Showing papers on "NOMINATE published in 1967"
TL;DR: Greeley was the only candidate who had behind him an efficient, skillful, well-trained, energetic working force, which will overcome the strongest undoubted majority as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: H iSTORIANS have long had a simple explanation for the nomination of Horace Greeley at the Liberal Republican convention in 1872. According to most historical accounts, certain professional politicians took control of the convention from the inexperienced reformers who had called it and who had intended to nominate Charles Francis Adams or Lyman Trumbull. The politicians settled upon Greeley as their candidate and nominated him by a simple maneuver. First, they made an alliance with one of the contenders, B. Gratz Brown, who withdrew from the contest after the first ballot. Thereafter the politicians deftly managed their well-disciplined minority and on the sixth ballot stampeded the convention to Greeley. In return, the Greeley delegates helped nominate Brown for the vice presidency. Thus the high idealism of the reform convention ended in a crass bargain manipulated by politicians. This explanation emerged immediately after the convention adjourned. Henry Demarest Lloyd, one of the disappointed reform delegates at the convention, attributed Greeley's nomination "by a convention which I firmly believe to have been opposed to him even while it nominated him" to the free traders' surrender of principle by accepting a compromise-tariff plank. But of equal importance was "the fact that Mr. Greeley was the only candidate who had behind him an efficient, skillful, well-trained, energetic working force.... Adams had the majority, but the Greeley minority had the mastery of political machinery, which will overcome the strongest undoubted majority."' Such views were restated innumerable times during the weeks following the Cincinnati convention.2
6 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the importance of the early sixteenth century for the development of Parliament seems to warrant another approach to the problem of attendance in the House of Lords during the reign of Henry VIII.
Abstract: In 1956 Professor Roskell, at the end of his discussion of the attendance of the lords in medieval parliaments, showed very briefly that attendances improved considerably during the reign of Henry VIII. More recently an attempt has been made to demonstrate a political significance in the use made by the Crown of the customary right of absent lords to nominate proctors to speak and vote for them in the House of Lords. The importance of the early sixteenth century for the development of Parliament seems to warrant another approach to the problem of attendance in the House of Lords during the reign of Henry VIII. So far the evidence has not been fully exploited nor have all the relevant questions been asked.
6 citations