"Mr. Conkling said that some hours ago the convention had adjourned until five o'clock, for the purpose of giving the Committee on Credentials time to report. The meaning of the recess was, that when the convention came together again the Committee on Credentials would make its report. He had been told by members of that committee that they were ready to report-not on one or two or three cases, but nearly every case referred to it. Why should not that committee make such report as it was ready to make, and let the convention pass upon it? He submitted that the good faith and good understanding of all concerned would be promoted and observed by proceeding now to consider that report of the Committee on Contested Seats.

"Mr. Henderson, of Iowa, replied that a good reason why the amendment should not prevail was the fact, that while the Committee on Rules had finished its work and was ready to report, the Committee on Credentials had not completed their work, and would probably not do so before tomorrow morning, and until then could not be here themselves to explain and sustain their own action.

"The chair stated that the question was first upon Mr. Sharpe's motion to amend so as to instruct the Committee on Contested Seats to report.

"Mr. Sharpe asked that the question be taken by yeas and nays, and the chair, exercising his

own discretion in the absence of any adopted rules, so ordered."

The roll was then called and Alabama led off with 19 yeas. When this vote was announced a delegate from that State rose and said he wished to vote in the negative.

Senator Hoar: "If the gentleman wishes to vote 'no' his vote will be received and recorded."

At this announcement, which was an out-spoken, manly declaration against the obnoxious unit rule and one of the best principles of political faith that the Republican party ever affirmed-the absolute inviolability of every man's share in the government of the governed-the convention sent up a great shout led by the galleries. This was applause worth listening to, the echo of which went through every State with the rapidity of great and good news.

Alabama was therefore recorded "Yeas 18, Noes 1," and the vote was continued thus:

Arkansas-Yeas, 12; California-Noes, 12; Colorado-Yeas, 6; Connecticut-Noes 12; Delaware-Noes, 6; Florida-Yeas, 6; Georgia— Yeas, 6; Noes, 16; Illinois-Yeas, 42; Indiana— Yeas, 6; Noes, 23; Iowa-Noes, 22; KansasNoes, 10. Kentucky announced 24 yeas.

A Kentucky delegate arose and said there were delegates from that State who desired to vote no. There were four stalwarts who desired their votes recorded "no." [Applause and hisses.]

Because of the delegates' excited and boisterous manner the chair ruled that all debate on anything else than correction of the vote be out of order.

The chairman of the Kentucky delegation here rose and said he would then give the names of the four, but just then Senator Conkling went up to him and said a word, which led him to forego his purpose and take his seat. Then the four Kentucky dissenters stood upon their chairs in the presence of the convention amid great applause. The vote of Kentucky was then recorded as 20 ayes and 4 noes. Maine, 14 noes; Maryland 7 ayes, 8 noes; Massachusetts, 7 ayes, 17 noes; Michigan, 1 aye, 20 noes; Minnesota, 3 ayes, 6 noes; Mississippi, 8 ayes, 7 noes; Missouri, 29 ayes, I no; Nebraska, 6 noes; Nevada, 6 noes; New Hampshire, 10 noes; New Jersey, 18 noes; New York-Mr. Conkling, by instructions of his delegation, cast 47 ayes, 23 noes; North Carolina, 5 ayes, 15 noes; Ohio, 3 ayes, 41 noes; Oregon, 6 noes; Pennsylvania, 29 ayes, 23 noes, Rhode Island, 8 noes; South Carolina, 7 ayes, 5 noes; Tennessee, 15 ayes, 7 noes; Texas, 9 ayes, 7 noes; Vermont, 10 ayes; Virginia, II ayes, 8 noes; West Virginia, 10 noes; Wisconsin, 2 ayes, 18 noes; Arizona, 2 noes; Dakota, I aye, I no; District of Columbia, 2 ayes; Idaho, 2 noes; Montana, 2 noes; New Mexico, 2 noes; Utah, 2 noes; Washington, 2 noes; Wyoming, 2 noes. TotalAyes, 316; noes, 407.

Pennsylvania asked to cast two additional votes aye of delegates who had just arrived. This gave Pennsylvania 31 ayes to 23 noes. Michigan corrected its votes to 1 aye, and 21 noes.

Thus corrected, the chair announced the result -yeas, 316; nays, 406. Mr. Sharpe's amendment was rejected.

The result, an unquestioned and overwhelming defeat for the Grant forces, was received with tumultuous applause in the galleries and not a little pleasure among the 406 victors on the floor. For it showed just exactly how much Grant could get on any one ballot and demonstrated beyond peradventure that if the opponents of the thirdterm stood together they could at any time defeat their enemies.

The question now recurring upon the original motion, Mr. Brandagee, of Connecticut, got up and said he did so in the interest of order, harmony and peace. He had voted against the amendment just rejected, but he thought there was a fair understanding in the Committee on Rules, that their report should not be made until after that of the Committee on Credentials. He moved to lay on the table the pending motion instructing the latter committee to report, with a view to adjourning. This was agreed to, and on motion of Mr. Metcalf, of Illinois, the convention adjourned until the next day-June 4th-at ten o'clock, A. M.

CHAPTER XXIX.

WAR TO THE KNIFE, AND KNIFE TO THE HILT

T was readily seen by this time that the fight

was to be a long-continued one, inaugurated

and conducted on the basis of war to the knife, and knife to the hilt. The country was aroused to a deep and untiring attention to every detail of the Chicago proceedings, and the newspapers were devoured by their thousands of readers with an avidity that spoke well for the political fortunes of our country. For no people can come to great disaster who show an intelligent, jealous interest in the proceedings of those who govern them.

To return to the convention. The Committee on Credentials had a hard time of it. At midnight on Thursday it had been in continuous session for six hours. It had settled the Illinois district contestants at the expense of eighteen votes for Grant (this was a question of whether delegates elected by a gag-law convention or by the districts should be seated), had agreed to the admission of a divided delegation from Louisiana, and had reached the Pennsylvania cases (the question here was somewhat similar to that of Illinois-a packed convention instructing delegates the opposite way