenson, of Virginia, in 1848, when the New York delega- 
 tion wis excluded, and Gen. C i«s was nominated, dec'ared that 170 votes were 
 two-thirds. The action of the Conventions has been uniform upon this subject. 
 
 The question bang taken on the resolution of Mr. Church, ol New York, as 
 offered by Mr. Hoge, of Virginia, an overwhelming and unanimous " aye'' was 
 given. 
 
 The negative vote was called for and there being no response, 
 
 The President sa ; d — Gentlemen of the Convention, as your presiding officer 
 1 declare Stephen A. Douglas, of Illinois, by the unanimous vote of ihis Con- 
 vention, ttie nominee of tiie Democratic party of the United States, for Presi- 
 dent. And may God, in his infinite mercy protect him, and with him this 
 Union. 
 
 This announcement was received by the Convention with profound attention 
 
170 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 and responded to with the most enthusiastic acclamations and cheers. The 
 cheering continued for several minutes, in the midst of which the banner of 
 the Ke\ stone Club was displayed from the upper gallerv, and the band strut k 
 up u Hail to the Chief. " 
 
 A second banner inscribed with the name of "Douglas, the next President 
 of the United States," " Pennsylvania good for 40,000 for Douglas," was re- 
 ceived with a fresh outburst of enthusiasm. 
 
 Cheer followed cheer, hats were waving in all part-; of the house, the bands 
 playing, and a general scene of congratulation going on among the di legate*. 
 
 CJls followed for virions speaker-, interrupted by renewed propositions fr 
 three more cheers for Douglas, which were given with a will as often as called 
 for. 
 
 RESPONSES OF THE STATES. 
 
 Loud calls were then made for Mr. Dawson. 
 
 Mr. Dawson, of Pennsylvania, thereupon addressed the Convention as fol- 
 lows : — 
 
 Mr, President, and Gentlemen of the Convention : — It is scarcely necessary 
 forme to say that at no time during the sittings of this body did Judge Dou- 
 glas receive the united voice of the delegation from Pennsylvania. And, 1 may 
 further add, that in the consideration of a platform a majority of us united 
 with our Southern friends, ready to give them all that we believed them 
 entitled to under the Federal Constitution. In our judgment they asked for 
 nothing more, and we were not willing to give them less. [Applause.] In 
 our actions then we have been overruled by a decided majority of this body, 
 and for Pennsylvania, I am free to say that, attached as we are to the Demo- 
 cratic party, its principles, its discipline, its organization, standing true forever 
 in the eloquent language of the President in his opening speech at Charleston, 
 " Standing as perpetual sentinels upon the outposts of the Constitution, " we 
 will, I trust, abide b}' - its decisions and support its nominees. [Cheers.] 
 
 Judge Douglas is a man of acknowledged talent, and everywhere regarded as 
 tbe accomplished statesman, skilled in the art of ruling. Born under a New 
 England sun, yet by adoption a citizen of the West, honored and cherised in 
 the valley of the Mississippi, and on the slopes of the Atlantic, he now should 
 belong to the whole country. [Cheers.] Unrestrained, to some extent, in 
 early life, in the learning of the schools, the deficiency, if any exists, has been 
 largely compensated by the generous measure in which nature has dealt 
 upon him her choicest gifts of intellect and character. [Applause.] Likw 
 Henry of the Revolution, like Peel of England, these noble qualities have 
 made him the architect of his own fortune. (Cheers.] 
 
 That the Union is a confederacy endowed with special powers, the St ites 
 composing it retaining all the undelegated attributes of sovereignty, is th« 
 fundamental truth of our political system. In defense of this truth we ;ire 
 about to engage in a new contest, and in the comprehension of iis true charac- 
 ter we have thoroughly to educate the public mind. The popular heart is to 
 be won back to loyalty by holding up to its contemplation the image of th» 
 Constitution in this severe beauty of lineament and proportion. The err;ng 
 conclusions of our fellow citizens of all sections are to be corrected bv a 
 thorough and persevering exposition of their fallacy, and in place of these a'»- to 
 be inculcated the paramount claims of the Federal compact to the hearty alK-gi- 
 ance, in letter and spirit, of every American who can comprehend and 
 appeciate the institutions of his country, and who really cherishes a desire for 
 their perpetuity. [Applause.] 
 
 If here in this beautiful city which looks out upon the Chesapeak, we could 
 have needed any incitement to a broad patriotism in our deliberations, it should 
 have been found in the associations in the midst of which we are assembled, 
 for it was at Annapolis at the close of the Revolution that Washington resigned 
 
Proceeding s at BaUimo-re. 171 
 
 his comnmsion. It is also within sight of the spot at which we are convened 
 that imposing monuments rise to the greatness of his memory and to the 
 patriotism of the sons of Maryland. [Cheers.] 
 
 Pennsylvania, the State in which independence was first proclaimed and the 
 work of the Revolution secured by the constructs r of the federal compact, the 
 State which holds within her bosom the ashes of Franklin and boasts the first 
 battle-field of Washington, will be true to her noble memories. [Applause. J 
 And in the fullness of that enlightened conservative sentiment for which she 
 has been distinguished, will rally, I hope, in giant strength, cast the dust from 
 her eyes, and aid the friends of the Democratic party once more to elect their 
 nominee. [Loud and long continued cheering.] 
 
 Mr. Shei'ley, of Maine, being loudly called for, he aro.-e and said : 
 
 Mr. President, and Qentlernen of the Convention : — It is known to you that 
 our own State, on the Northern frontier, which has occupied but little time of 
 your Convention, has, until the last two bollots, been divided in its votes and 
 in its preference lor candidate*. But, sir, that division in the expression of 
 our opinions was not a division as to who was the preference of the Democracy 
 of Maine. The Democracy of Maine have been in the habit of sacrificing 
 their own preferences for the harmony of the Democratic party, and so long 
 as any of us believe that by the sacrifice of individual preferences, either 
 of our own or of our constituents, we can do anything for the harmony and 
 the unity of the party, we are disposed to make that sacrifice for ourselves and 
 lor them. 
 
 But, Mr. President, there arose a delicate and responsible duty for those 
 of us who were in the minority to perform. There was a time when some of 
 those from New England, with whom we acted, withdrew from the Conven- 
 tion, and it then became the duty of the minority of our delegates to deter- 
 mine their course of action. We accordingly decided, in the first place, that 
 if we went out of this Convention because some question, in regard to the 
 admissibility of delegates, was decided contrary to our convictions, there 
 would be an end to Conventions. But we decided that we might separate 
 upon a question of principle, and that if, upon any question of principle, we 
 were defeated, we would go out, even if we went out alone. But that was 
 not the case, and so we determined to remain. I say this, merely as intro- 
 ductory to the point I am about to make — that when any delegate decided to 
 remain in this Convention, he virtually agreed to the resolution which has 
 just been passed. [Applause.] That he acknowleged the principle that 
 there was a quorum present, with power to make a nomination, though there 
 were not two-thirds of this Convention left. 
 
 I have only one word to say, in conclusion. "We represent 55, COO Demo- 
 crats in the State of Maine, and although it has been urged here that there 
 is no Northern Democracy, in the coming election we will show those men 
 of the lowlands, who have said it, that 
 
 There are lulls beyond T>enrland, 
 
 There are friths beyond Fort*i ; 
 If there are lords in trie >outhland, 
 
 There are chief's in the Korth." 
 
 Mr. Cochran, of New York, was then loudly called for. He rose and 
 said : 
 
 Gentlemen — It is with no reluctance, though with much diffidence, that I 
 rise to respond to the calls with which I have been honored. I congratulate 
 the whole country upon the successful termination of your labors. (Ap- 
 plause.) My own individual efforts, it is due to you to say, have not been 
 bent to this issue. I frankly say that, with all the efforts of which I 
 sfta capable, but still with manly openness, I have opposed the course which 
 has at last brought this Convention to the haven of its desires. But, sir, my 
 
172 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 course was adopted under the pressure of convictions and of affections other- 
 wise given than to the favorite of Illinois. There was a gentleman from the 
 far South- West, whose position we of New York had long contemplated with 
 satisfaction, and it might not seem strange to our fellow- Democrats, in glanc- 
 ing along our own borders, our eyes had been directed to some of our own 
 favorite sons. But the time has arrived when these differences of opinion are 
 to be merged in the authoritative decrees of the great Democratic party, and 
 as that decree is here announced to the people of the United States, I for one 
 lend the feeble volume of my voice to those winds and currents that are now 
 bearing to every portion of the Union the honored, illustrious, impregnable 
 name of Stephen A. Douglas. (Loud cheers.) 
 
 Sir. it is the part of patriotism, when sacrifices are required upon the com- 
 mon altar of our country, to make tbem, and when those sacrifices are in 
 accordance with the best feelings of loyalty and devotion to the whole coun- 
 try, it is better that they should be made with a volition that shows no re- 
 luctance, and with alacrity and with energy. I should do a great wrong, both 
 to myself and my constituents, were I to suppress the declaration that he who 
 stands forth now as the standard-bearer of the Democratic party is one who 
 will command a roar of acclamation from the hills and fields, from the streets 
 and groves of the State of New York, loud as from voices without number. 
 (Cheers ) I proclaim to this Convention here to-day assembled, that he who 
 has commanded the suffrages of my fellow-delegates is the man who was de- 
 manded by the great Democratic party of the United States. (Applause.) 
 Now that the toil is over and the controversy is at an end which has been so 
 fairly and manfully conducted by all, I here come forward for myself, and 
 those who feel with me, and declare that the reluctance of the past will be 
 compensated by the cordiality of the future, (applause,) and notwithstanding 
 secession after secession has taken place in the National Democratic Conven- 
 tion, with such a standard-bearer as you have this day given us, we shall be 
 victorious against all opposition. (Cheers.) I have arisen only in response to 
 the call of my fellow Democrats, not to make a speech, not to present an 
 argument, but to declare that patriotism and honesty require that those who 
 have been sent here as delegates are in strict honor bound by the action of 
 this Convention. (Applause.) But above and beyond the obligations of 
 honor, there is a volition that will expand from these walls to the whole 
 country, which will resound in huzza upon huzza for Stephen A. Douglas. 
 (Loud cheers.) 
 
 On motion of Mr. Stuart, of Michigan, the Convention took a recess till 
 7 o'clock. 
 
 EVENING SESSION. 
 
 The President called the Convention to order at 7 o'clock. 
 
 The President requested each of the several delegations to name one of 
 their own number to constitute a member of the Executive National Com- 
 mittee. 
 
 Mr. Sayles, of Rhode Island, said that there was a resolution referring to 
 that matter, and a Committee had been appointed. 
 
 The President then called the attention of that Committee to the dis- 
 charge of their duty. 
 
 Mr. Jones, of Tennessee. Mr. President, the Southern delegates in their 
 Convention have conferred together and have agreed unanimously to nomi- 
 nate for Vice President of the United States the Hon. Benjamin Fitzpatrick, 
 of the State of Alabama. (Applause.) 
 
 Mr. Clark, of Missouri. This nomination being made by consultation otf 
 the Southern States, including Missouri, (we claim to be a Western State, 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 
 
 173 
 
 however — laughter,) 1 beg leave to second the nomination, and to say to the 
 Convention that after long and somewhat intimate acquaintance with Guv. 
 Fitzpatrick, a better nomination could not be made. He is a self-made man 
 — a man in the prime of life — a man of vigorous intellect — a man of great 
 administrative talent — a popular Governor of his own State — a national man 
 — a life-long Democrat He lives in the State that first seceded from this 1 
 Convention. We have selected him for his peculiar fitness, his high qualfi- 
 oations, and because he lives in a State where his name will give such a ma- 
 jority as will astonish every portion of the couutry. (Applause.) His name 
 isi a tower of strength. (Applause,) 
 
 Mr. Gittings, of Maryland. I tall for the vote by States. I consider it 
 an eminently fit nomination, and I have an object in calling for the vote by 
 States. I want it to go out that every S-ate voted for Mr. Fitzpatrick, and 
 their votes were so recorded. 
 
 THE FIRST GUN. 
 
 Mr. Sayles, of Rhode Island. I have a telegraphic despatch The first 
 gun. 
 
 Providence, R. I. — 4 o'clock. Your note is received. We are now firing 
 a hundred guns, amidst great enthusiasm over the name of Stephen A. Doug- 
 las. (Enthusiastic cheers.) 
 
 Mr. ('AGGER, of New Yorfe. I have the 
 
 SECOND GUN. 
 
 Troy, N. Y. The nomination of Douglas received with immense enthu- 
 siasm. A salute now being fired. (Renewed applause.) 
 
 The President, (after calling the Convention to order repeatedly) — Gen- 
 tlemen, you all know that the Chair feels so much disposition to join in these 
 yells that he can't keep order. (Laughter.) The Secretary will now proceed 
 with the call of States. 
 
 CALL OF THE STATES ON THE NOMINATION OF VICE PRESI- 
 DENT. 
 
 At the call of the States the response was promptly given in favor of M*- 
 Fitzpatrick, with no exception until the State of Pennsylvania was reached, 
 when one vote was anuounced for William F. Alexander, of New Jersey. 
 
 Mr. Whiteuurn, of New Jersey. I was authorized before the meeting of 
 this Convention, by Mr. Alexander, not to allow his name to be presented a> 
 as a caud.date. 
 
 The call having been completed, the vote was announced as follows : 
 
 Whole numoer of votes cast, 199i, as follows, viz : 
 
 BALLOT FOR VICE 1 'RESIDENT. 
 
 For Benjamin 
 Fitzpatrick. 
 
 Maine 7 
 
 New Hampshire .. 5 
 
 Vermont. 5 
 
 Massachusetts 10 
 
 Rhode ls'and 4 
 
 Connecticut 6 
 
 New York... 85 
 
 New Jersey .... 7 
 
 Pennsylvania 14 
 
 Delaware 
 
 llHryland 3 
 
 Virginia 3 
 
 For Benjamin 
 Fitzp;-.trick. 
 
 North Carolina I 
 
 South Cat ohna 
 
 ireorgia 
 
 Florida 
 
 Alabama 9 
 
 Louisiana C 
 
 Mississippi ...... (' 
 
 Texas... 
 
 \rkausas 4 
 
 Missouri 6 
 
 lenneisee 3 
 
 Kentucky 4i 
 
 For BeqjainiH 
 Kitzpatriefe. 
 
 Ohio 23 
 
 Indian/* 13 
 
 Illinois 11 
 
 Michigan 6 
 
 Wi:!oo:.sin . 5 
 
 Iowa 4 
 
 Minnesota 4 
 
 i alilbruia <i 
 
 Oregon (5 
 
 Total ....W} 
 
 Pennsylvania cast one blank vote. 
 
 The President. — The Chair, therefore, announces that the Democratic 
 
174 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Convention have made choice of Benjamin Fitzpatrick as their candidate for 
 Vice President of the United States. 
 
 Mr. Stevens, of Massachusetts, asked leave to file a statement of the del 
 egate from Massachusetts, (Mr. Chaffee,) whose right to a seat had been sus- 
 tained by this Convention, as against the contestant, in answer to the protest 
 of a portion of the Massachusetts delegation, who withdrew. 
 
 Agreed to, and the following is the statement. 
 
 In Convention, June 23d, 1860. 
 
 The undersigned respectfully represents, in reply to the protest presented 
 by B. P. Butler, and others of his colleagues, from the State of Massachusetts, 
 respecting his rights as a member of this Convention, the following brief con- 
 siderations of fact and argument, namely : That on the 19th day of October, 
 1859, Benjamin F. Hallett and Cornelius Doherty, of Boston, were duly 
 elected delegates from the Fifth Congressional District of Massachusetts, and 
 K. S. Chaffee, of Cambridge, and Silas Pierre, of Boston, as substitute Dele- 
 gates, to attend the National Democratic Convention at Charleston. 
 
 That on the 17th day of April, 1860, Mr. Hallett formally notified the un- 
 dersigned of his determination not to attend the said Convention, for reasons 
 of a private nature, which are immaterial here. That thereupon, the under- 
 signed repaired to the city of Charleston, for the purpose of discharging his 
 duty as a substitute delegate to the Convention, and that, upon the report of 
 the Committee on Credentials in his favor, (his seat having been contested,) 
 he was confirmed as a member of the Convention, and acted as such up to 
 the time of the adjournment of the Convention to Charletson.. 
 
 That upon the re- assembling of the Convention, at its present session, Mr. 
 Hallett presented himself before the Convention, claiming, and in fact, assum- 
 ing the seat of the undersigned, and that the question of contested right in 
 the premises was referred to the Committee on Credentials for decision, and 
 their report, in his favor, was adopted, with a large majority, by the Conven- 
 tion itself. To all which facts, in the opinion of the undersigned, the follow- 
 ing considerations of argument properly applied : 
 
 1. That by the same authority by which Mr. Hallett was authorized to 
 act as a delegate to the National Convention, the undersigned was invested 
 with the right to act as such, in a certain contingency, to wit : the non-afc- 
 tendance of the former, for any cause whatever. 
 
 2. That the undersigned, therefore, was not the personal agent of Mr. 
 Hallett, in any proper sense, or his mere 'personal substitute, but was the agent 
 of the District Convention itself, expressly designated as its substitute dele- 
 gate, and having authority to act as such, in case the former should, for any 
 reason, decline to act. 
 
 3. That Mr. Hallett' s notification to the uudersigned, of his intention not 
 to attend the Convention at Charleston, was, in effect, an act of resignation on 
 his part, and that the undersigned was substituted in his stead, in this contin- 
 gency, not by Mr. Hallett's own act, but by the act of the District Conven- 
 tion itself. 
 
 4. That in this view, the undersigned, having availed himself of his 
 rights in this respect, and having attended upon the discharge of his dele- 
 gated duties, is amenable to no other body than that by which he was ap- 
 pointed, and holds a seat in the Convention of absolute right. 
 
 All of which is respectfully submitted and subscribed. 
 
 K S. CHAFFEE. 
 
 Mr. Stevens, of Massachusetts, submitted the following resolution, which 
 was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That John Gt. Parkhurst, Recording Secretary of this Convention, 
 be requested to prepare the proceedings of this Convention, to be printed in 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore, 175 
 
 proper form, and that the National Committee cause 10,000 copies of the same 
 when so prepared, to be printed and distributed among the delegates of this 
 Convention. 
 
 REPORT ON RULES AND REGULATIONS. 
 
 Mr. Krum, of Missouri, from the Committee on Rules and Regulations, 
 •ubraitted the following Report : — 
 
 Mr. President : The Committee on Rules and Regulations, to which was 
 referred the several matters contemplated hy the resolution of Mr. Pugh, of 
 Ohio, beg leave to report : 
 
 That they have had the same under consideration, and as the result of their 
 deliberations, submit to the Convention the following resolutions, and recom- 
 mend their adoption : 
 
 1. Resolved, That in the next National Democratic Convention the num- 
 ber of delegates from each State shall not exceed double the number of the 
 electoral votes of the State from which such delegates may be elected or ap- 
 pointed. 
 
 2. Resolved, That a Committee consisting of one from each State, be 
 appointed, which shall be called the Natioaal Democratic Committee ; and that 
 said Committee shall have authority to call and designate the time and place 
 of holding the next National Democratic Convention, and provide accommo- 
 dation therefor; and said Committee, in conformity with usage, shall also 
 have power and authority to take all such measures as in the opinion of said 
 Committee may best promote the interests, insure the suscess, and preserve 
 the unity and harmony of the Democratic party. And said Committee shall 
 have pover to fill any vacancy that may occur in their number by resigna- 
 tion, death, or refusal to act ; but in filling vacancies, it shall be the duty of 
 said Committee to appoint the person who may be designated for the place 
 by the Executive or Central Committee or Convention of the State in which 
 such vacancy may occur ; but if no person be designated after reasonable no- 
 tice, as herein provided, then said Committee may fill the vacancy at pleas- 
 ure. And the said National Democratic Committee shall also have power to 
 appoint from their own members an Executive Committee ; and said National 
 Committee shall continue in office until their successors shall be duly 
 appointed. 
 
 3. Resolved, That in the Call of said National Democratic Committee for 
 holding the next National Convention, they shall designate the number of 
 delegates to which each State may be entitled. 
 
 4. Resolved, That the National Committee cause an Official Report of the 
 Proceedings of this Convention to be prepared, published and distributed 
 among and to each of the members thereof; which report shall contain a list 
 of the names of the several members of this Convention, with the Post-office 
 address of each delegate, and the number of electoral votes of each State. 
 
 All of which is respectfully submitted. 
 
 JOHN M. KRUM, Chairman. 
 On motion of Mr. Pratt, of Connecticut, the report was adopted. 
 
 NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC COMMITTEE. 
 
 The Convention then duly appointed the following named gentlemen to 
 serve as the National Democratic Committee, as provided in the Report submit- 
 ted by the Chairman of the Committee on Rules and Regulations, viz : 
 
 SYLYANUS R. LYMAN, of Portland, Maine. 
 ALPHEUS F. SNOW, of Claremont, New Hampshire. 
 CHARLES G. EASTMAN, of Montpelier, Yermont. 
 
176 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 FREDERICK 0. PRINCE, of Boston, Massachusetts. 
 JACOB BABBITT, of Bristol, Rhode Island. 
 WM. L. CONVER-E, of Norwich, Connecticut. 
 AUGUSTE BELMONT, of New York City, New York. 
 JACOB VAN ARSDALE, of Newark, New Jersey. 
 RICHARD J. HALDERMaN, of Harrisbnrgh, Pennsylvania. 
 THOS. M. LANAHAN, of Baltimore, Maryland. 
 JOHN. A. HARMAN, of Stanton, Virginia. 
 ROBERT P. DICK, of Greensborough, North Carolina. 
 WM. B. CAULDEN, of Huutsville. Georgia. 
 W. W. MOORE, of Jacksonville, Florida. 
 OATLEY H. BYNUM, of Portland, Alabama. 
 THOS. COTTMAN, of Donaldsonville, Louisiana. 
 THOMPSON B. FLO URNOY, of Arkansas. 
 JAMES CRAIG, of St. Joseph's, Missouri. 
 J. KNOX WALKER, of Memphis, Tennessee. 
 HENRY C. HARRISON, of Covington, Kentu.ky. 
 HUGH J. JEWETT, of Zanesville, Ohio. 
 *TL W. HARRINGTON, of Madison, Indiana. 
 MURRAY McCONNELL, of Jacksonville, Illinois. 
 BENJ. FOLLETT, of Ypsilanti, Michigan. 
 JOHN R. SHARPSTEIN, of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. 
 WM. H. MERRITT, of Cedar Rapids, Iowa. 
 HENRY H. SIBLEY, of Minnesota. 
 JAMES A. McDOUGAL, of San Francisco, California. 
 WM. B. EARNEST, of Oregon. 
 SAMUEL TOWNSEND, of Delaware. 
 , of South Carolina. 
 
 •, of Mississippi. 
 
 A. J. HAMILTON, of Texas. 
 
 COMMITTEE TO WAIT ON CANDIDATES. 
 
 Mr. Ludlow, of New York, offered the following resolution, which was 
 adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That a Committee of nine be appointed by the President to in- 
 form the candidate^ nominated for President and Vice President of the United 
 States of their nomination by this Convention and request their acceptance. 
 The Chairman announced the folio wing, as said Committee : 
 WILLIAM H. LUDLOW, of New York. 
 J. L. SEWARD, of Georgia. 
 J. L. DAWSON, of Pennsylvania. 
 ROBERT C. WICKL1FFE, of Lousiana. 
 W. A. GORMAN, of Minnesota. 
 T. B. FLOURNOY, of Arkansas. 
 A. A. KING, of Missouri. 
 BION BRADBURY, of Maine. 
 R P. DICK, of North Carolina, 
 Mr. Payne, of Ohio. It is generally understood that the platform wa* 
 adopted at Charleston. I understand that a distinguished member from Lou- 
 isiana, (Mr. Wickliffe,) desires to present a 4 resolution relating to the plat- 
 form, and I hope he will be allowed to do so. 
 
 Gov. Wickliffe, of Louisiana. In behalf of the Committee on Resolu- 
 tions, I beg leave to present the following. The adoption of it will give to 
 Stephen A. Douglas forty thousand votes in two of the Southern States of 
 this Union. 
 
Proceeding's at Baltimore. 177 
 
 Resolved, That it is in accordance with the interpretation of the Cincinnati 
 platform, that during the existence of the Territorial Governments the raea- 
 »ure of restriction, whatever it may be, imposed by the Federal Constitution 
 on the power of the Territorial Legislature over the subject of the domestic 
 relations, as the same has been or shall hereafter be finally determined by 
 the Supreme Court of the United States, should be respected by all good 
 citizens, and enforced with promptness and fidelity by every branch of the 
 General Government, 
 
 Mr. Payne. Mr. President, I undertake to say that no fair-minded man, 
 North, or South, can find fault with one word of that resolution. (Several 
 voices, "not a word.") Now, with the permission of the Chair, I wiil read 
 it again in the hearing of this part of the house. 
 
 The gentleman read the resolution from his seat, and moved the previous 
 question. 
 
 Mr. Davis, of Virginia. I say that's unfair. I protest against it, and I 
 want to be heard. 
 
 Mr. Payne withdrew the call. 
 
 Mr. Davis then gave his reasons for opposing the resolution. 
 
 Mr. Payne. I now demand the previous question. 
 
 The previous question was then seconded and the Convention ordered that 
 it now be taken. 
 ■ The resolution was adopted with one or two dissenting voices. 
 
 Mr. Price, of Louisiana, moved to reconsider the vote on its adoption, aud. 
 to lay that motion on the table, which was agreed to. 
 
 SPESCH OF COL. RICHARDSON.— LETTER FROM MR. DOUGLAS;. 
 
 Mr. Richardson, of Illinois. Mr. ChairmaB, the labors of this Convention, 
 arduous as they have been, are now drawing to a close. Arduous duties lie 
 before us in the canvass that is to come, consequent upon the nomination that 
 we have made here to-day. To the Convention, to those who have been our 
 friends, for their support on behalf of our nominee for the Presidency, and on 
 behalf of his State, as also to this entire Convention, I return my profound 
 thanks. We have been involved in seeming difficulties, great and perilous 
 during the time that we have been deliberating here. But the Democratic 
 party have passed through greater difficulties than these, and come from the 
 contest with their banner untorn and with triumph perched upon it. (Ap- 
 plause.) 
 
 I have no complaint to make against those who have seceded from this 
 Convention. But I desire to say, before I leave, that I wish them to go to 
 their constituents with all the responsibility of that act resting upon them if 
 the Democratic party is broken down and destroyed. As for us, we have 
 nothing to do but with our nominations to go forth to fight this battle for the 
 success of the Democratic party and the perpetuity of this Government. And 
 if those gentlemen who have seceded, from us bring this Government into 
 peril, the responsibility of the act will rest upon them, and not upon us. 
 (Applause.) 
 
 Sir, what a spectacle do we present. Day after day duriug this discussion 
 I have heard it said that this whole discussion was to secure the nomination 
 of a particular man. My lips were sealed. When gentlemen have charged 
 that all this effort on our part has been to nominate a single man, Mr. Presi- 
 dent, the time has arrived when I can put the denial straight, flat upon that 
 statement, and produce the proof that will put them to blush whenever they 
 repeat it again. (Applause.) I will not repeat the transactions that occur- 
 red at Charleston or here, I will refer to them only for the purpose of calling 
 attention to another thing. At Charleston we were told by the seceders that 
 12 
 
178 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 they went off on account of the platform. How do they stand before the 
 country to-day ? They come back here upon that platform precisely as they 
 left it at Charleston. (Applause.) They sought admission into your Conven- 
 tion, and the Convention acted upon their application. Then another set of 
 gentlemen, who were in here and had pledged themselves to stand by the 
 nominees, if they could get 202 votes in the nomination — these otbar gentle- 
 men told you that unless you admitted those seceders, they would go out 
 too. They made an issue not upon the candidate, not upon the platform, 
 but upon the contest over the seats which the seceders claimed here. (Ap- 
 plause.) 
 
 I attribute none but patriotic motives to every gentleman. But I musk 
 say, I do not know how elevated that patriotism that leads men to go out of 
 a National Democratic Convention, and seeks to break up the party, because 
 you will not let this man or that man, or the other man, sit here in this Con- 
 vention. (Applause.) So help me God ! if I was influenced by such con- 
 siderations, I would go home and seek the most insignificant town in my 
 State and remain there the balance of my life, for I should not want to be 
 seen by many people. (Great applause.) 
 
 Now, Mr. President, 1 am going to mike an announcement that will ac- 
 count for the currency of a rumor prevalent here the other day. Judge 
 Douglas will accept the nomination. (Loud cheers and applause.) But 
 Judge Douglas was prepared, for ihe harmony of the part}', for the Miccess of 
 the party, for the preservation of the government, always and at all times, to 
 withdraw his name from the Convention. (Applause.) I mean those gen- 
 tlemen shall meet that issue when they go home. I have had in my pos- 
 session, since the session of this Convention here, his authority placed in my 
 hands to withdraw his name, to be used by his friends whenever they deemed 
 it necessary to do so. (Great applause.) And I now send to the Secretary's 
 desk a letter which though marked " private," I ask may be read to this 
 Convention. 
 
 The Secretary read the following letter: 
 
 [Private.] 
 Washington, 11 P. M., June 20, 1860. 
 
 My Dear Sir : I learn there is imminent danger that the Democratic 
 party will be demoralized, if not destroyed by the breaking up of the Con- 
 vention. Such a result would inevitably expose the country to the perils of 
 sectional strife between the Northern and Southern partisans of Congressional 
 intervention upon the subject of slavery in the Territories. I firmly and con- 
 scientiously believe that there is no safety for the country — no hope for the 
 preservation of the Union, except by a faithful and rigid adherence to the 
 doctrine of non-intervention by Congress with slavery in the Territories. 
 (Applause.) Intervention means disunion. There is no difference in princi- 
 ple between Northern and Southern Interventionists. The one intervenes 
 for slavery, and the other .against slavery ; but each appeals to the passions 
 and prejudices of his own section against the peace of the whole country and 
 the right of self-government by the people of the Territories. Hence the 
 doctrine of non-intervention must be maintained at all hazards. But while I 
 can never sacrifice the principle, even to attain the Presidency, I will cheer- 
 fully and joyfully sacrifice mvself to maintain the principle. (Applause.) If, 
 therefore, you and my other friends, who have stood by me with such heroic 
 firmness at Charleston and Baltimore, shall be of the opinion that the princi- 
 ple can be preserved and the unity and ascendancy of the Democratic party 
 maintained, and the country saved from the perils of Northern abolitionism 
 and Southern disunion by withdrawing my name and uniting upon some other 
 non-intervention and Union- loving Democrat, I beseech you to pursue that 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 179 
 
 "B 
 
 course. (Applause.) Do not understand me as wishing to dictate to my friends. 
 I have implicit confidence in your'a and their patriotism, judgmtnt and dis- 
 cretion. Whatever you may do in the premises will meet ray hearty ap- 
 proval, but I conjure you to act with an <?ye single to the safety and welfare 
 of the country, and without the slightest regard to my individual interest or 
 aggrandizement. (Applause.) My interests will be but promoted, and am- 
 bition gratified, and motives vindicated by that course on the part of my 
 friends which will be most e'fectual in saving the country from being ruled 
 or ruined by a sectional party. 
 
 The action of ihe Charleston Convention in sustaining me by so large a ma- 
 jority on the Platform, and designating me as the first choice of the paity fci 
 the Presidency, is all tl e personal triumph I desire. This letter is prompted 
 by the same motives which induced my despatch four years ago, withdrawing 
 my name from the Cincinnati Convention. 
 
 With this knowledge of my opinions and wishes, you and other friends 
 must act upon your own convictions of duty. 
 
 Very truly, your friend, S. A. DOUGLAS. 
 
 Hon. Wm. A. Richardson, Baltimore, Md. 
 
 The reading of the letter was received with the most enthusiastic applause 
 the whole Convention rising in their seats, waving their hats and cheering. 
 
 Mr. Richaudson resumed. Mr. President, we have discharged our whole 
 duty. Whatever may befall us in that future so uncertain, we have the 
 proud consolation that we have discharged our duty to just political associa- 
 tions ; we have discharged our duty to this bright heritage that our fathers 
 have given to us ; Ave have discharged our duty to the country so connected 
 with the hopes of all the future ; we have discharged our duty to that God 
 who placed us here that we might advance the great interests of our fellow- 
 man. (Applause.) 
 
 So anxious was my friend, the nominee of this Convention, that this should 
 be impressed upon the minds of all his friends here that he telegraphed the 
 gentleman from New York (VIr. Richmond) on yesterday, I believe, to the 
 same effect. I trust that no person who knows me believes that I would he 
 guilty of manufacturing evidence for an occasion of this sort. (Cries of '• no," 
 "no.") I have borne this letter with„me lor three days, but those gentle- 
 men who have seceded from this Convention placed it out of my power to use 
 it. And the responsibility, therefore, is on them. I do not care it we have 
 but ten friends in the South. In all time to come, I shall be found, so long 
 as my heart continues to beat, striving to maintain all their constitutional 
 rights. I have stood amid the ^-torm of Northern fanaticism, and I under- 
 stand, what it is. I understand what you have to pass through in your sec- 
 tion of the country, ami appreciate your position. But in a just cause you 
 cannot fail. We will be enabled with you to pass that crisis, and place the 
 government where it will be so administered as to secure all the rights of all 
 sections of the country. It is in hours of danger that true men are found, 
 and in such hours alone. Meet this issue boldly, fearlessly, and for the right. 
 In thirty days from this time we shall have established our ascendancy 
 throughout the North- West, and we shall have such an organization and 
 power then as will give us the control of that Northern empire now fast grow- 
 ing into such vast importance and power. 
 
 Sir, we shall have a terrible conflict. I expect to traverse the State in 
 which I live from the lakes to the Ohio river. I expect to meet everywhere 
 my fellow-citizens ; I know their temper, and I know that they will put 
 their m irk upon that man who, when our army was winning for itself the 
 proudest laurels, declared in Congress that it was an unnecessary and an un- 
 constitutional war. (Applause.) We in the North have one sectional party 
 
180 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 to fight, and intend to whip them. You have an equally sectional party to 
 fight in the South, and we expect you to whip them. When the election 
 comes on in November next, we shall carry a majority of the electoral vote 
 of the North, and we expect you to carry a majority of the electoral vote of 
 the South. (Applause.) I am exceedingly obliged" to the Convention for the 
 kindness and patience with which they have listened to my remsrks. 
 
 Mr. Cessna, of Pennsylvania. We were informed, upon the opening of 
 this Convention in this city, by our late highly respected and most lamented 
 presiding officer, that when we adjourned at Charleston there were pending 
 three motions to reconsider, and three motions so lay those motions to recon- 
 sider on the table. I move that the question be now taken upon those mo- 
 tions. 
 
 Th|§ motion to lay on the table the motion to reconsider the vote by which 
 the first resolution in the minority Report of the Committee on Platform was 
 adopted was then put and carried. 
 
 The several motions to lay on the table, the several motions to reconsider 
 the vote adopting the 3d, 4th and 5th Resolutions in the minority Report 
 substituted for the majority Report of the Committee on Platform and Reso- 
 lutions, were then put and carried, and the motions to reconsider pending be- 
 fore the Convention at the time of its adjournment from Charleston to Balti- 
 more, were severally laid upon the table. 
 
 RESOLUTIONS OF THANKS. 
 
 Mr. Seymour, of New York, offered the following resolution, which was 
 adopted, the question being put by Yice President Elston, of Indiana: 
 
 Resolved, That the thanks of this Convention be presented to the Hon. 
 David Tod, for the dignified, impartial and courteous manner in which he 
 has presided over this Convention. 
 
 The following resolutions were also adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That our thanks are due and hereby tendered to the several 
 railroad companies which have furnished us with half- fare tickets to this 
 Convention; and especially to the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company , 
 for their kind exertions with other companies to procure for us such tickets, 
 and for the extra trains run for our accommodation ; and also to the Adams 
 Express Company, for their kindness in transmitting messages, &c, for the 
 a 'commodation of delegates. 
 
 Resolved, That the thanks of this Convention be and are hereby tendered 
 to R. Eaton Goodell, of Illinois, ard E. 0. Perrine, of New York, principal 
 Reading Secretaries, and to John G. Park hurst, of Michigan, and Franklin 
 Vansant, of Pennsylvania, principal Recording Secretaries, for the energy,, 
 fidelity and attention with which they have discharged their respective 
 duties. 
 
 Resolved, That the thanks of this Convention be tendered to the Marshal 
 of the Police of Baltimore and those acting under him for the able manner 
 in which they discharged their duties ; also, to the Sergeant at- Arms of this 
 Convention, and those acting under him, and all the officers of the Conven- 
 tion, for the efficient and able manner in which they have discharged their 
 duties. 
 
 Mr. Merrick, of Illinois, offered the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, I'hat the thanks of this Convention be tendered to the Comnrttee 
 o p Arrangements on the part of the State of Maryland and the city of Balti- 
 more, and for the liberal and generous arrangements provided for the accom- 
 modation of this Convention, and the uniform courtesy displayed to its mem- 
 bers. 
 
 Mr. Warwack, of Alabama. I desire to return the thanks of Alabama 
 to this Convention for the nomination you have made for Yiee President of 
 
Proceedings at Baltimore. 18 L 
 
 the Uuited States. Alabama has her choice now for Presideut and Vice 
 President, and we pledge Alabama to give her electoral vote foi the ticket 
 you have this day nominated — such a vote as she has not given since she 
 voted tor Jackson in 1828. I wished, when I heard the speech of the gentle- 
 man from Illinois (Mr. Richardson), that I had such a friend as Judge Doug- 
 las has in him. (Applauae.) In 1856 Alabama voted for Mr. Douglas eight 
 times, and the intriguers saw that he stood next for the nomination at the 
 oud of the next four years, that he must certainly be our next President, and 
 they resorted to every measure to break him down. But Alabama will be 
 true to the Union and the De»io"ratic party. We know not whofmay be the 
 nominee of the seceding Convention, but let him be from the South or from 
 the North, if he be nominated by them, the State of Alabama will cast her 
 electoral vote for the nominees of this Convention. 
 
 Mr. Stuaut, of Michigan. Mr. President, we shall never be able to ad- 
 journ in a better mood than we are now. I therefore propose that we ad- 
 journ, and let us go into the field where the enemy are and conquer them, in 
 a hand-to-hand fight. (Applause.) 
 
 THE PRESIDENT'S ADIEU. 
 
 The President. Before putting the motion, the Chair must not forget to* 
 say how profoundly gia.eful he feels for the vote of thanks so generously 
 tendered to him for his conduct in presiding over your deliberations. Called, 
 for the first time, to preside over some six hundred gentlemen, th^ Chair 
 announced to y »u in the beginning that he never could succeed in preserving 
 order, unless he had the help and support of every member. He is proud to 
 say now that he was not disappointed in that expectation. 
 
 One word more. The victory in this contest, fellow Democrats, is iu our 
 hands. We have only to continue firmly, nationally, sternly, fairly, honor- 
 ably in the discharge of our duties, as we have done since we met at Charles- 
 ton, to crown our efforts with entire success. 
 
 Wishing you all a safe return to your homes, to your wives and children,, 
 and Grod grant that you may all have them at home waiting for you. 
 
 After putting the motion to adjourn, 
 
 The President said, I now declare this Convention adjourned, and bid 
 you adieu. 
 
 The following is a statement of the number of Presidential electors to 
 which each State is entitled, viz : 
 
 States.! States. States. 
 
 Maine 8 1 Virginia 15 [Tennessee 12 
 
 New Hampshire 5 North Carolina, 10|Kentucky 12 
 
 Vermont 5|South Carolina 8!Ohio v3 
 
 Massachusetts 13 Georgia 10 [Indiana 13 
 
 Rho.ie Island 4 Florida 3 Illinois ...11 
 
 Connecticut 6 Alabama.. 9, Michigan. o 
 
 Now York -- . .35 Lou.sianu oWiaconsin 5 
 
 New Jersey 7 Mississippi. 7 Iowa . 4 
 
 Peun.s\lvania -7 1'txas 4 \. Minnesota 4 
 
 Delaware 3 Arkansas 4 California ..- 4 
 
 Maryland 8 Missouri 9 Oregon 3 
 
 DAVID TOD, President. 
 John G. Parkhurst. for the Secretaries. 
 
182 
 
 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 Recapitulation of the Fifty-seven Ballots at Charleston. 
 
 09 
 
 IT 
 Er 
 
 c 
 8 
 
 3 
 ST 
 
 t? 
 p" 
 
 s- 
 a 
 
 co 
 
 O 
 
 P 
 
 r 1 
 § 
 
 b 
 pr 
 
 E' 
 at 
 
 O 
 O 
 
 C 
 ■< 
 w 
 
 li 
 
 o 
 
 00 
 
 30. 
 
 151% 
 
 e 
 
 3 
 
 O 
 
 c 
 t? 
 
 5* 
 
 a 
 
 at 
 O 
 
 a 
 11 
 
 
 O 
 
 5* 
 S 
 
 B 
 
 sr 
 
 1.. 
 
 145% 
 
 42 
 
 35 
 
 12 
 
 6 
 
 25 
 
 4^ 
 
 5% 
 
 3 
 
 l 
 
 2.. 
 
 147 
 
 41% 
 
 36 * 
 
 ll 
 
 6 
 
 fi l 
 
 
 31.. 
 
 151% 
 
 32 V % 
 
 J7'., 
 
 11 
 
 M . 
 
 3 
 
 l 
 
 3... 
 
 L8% 
 
 36 
 
 42 
 
 12 
 
 6 
 
 6% 
 
 
 32. 
 
 152% 
 
 -.2% 
 
 47% 
 
 11 
 
 5 - 
 
 3 
 
 i 
 
 A.. 
 
 U9 
 
 41% 
 
 37 % 
 
 12 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 
 33 
 
 152% 
 
 254?: 
 
 47% 
 
 11 
 
 14 % 
 
 3 
 
 
 5.. 
 
 149^ 
 
 41 
 
 87 H 
 
 |0 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 
 34... 
 
 152% 
 
 22 
 
 47% 
 
 11 
 
 141 
 
 5 
 
 l 
 
 «.. 
 
 149% 
 
 41 
 
 39% 
 
 12 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 
 35 
 
 152 
 
 22 
 
 47% 
 
 12 
 
 I2f 
 
 4% 
 
 i 
 
 T.. 
 
 150% 
 
 41 
 
 38% 
 
 11 
 
 7 
 
 4 
 
 
 36 
 
 151% 
 
 22 
 
 48 
 
 12 
 
 13£ 
 
 4% 
 
 l 
 
 8.. 
 
 150% 
 
 40% 
 
 38% 
 
 11 
 
 6 
 
 i l A 
 
 
 37 
 
 151% 
 
 16 
 
 H4% 
 
 
 13% 
 
 5% 
 
 l 
 
 9- 
 
 150% 
 
 39^ 
 
 41 
 
 12 
 
 6 
 
 1 
 
 
 38 
 
 151% 
 
 16 
 
 66 
 
 
 13 
 
 5% 
 
 
 
 10.. 
 
 150 % 
 
 39 
 
 39% 
 
 12 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 1? 
 
 39 
 
 151% 
 
 16 
 
 66 % 
 
 
 12% 
 
 12% 
 
 % 
 
 
 
 11... 
 
 150% 
 
 38 
 
 39 % 
 
 12 
 
 5% 
 
 4 
 
 1] 
 
 40... 
 
 151% 
 
 16 
 
 66% 
 
 
 5% 
 
 
 
 12.. 
 
 150% 
 
 38 
 
 39% 
 
 12 
 
 6% 
 
 4 
 
 1 J 
 
 41. 
 
 151% 
 
 16 
 
 66% 
 
 
 >3% 
 
 5% 
 
 
 
 13.. 
 
 149% 
 
 28% 
 
 39% 
 
 12 
 
 (i 
 
 1 
 
 
 42 
 
 151% 
 
 16 
 
 P6% 
 
 
 13* 6 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 14.. 
 
 150 
 
 27 
 
 41 
 
 } 2 
 
 20 
 
 % 
 
 
 48 
 
 151% 
 
 16 
 
 65% 
 
 
 13 
 
 5 
 
 
 15.. 
 
 150 
 
 26% 
 
 41% 
 
 12 
 
 20 1 
 
 % 
 
 
 44.. 
 
 151% 
 
 16 
 
 65% 
 
 
 13 
 
 5 
 
 
 16.. 
 
 liO 
 
 26 
 
 42 
 
 12 
 
 20 \ 
 
 % 
 
 
 45 
 
 151% 
 
 16 
 
 WO /. 
 
 
 13 
 
 5 
 
 
 IT- 
 
 150 
 
 26 
 
 4S 
 
 12 
 
 20£ 
 
 i/ 
 
 
 4o 
 
 151% 
 
 16 
 
 65 l 2 
 
 
 13 
 
 5 
 
 
 IS.. 
 
 150 
 
 26 
 
 41% 
 
 12 
 
 20* 
 
 1 
 
 
 47. 
 
 151% 
 
 16 
 
 65 ^ 
 
 
 13 
 
 5 
 
 
 19.. 
 
 150 
 
 26 
 
 41% 
 
 12 
 
 20 J- 
 
 1 
 
 
 48 
 
 151s 
 
 16 
 
 65% 
 
 
 13 
 
 5 
 
 
 20 
 
 150 
 
 26 
 
 42 
 
 12 
 
 20| 
 
 % 
 
 
 4<». 
 
 15'% 
 
 16 
 
 65% 
 
 
 14 
 
 4 
 
 
 21... 
 
 150% 
 
 26 
 
 41% 
 
 12 
 
 20* 
 
 5* 
 
 
 50. 
 
 151% 
 
 16 
 
 65% 
 
 
 14 
 
 4 
 
 
 22.. 
 
 150% 
 
 26 
 
 41% 
 
 12 
 
 20£ 
 
 % 
 
 
 51 
 
 15** 
 
 Hi 
 
 65% 
 
 
 14 
 
 4 
 
 
 23 
 
 152% 
 
 25 
 
 41%. 
 
 12 
 
 20 \ 
 
 % 
 
 
 52 
 
 151 
 
 16 
 
 65% 
 
 
 14 
 
 4 
 
 
 24-. 
 
 151% 
 
 25 
 
 41% 
 
 12 
 
 20* 
 
 i% 
 
 
 53 
 
 151% 
 
 16 
 
 65% 
 
 
 14 
 
 4 
 
 
 25.. 
 
 151% 
 
 35 
 
 41% 
 
 12 
 
 19* 
 
 n% 
 
 
 54 
 
 1-1% 
 
 20% 
 
 61 
 
 
 16 
 
 2 
 
 
 26 . 
 
 151% 
 
 25 
 
 41% 
 
 12 
 
 19% 
 
 12 
 
 
 55 . . 
 
 151% 
 
 16 
 
 65% 
 
 
 14 
 
 4 
 
 
 27... !5l% 
 
 25 
 
 42% 
 
 12 
 
 9 
 
 12% 
 
 
 56.. 
 
 151% 
 
 16 
 
 Ho% 
 
 
 14 
 
 4 
 
 
 28.. 151% 
 
 25 
 
 42 
 
 12 
 
 8 
 
 12% 
 
 1 1 
 
 57 
 
 •51% 
 
 16 
 
 65% 
 
 
 14 
 
 4 
 
 
 29 n5H/ 
 
 95 
 
 4.0 
 
 19 
 
 8 
 
 T) 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 On the first ballot Mr. Toucey received 2£ votes and Mr. Pierce 1 ; and on 
 the second ballot Toucey received 2£ votes. 
 
 MR. DOUGLAS' LETTER OP ACCEPTANCE. 
 
 Washington-, June 29, 1860. 
 
 Gentlemen : — In accordance with the verbal assurance which I gave yon 
 when you placed in my hands the auihentic evidence of my nomination for 
 the Presidency by the National Convention of the Democratic party, I now 
 send you my formal acceptance. Upon a careful examination of the platform 
 of principle adopted at Charleston, and re-affirmed at Baltimore, with an 
 additional resolution, which is in perfect harmony with the others, I find it to 
 be a faithful embodiment of the time-honored principles of the Democratic 
 party, as the same are now proclaimed and understood by all parties in the 
 Presidential contests of 1848, 1852, and 1856. Upon looking into the pro- 
 ceedings of the Convention, also, I find that the nomination was made with 
 great unanimity in the presence, and with the concurrence, of more than two- 
 thirds of the whole number of delegates, and in exact accordance with the 
 long established usages of the party. 
 
Democratic National Convention. 383 
 
 My inflexible purpose not to be a candidate, nor accept the nomination in 
 ftny contingency, except as the regular nominee of the National Democratic 
 party, and in that case only upon conditions that the usages, as well as the 
 principles of the party, should be strictly adhered to, had been proclaimed for 
 ft long time and become well known to the country. These conditions hav- 
 ing all been complied with by the free and voluntary action of the Democratio 
 masses and their faithful representatives, without any agency, interference, 
 or procurement on my part, I feel bound in honor and duty to accept the 
 nomination. 
 
 In taking this step, I am not unmindful of the responsibility it imposes ; 
 but in a linn reliance on Divine Providence, I have faith that the people will 
 comprehend the true nature of the issue involved and eventually maintain 
 the right. The peace of the country and perpetuity of the Union have been 
 put in jeopardy by attempts to interfere with and control the domestic affairs 
 of the people in the Territories, through the agency of the Federal Govern- 
 ment. If the power and duty of Federal interference be conceded, two hostile 
 parties must be the inevitable result. The one inflaming the passions and 
 ambition of the North, and the other of the South ; and each struggling to 
 use the Federal power and authority for the aggrandizement of its own section 
 ao the expense of the equal rights of the other, and in derogation of those 
 fundamental principles of self government which were firmly established in 
 this country by the American revolution as the ba»is of our entire Kepublican 
 ftystem. 
 
 During the memorable period in our political history, when the advocates 
 •f federal intervention upon the subject of slavery in the Territories had well 
 nigh precipitated the country into revolution, the Northern interventionists, 
 demanding the Wilmot proviso for the prohibition of slavey, and the South- 
 ern interventionists, then few in number, and without a single Representative 
 in either House of Congress, insisting upon Congressional legislation for the 
 protection of slavery, in opposition to the wishes of the people in either case, 
 it will be remembered that it required all the wisdom, power, and influence 
 of a Clay and a Webster, and a Cass, supported by conservative and patriotic 
 men, Whig and Democrat, of that day, to devise and carry out a line of policy 
 which would restore peace to the country and stability to the Union. 
 
 The esseutial living principle of that policy, as applied in the legislation of 
 1850, was, and now is, non-intervention by Congress with slavery in the 
 Territories. The fair application of this just and equitable principle restored 
 harmony and fraternity to a distracted country. 
 
 If we now depart from that wise and just policy which produced these 
 happy results, and permit the country to be again distracted, if not precipitated 
 into revolution by a sectional content between pro-slavery and anti-slavery 
 interventionists, where shall we look for another Clay, another Webster, or 
 another Cass, to pilot the ship of State over the breakers into the haven of 
 peace and safety ? 
 
 The Federal Union must be preserved. The Constitution must be main- 
 tained iuviolate in all its parts. Every right guaranteed by the Constitution 
 must be protected by law in all cases where legislation is necessary to its en- 
 joyment. The judicial authority, as provided in the Constitution, must be 
 sustained, and its decisions implicitly obeyed and faithfully executed. The 
 laws must be administered and. the constitutional authorities upheld, and all 
 unlawful resistance suppressed. 
 
 These things must all be done with firmness, impartiality, and fidelity, if 
 we expect to enjoy and transmit, unimpaired, to our posterity, that blessed 
 inheritance which we have received in trust from the patriots and Siiges of 
 the Kevolution. 
 
184 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 With sincere thanks for the kind and agreeable manner in which you have 
 made known to me the action of the Convention, I have the honor to be, 
 very respectfully, 
 
 Your friend and fellow-citizen, 
 
 S. A. DOUGLAS. 
 Hon. W. H. Ludlow, of New York, and others of the Committee. 
 
 DECLINATION OF SENATOR FITZPATRICK 
 
 The following is the correspondence between the Committee and Mr. Fitz- 
 patrick : — 
 
 Washington, June 25, 1860. 
 Sir : You have been unanimously nominated by the National Convention 
 of the Democratic party, which met in Charleston on the 22d day of April 
 last, and adjourned to meet at Baltimore on ihe 18th day of June, as their 
 eandidate for the office of Vice President. 
 
 To us has been delegated the agreeable duty to inform you of such nomina- 
 tion, and to ask your acceptance of it. 
 
 In selecting you for this honorable post, the Convention have but appre- 
 ciated the ability and high-toned nationality and patriotism which have long 
 distinguished your public career. 
 
 We tender to you our congratulations, and have the honor to be your 
 fellow- citizeus, 
 
 WILLIAM H. LUDLOW, of New York, 
 R. P. DICK, of North Carolina, 
 J. L. SEWARD, of Georgia, 
 J. L. DAWSON, of Pennsylvania, 
 R. C. WICKLIFFE, of Louisiana, 
 W. A. GORMAN, of Minnesota, 
 T. B. FLOURNOY, of Arkansas, 
 A. A. KING, of Missouri, 
 BION BRADBURY, of Maine. 
 To Hon. Benjamin Fitzpatrick. 
 
 Washington, June 25, 1860. 
 
 -Gentlemen: Your letter of to-day, informing me that I "have been 
 uuanimously nominated by the Notional Convention of the Democratic party, 
 which met at Charleston on the 23d of April last, and adjourned to meet at 
 Baltimore on the 18th day of June, as their candidate for the office of Vice 
 President," was duly received. 
 
 Acknowledging with lively sensibility this distinguished mark of your con- 
 fidence and regard, it is with no ordinary feelings of regret, that considera- 
 tions, the recital of which I will not impose upon you, constrain me to decline 
 the nomination so flatteringly tendered. My designation as a candidate for 
 this high position would have been more gratifying to me if it had proceeded 
 from a united Democracy — united both as to principles and to men. 
 
 The distracting differences at present existing in the ranks of the Demo- 
 cratic party were strikingly exemplified both at Charleston and at Baltimore, 
 and, in my humble opinion, distinctly admonish me that I should in no war 
 contribute to these unfortunate divisious. 
 
 The Black Republicans have harmoniously (at least in Convention,) pre- 
 sented their candidates for the Presidency and Vice Presidency. So has the 
 Con^titutioniil Union party ^as it is termed.) Each party is already engaged 
 
Democratic National Convention. 186 
 
 in the contest. In the presence of such organizations we still unfortunately 
 exhibit a divided camp. What a melancholy spectacle ! It is calculated to 
 cause every Democratic citizen who cherishes the Constitution of his country 
 to despond, if not to despair of the durability of the Union. 
 
 Desirous, as far as I am capable of exercising any influence, to remove ev- 
 ery obstacle which may prevent a restoration of the peace, harmony, and 
 perfect concord of that glorious old party to which I have been inflexibly 
 devoted from early mmhood — a party which, in my deliberate opinion, is 
 the only real and reliable ligament which binds the South, the North, the 
 East and the West together upon Constitutional principles — no alter- 
 native was left to me but that which I herein most respectfully communi- 
 cate to you. 
 
 For the agreeable manner in which you have conveyed to me the action of 
 the Convention, accept ray sincere thanks. 
 
 Very truly, vour friend and obedient servant, 
 
 B. FITZ PATRICK. 
 
 To Wm. H. Ludlow, of New York, and others. 
 
 The foregoing correspondence was immediately placed in the hands of the 
 National Democratic Committee, and thereupon a meeting of said Committee 
 was held at the National Hotel, in the city of Washington, on the 25th day 
 of June, at which meeting all the States were represented except Delaware, 
 South Carolina, Mississippi, and Oregon. 
 
 The Hon. H. H. Sibley, of Minnesota, was made Chairman of the meet- 
 ing, and F. 0. Prince, of Massachusetts, was appointed Secretary. 
 
 After the Secretary had finished reading the correspondence between the 
 Committee of the Convention and Mr. Fitzpatrick, 
 
 On motion of Mr. Dick, of North Carolina, the Hon. Herschel V. John- 
 son, of Georgia, was by acclamation unanimously nominated as the candidate 
 of the National Democratic party for the office of Vice President of the Uni- 
 ted States. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Gattlden, of Georgia, it was voted that a Committee of 
 fire be appointed by the Chair, to notify Mr. Johnson of his nomination, and 
 request his acceptance of the same; and Messrs. Gaulden, of Georgia, Mc- 
 Connell, of Illinois, Dick, of Nortii Carolina, Eastman, of Vermont, and Cott- 
 man, of Louisiana, were appointed such Committee. 
 
 The Committee immediately waited upon Mr. Johnson and notified him of 
 his nomination, and requested his acceptance ; and the following is the 
 speech of Mr. Johnson on accepting the nomination for the Vice Presidency : 
 
 Mr. Chairman, Gentlemen of the Executive Committee of the National 
 Democratic Party, and Fellow-Citizens: — I was taken by surprise when I 
 received a telegraphic despatch in Baltimore, at three o'clock fchgs 
 day, that the Hon. Benjamin Fitzpatrick had declined the nomination 
 tendered him by the Democratic National Convention, and that it wa* de- 
 manded of me to accept it. It is known to many of you that my name was 
 freely mentioned in Baltimore, in connexion with this nomination, and that I 
 persistently refused to countenance it, but invariably urged that if Georgia 
 were to be thus honored, it was due to another of her sons, distinguished for 
 his talents and great public service. This was my earnest desire, and the de- 
 sire of the delegation of which I was a member. But the Convention, in its 
 wisdom, deemed it best to nominate a statesman of Alabama. It was entirely 
 satisfactory. Alabama is the child of Georgia, and the mother cordially re- 
 sponds to any compliment bestowed upon her daughter. These are the 
 
186 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 circumstances under which I have been assigned this distinguished position, 
 and which demand that disinclination should yield to the voice of duty. 
 
 The National Democratic party is in a peculiar condition. Jt is assailed in 
 the house of its professed friends, and threatened with overthrow, 'i he 
 country is in a peculiar condition. It is on the eve of a sectional confli** 
 which may sweep down all political parties, and terminate in a disjoint on of 
 the Union. It is the duty of patriots and statesmen to unite iti averting these 
 threatened calamities. 
 
 It may not he inappropriate to refer to the circumstances which imperil 
 the National Democracy. The Alabama delegation went to the Convention 
 at Charleston instructed to demand the mcorporation into the platform of the 
 party the proposition that Congress should intervene for the protection of 
 slaves in the Territories, and to withdraw if the demand should he refused. 
 That delegation did retire, and with them a large portion of the delegations 
 from the Cotton States. Why should they have retired? The record shows 
 that if they had remained at their posts they had the power to have pre- 
 vented the nomination of any candidate who might be obnoxious to the 
 South. Thus reduced by secessions, the Convention adjourned to Raltimore, 
 and requested the States to fill the vacancies in their respective delegations. 
 The Convention re-assembled on the 18th instant. The seceding delegations 
 were returned, some accredited to Richmond, and others to Baltimore by way 
 of Richmond, and instructed to make the same demand, and to withdraw if 
 it should be refused. Delegates were appointed in Louisiana, Alabama, and 
 Georgia, by the National Democrats of those States, to fill the vacant seats of 
 the seceders. Those of Alabama and Louisiana were admitted, and the 
 seceding delegates from Georgia were admitted to seats. They all took 
 umbrage at the decisions of the Convention, touching the various contests for 
 seats. 
 
 They retired, organized, and nominated candidates for the Presidency and 
 Vice Presidency, and they claim to be the National Democracy of the United 
 States. Now, if they were actuated by " principle ; " if it was their purpose 
 in good faith to obtain the recognition of the principle ol Congressional pro- 
 tection for slavery in the Territories, why not wait until a proper time arrive 
 to bring that subject before the Convention, and then according to their in- 
 structions, withdraw from the body ? The reason is palpable ; they were 
 waging war against the distinguished man, not for the maintenance of the 
 " principle ;" they were willing to je >p;ird the integrity of the Democratic 
 party and the triumph of its cherished principles, rather than see its will pro- 
 claimed in the nomination of its favorites 
 
 Admitting, for the sake of argument, Mr. Douglas to be as obnoxious as 
 they allege he is, yet there never was a time when the South, united, could 
 not have defeated his nomination. Why, then, should they have seceded ? 
 Why not remain at their post ? Why seek to dismember and destroy the 
 party ? I question not the patriotism of any, but the people v ill hoid them 
 responsible sooner or later, for all the ills that may How from their errors. 
 
 I said the demand for Congressional intervention was properly rejected at 
 Charleston, and why do I say so? Became it was the agreement between 
 the North and South that the slavery agitation should be removed from the 
 halls of Congress, and the people of the Territories be left, perfectly free to 
 regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject to the Constitu- 
 tion of the United States. 
 
 This was the principle of the compromise measures of 1850, and practically 
 applied in the Nebraska- Kansas act, in 1834. It was adopted by both the 
 great parties of the United States in 1852. It triumphed in the election of 
 Franklin Pierce in that year, and of James Buchanan in 1856. it is, perhaps, 
 
Democratic National Convention. 187 
 
 the best ground of com promise between the North and the South which hu- 
 man ingenuity can devise, and by it the Democratic party, at least, of all- 
 aectious, should be willing to abide. It gives advantages to neither section 
 over the oilier, becauseit refers all questions of dispute between them, either 
 as to Congressional or Territorial power over the subject of 'slavery, to the 
 final arbitrament of the Supreme Court of the United Stales. It is, therefore, 
 safe for the South. Its practical working is not without satisfactory results. 
 Where the ] eople of a Territory desire slave labor, and the soil and climate 
 are suited to it, slavery \\ill go ; where these conditions do not exist, it will 
 not go. This finds an illustration in New Mexico, where slavery is estab- 
 lished, and that in those Territories where it is excluded, only a few days ago 
 propositions to repeal the slavery laws of New Mexico wej^e made and 
 rejected, on the one hand, and the anti-slavery law of Kansas, en the other, 
 was made and rejected in the Senate. 
 
 Suppose these propositions, or either of them prevailed, is it not certain 
 that the country would have been thrown into the highest excitement ? but 
 by their rejection non-intervention was practically adhered to, and the public 
 mind is satisfied and quiet. Let us maintain it firmly and faithfully. We 
 are bound to it by every consideration of interest and obligation of compact. 
 Its abandonment will prove fatal to the National Democratic party, and ulti- 
 mately to the Union ittelf. It will drive the South into intense sectionalism, 
 and the North into the ranks of Black Republicanism. I do not say every 
 man of the North, for I know that the great body of the Northern Democracy 
 will remain true to tii« Constitution, despite the overwhelming flood of its 
 relentless cohorts. But I mean that the free labor States would be controled 
 by Black Republicans, and would not be able to return a single member to 
 either House of Congress friendly to the constitutional rights of the South. 
 I trust that such a condition of things may never exist; but if it should, I 
 know of no way by which the Union can be saved. 
 
 Hence the doctrine of Congressional intervention, and advocated by this 
 new-born sectional party, is fraught with peril to the country. The question 
 is now distinctly presented to the people, whether they will adhere to the 
 doctrine of non-intervention, or whether they will abandon it ; whether they 
 will re-open the slavery agitation by requiring Congress to take jurisdiction 
 over ir, or whether they will give repose to the public mind and security 
 to the Union, leaving it where the compromise leaves it, to the free action of 
 the people of the Territories and the Constitution of the United States. The 
 issue is fairly made up. It is intervention or non-intervention. Its decision 
 involves the destiny of this great Republic and the highest interest of the 
 civilized world. 
 
 Compared witk it, the aspirations of men and the fate of political parties 
 sink into utter insignificance. Where shall we look for deliverance Irom 
 these threatened evils ? It has been the mission of the Democratic party of 
 the Union, in a thousand perils, to rescue our country from impending calam- 
 ities. Its past career abounds with heroic passages, and is illustrated with 
 the mo?t glorious achievements in the cause of Constitutional liberty. It is 
 the party of Jefferson, and Madison, and Jackson, and Polk, whose adminis- 
 trations constitute gtand epochs in our national liberty. It is the party of the 
 Constitution. I iook to it with confidence. Where else shall the patriot 
 look in thesj times of political defection and sectional agitation ? Let our 
 integrity be permanently destroyed, an I (he doctrine of non-intervention 
 overthrown, and then the best hopes of the statesman may well be clouded 
 with gloom and darkness. 
 
183 Democratic National Convention. 
 
 It is to maintain these that I consent to take the position now assigned me, 
 mid welcome the consequences of personal good or personal ill, which that 
 position may bring. Nothing else could induce me to brave the detraction 
 which it iuvites, and incur the heavy responsibility which it imposes. I hav« 
 nothing to add but the expression of my profound thanks for the honor so 
 unexpectedly conferred upon me, and my cordial acknowledgments for the 
 flattering terms in which I have been notified of my nomination. Whatever 
 may be honorably done, I shall cheerfully do 10 maintain the integrity of the 
 pa-rty and the triumph of its principles. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 V > 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 s 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 S* 
 
 
 s~ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 °o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 <J> 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 \ ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 <* 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 
 v* 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^- ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 
 s • 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 <. 
 
 
 \ ■% 
 
 .V ^ 
 
 
 v 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^» 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 .,^' •*. 
 
 
 ,f *- 
 
 ^r 
 
 C ^ 
 
 
 
 <-> X ^ 
 
 "^