Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1876-04-14

The state Convention and Ii. wors.
OPINIONS oil TIE STATE PRESS
From the Rutland Hsra. d

OPINIONS OF IuE STATE PRESS
From the Rutland Hsra.t.
Il the Convention failed IL any respect J.
was in a lack of Independence Of localities
II was indisposed. as conventions usually
are. TO interfere with any selection that any
section or locality had agreed upon. TINS
/ was wrong. In order to be sure Of the best
men always it should be understood that
any county or section Of the State asking
tor an important Office must present their
best man. or other sections will repudiate
their choice. A few examples of such rep
distlon would end this dIctation Of localities
which now too often prevails, resulting IN
I the election OF second-rate men TO Office
Prom the Rutland g. be.
Our Vermont Republican State C0nven-
ton was composed OF good men, they knew
what was wanted, but they advised and con-
sented TO everything just a II was fixed tor
them without protest or question. Had the
delegates possessed little more manly cour-
age. had they regarded only the fitness Of
things and the honor OF the Republican
party and the State. different men, ID part,
would have represented Us at Cincinnati
From the Woodstock Standard.
We can most heartily indorse every word
uttered by the FREE Pass in criticism Of
the late State Convention. In number
and character the Convention was one of
the finest ever assembled IN this State. but
the result of the deliberations was not suca
ss TO occasion any great feeling of pride IN
the breasts of the better portion Of the par
ty. Several gentlemen chosen 10 represent
the State at Cincinnati are worthy the hon
Or bestowed upon them, while others whose
names can be readily selected from the
delegates from the western portion Of the
State, are wholly unworthy. In times ike
these men notorious a. bar room politicians
and lobbyists. "bummers" as the FREE |
Pass aptly characterizes them, are not the |
men who should represent the intelligent
Republican voters OF Vermont But there 1
Is hope IN the future when such papers a
the FREE Press and Rutland Herald boldly /
protest against such proceeding and We /
seriously doubt that another Convention 1
will 50 tamely submit to such an outrage /
upon Its best judgment Another time the /
deep undercurrent Of dissatisfaction and /
disgust that existed at Burlington will |
rise IN overpowerlng strength and smash
the states.
From the Montpelier Freeman
II Captain Harrington, who so boldly
protested against the election of Mr.. Wood
bridge, bad taken ex-Goy. Page at his word
when the latter stated that the full Conven-
ton had no authority TO override the choice
o! the District, Mr.. W. would very likely
have gone TO Cincinnati without the en-
dorsement of the full Convention For
want OF power to override carried no obi
CATION to ratlfy. and we do not doubt that
had 1t been brought 10 q test the Conven-
ton would have said ''the First District
may send Mr. Woodbridge. but it must
a4 bE - ]
went home as body ashamed of itself as to
the result of this episode. Washington
county had one of the District delegates
four wears ago, and of course couldn't get
one now, but her delegates might have
elected John w. Stewart--and 1t ought 10
have been done.
From the Middlebury Register.
The uttergnces OF the FREE Pass. which
are reperhing y vigorous and it is feared not
wholly without reason, haveR smack of dis
appointment about them which detracts
from their influence. The Addison county
caucus held the evening before the Conven-
ton was hasty, ill-advised and irregular.
The meeting should have been informal. for
he interchange Of opinion only. Or if
1ehaite action were 10 be taken at all, it
should have been deferred until more OF the
delegates had arrived. But whether the
regularity of the call and organization,
which should have been made under the d.
-ection OF the county committee, furnishes
ground for suspicion that the caucus was
sprung Tor special purpose. is not entire
" clear. 1t Is true, as the FREE Press as ;
serts, that only seventeen votes were cast =,
or Mr. W Woodbridge IN the caucus But no ]
other candidate was presented and the op- !
position, Whatever there was Of it, failed of |,
for want of organization. and it is ,
more than probable that portion of the :
delegates arriving afterwards supported |;
lin with cordislity. The sever ,
'st criticisms have been uttered with regard
% one Of the First District delegates. but :
wo OF the other delegates, at least, are
quslly open to criticism. There is no I
lodging the conclusion that MIR. Wood
ridge was not the free choice of the Con-
'ention. The response to Mr. Farrington's
,rotest was an indication 70 that effect, and :
be discussions which followed in private,
ave proof positive. Many. if not most,
would have preferred one VINO had not been :
hsrged with being professional lobbyist. ,
Prom the Montpelier Waterman
In respect to the delegates selected to re-
resent the State st Cincinnati, We comics. r