The Leavenworth weekly times., 1878-08-08
A BAKERS DOZEN.
Which Number Will Hardly Cover
tk7 LES Lucien Has Been
ie,iing La!eIy.
An Utter Disregard for Truth and
Most Apparent Deficiency
of Principle.
An Interview With Judge S!i!lings
snd What He Says About it.

A reporter OF The TINES yesterday even
ing called upon Judge S;illings 10 get hi.
statement in regard to the alleged inter
view reported in Mr.. Bakers organ. Judge
Stillings protested against having his name
mentioned in tlsA In after, because, lie said,
he expected TO be candidate in his ward
for delegate to the convention, but ss he
was the only witness to the understanding
between Messrs. Baker and Anthony in re-
gard TO delegates, We are obliged TO give his
statement. The conversation was subs;an-
TALLY as follows:
Rep.-Were you present, Judge, at the
conversation between Messrs. Anthony and
Baker, at Bakers Office, in regard to dele
gates TO the Congressional convention?
JaJge SMiag&.-Yes, was present dur
ing the conversation.
Rep.-Slsie, if you please, what the
agreement was, between the gentlemen
named, in regard TO delegates?
Judge Sit was not what would be le-
gally called an oge.mert, but was an un-
derstandiDg, TO the effect that but one set
of delegates should he run. ! understand
from the conversation tha: both gentlemen
fully consented TO this. and that neither
would run an independent set OF delegates.
That was the arrangement, and
both parties agreed to abide by it.
Rep.-Who were named as the delegates
from the several wards?
Judge Sit was understood that should
be supported in the First ward, Judge Al
Ter IN the Second, Insley, Caldwell or Tay-
lor in the Fourth, and Rush and La,,a or
Legate and Mckee in the Third.
Rep.-Was that satisfactory TO Mr.. Baker?
Judge S-That was certainly my under
All the names, with possibly
one exception, were suggested by Mr.. Baker
himself.
Rep.-And you understood, from what oc |
Cured that this arrangement was agreeable |
to both gentlemen, and that they intended |
10 abide by ii?
Judge S-Alost assurediy l dill. There
was no written agreement, but it was dis
iinc,ly understood that this should be the
course pursued, ard that the gentlemen
would as delegates shonld he Supported by
10Th parties.
Rsp.-Were these delegates 10 be pledged
% anybody?
Judge S.-Certainly not. 1t was under
.tOod that they should not he known As
Anthony delegates or Baker delegates, but
hould go 10 the convention for the purpose
II securing tie nomination of LerreRwortk
nan ii possibie-that they should not be for
IT against any one, but should vote solid
or any Leav,nworih man that could he
nominated.
R,p.-Do you think it possible tor
ither of the gentlemen 10 have misunder-
TODD the arraBgems
Judge 81 don't see how it would b:
'ossible for either OF them 10 misunderstood
I, for the arrangement was explicitly sta
ed and seemed to be perfectly satisfactory
0 both. Mr.. Baker suggested the names
+ the delegates, and Col. Anthony agreedto
hem. The object was to serd delegation
hat would be united, and that would work
n:harmony for theinterests OF Leavenworth
'ithout prejudice for or against any inIi-
idual. ! thought the arrangement an sx-
client one, and was glad to see that bJth
entlemen acquieaced in it 50 cordially.