The weekly miner. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1878-1881, 1880-08-24
A FEW

The plea of the Independent Is that its
candidate must be reelected because of his
great and varied experience, which renders
him an infinitely more efficient delegate than
any new man we might select. Now We
CHANGED to be in Montana during Maginnis
first term in Congress and it so happens that
We have an inconvenlently distinct ~recollec
lion of the fact that at the end of that term
a denomination was claimed for Maglnnis as
q recompense for valuable ~serrices already
rendered Montana during his first term, and
not at all because his congressional career had
thus far merely given a promise Of future
efficiency. Now if it is true, as the Maginnists
maintain, that a new man is practically use
less during his first term, how is it that their
man did so well when inexperienced? Or
whytcdnnOt another mex perienced man do as
welle.as Maginnis did during his first two
years in Congress?
Again, it is an un9uestionablc fact that
when Maginnis entered Congress lie attracted
far more attention, and was mentioned by
the press of the Capital tar more frequently
than of late years, or since he has become
one Of the regular old !" stand by's" of the
House. If then, this is the effect of growing
old In harness. Or rather Ct dropping into a
little rut of routine, shall We gain or lose by
sending to Congress a new, fresh man; one
who would be altogether free from the enmi-
ties which, unless Maginnis is a putty man he
must, surely have accustomed one who could
succeed fully as well as Maginnis in enlisting
the friends of Montana in any measure cal
eulated to promote the welfare Of the terri
tory?
Still further; does the Independent consider
it advisable to saddle the party with the firth
term of a candidate who in the campaign
preceding his third term gave a pledge to the
effect that if renominated on that occasion he
would under no circumstances be a candidate
for denomination two years thereafter? If
"experience " was Of such inestimable value
why didn't Maginnis stand on his rights and
tell the people Of Montana that. a proper re-
gard for their own interests should impel
them to send him TO Congress again? Why
did he give a pledge amounting to what is
generally known as his word of honor
bOuAelHlilS, ny bHc way, usually COISluefeu
binding among honorable men-why did he
givethis pledge unless he intended to stand
by it? The opposition TO Maginnis during
the campaign for his third term was quieted
by that pledge, but does the Independent i'm
agine that the same opposition, finding that
faith was not kept with them, will rally again
to the support of the machine candidate? 1t
was all very well to ignore this pledge two years
ago, when there was no regular opposition
and when the party nominee had virtually g
walk over. But will it do, having regard fol
no other consideration than the party welfare
to bring out a candidate in direct oppositic,
10 hls own pledge, to face a strong nomination
by the republicans? Now is the time to con
slider such matters. The conventions art
soon to assemble and after they once issut
iheir instructions the matter will be settled
II the Independent maintains that no sucl
pledge as that alluded to above was evel
given, then all we have TO say about it is tha
Major Aaginnis will have a first rate chanc,
to institute criminal proceedings against GER
tam parties, for as soon as his name is pro
posed in the Deer Lodge convention tina
pledge, which wasn't a pledge after all, vii
he brought forward and attested.