Lewiston teller. [volume] (Lewiston, North Idaho) 1878-1900, 1882-10-26
aINoIsER ANNOUNCED FOR AN
MEXATION AUG. Goth, FIVE
DAYS AFTER HIS NONIINA
TON.


TON.
We have been repeatedly asked why
Singiser waited till he came to the
North, Oct. 9Th, before he announced
his position on annexationl When we
first met Mr.. Siugiser, the day at er
his arrival ia Lewiston, we asked him
the same question, and he said that be
had done so a few days after his nomi-
nation, and expressed his surprise that
his announcement had not been made
public here. We told him that no
such announcement had been made Of
his position upon the question, so far
- We had knowledge, that had the
people Of the North leen so made ac-
quainted with his position, we were of
tho full opinion that it would have been
satisfactory and that no move would
have been made for convention to
nominate Northern man, but that he
would have been accepted and voted
for almost unanimously. He then told
- that under the circumstances as far
- known to the North, they had acted
rightly 10 moving for Northern nom
nation. But he said he was not to be
blamed for the neglect to have made
known to the voters of the North his
views; that he had on the 30th of Aug.
ust written letter declaring his views
addressed to A. McGregor and the
voters Of North Idaho, and placed it
In tho hands of Northern man who
was then at Boise City, to be sent here
for the information Of the voters, and
supposed it bad been sent, and was al.
ready well known here. Soon after
hs wrote this letter he went to Denver,
Colorado, as he was chosen to represent
Idaho ct the Denver exposition. We
asked Mr.. McGregor and he told us
that no such letter had come to his
hand, and he himself knew not of the
existence Of any such letter except what
he had learned from Mr.. Singiscr since
he came here. When Mr.. L. p. Brown
and s. 8. Fem came down a day or so
before the convention, MIR. Brown said
that he had that letter, that he received
Il in due course Of mail, that if there
WAS any blame in its not having been
made public he alone was answerable
tor the delay and not Mr.. singiser,
that when he received it he supposed
that Mr.. Singiser would soon be here,
and that il would be more satisfactory
70 have Mr.. Singiser here when it was
made public, and he then produced the
letter, which We then saw aud heard
read and became convinced Of its genu-
Inc character. We then told Mr.. Brown
that we thought that his Withholding
It % long while the Independent move
ment was going forward was bad policy
and that it might greatly endauger the
harmony Of the North upon candi-
date. But that SO far as we were con
cerned We had full faith 10 the integ-
rity and right purpose Of Mr.. Singiser
on the question Of annexation, aud it
only remained to induce the same faith
in others at the North SO as to secure
I united North upon him as q candi.
dass, - much 50 as upon . resident
voter Of North Idaho. That we thought
there would be more difficulty in rec
eneiling the Democratic voters to a
change from an independent nominee
to . Territorial Republican nominee
than it would bs to change the Repub
lican voters. As we are informed this
delayed letter was shown to several Of
tho delegates to the Independent con-
vsntion, and this, with other things,
induced the convention to refuse to
make = nomination, and to recommend
Mr.. Singiser to the voters of North
Idaho q thu annexation candidate.
The following is the letter in question.
The envelope bears post mark "Boise
City. Idaho. Sept. @" The address is
in the handwriting Of Judge Norman
Buck and is as follows: az. p. Brown.
Mt. Idaho, Idaho Co, Idaho Territory,
The letter itself is as follows:
ExEcuTIrE DEPARTMENT.,
TERRITORY OF IpAno.
Office Of the Secretary,
BOISE Cry, Aug. 30, 1882.
A McEre1or Fec Te,n;eta, ~ u a