The Weekly Kansas chief. [volume] (Troy, Kan.) 1872-1918, 1882-07-27
Jus. wha. We Said.

The ktchison CkazpioH, commenting upon
what We said ahont the Leaveuworth delrga-
.ion. last weck, concludes with the following
paragraph:
Tle 6Lisf seems TO take it to heart that Atei-aE
d,d not support Mr.. Baker against Maj; M"ffill,
WHY shauld AtchisnR have done sol When dih
I.ayruanrfa ever support Arehison man for any
I.n-itioni The CEicf's complaint; 90 far as this
County j. enircrrne,l l. unreasonable. Atchson has
me- Objection Mr. Baker, la: was under many po-
Ii,cal obligations Brown County and to Maj Nor
r and il il had refused rrguitc them when such
an opportunity offered it would have been guilty oi
base iugratitude That is all there is OF 1t
We gave our reasons for opposing Mr.. Nor
riIl's nomination. before the meeting of the Con
yention, and we Thought they were good. We
also gave our views of the manner of his noIni-
nation. Having done all that we were able 10,
w. intended to lay aside local differences, and
vote for him. We like him personally, and Po-
litically he is usually very leayel-headed. But
the Champion compels us to refer TO those past
matters, to show why we thought we were
right, and particularly as the Champion, in the
paragraph quoted, sustains what we have all
along claimed.
We were opposed to Morrill, first, because we
believed him to lie unfriendly to the County i'll
which we live. Another objection was not 10
cal but general and was entertained by large
number of persons. We did believe, and still
do believe that If was possible to have spared
the State the incilition of st. John for the last
two years, after all the delegates were chosen,
if Mr. Morrill, and several other influential men
had vigorously carried out the opposition to st.
John that they professed, and had used their
influence in that direction. The Convention
was very close, with slight advantage in ia
vor of St. John, but with balance of power in
the hands of delegates who were wavering, and
ready to tumble to the big side. Mr.. Morrill,
and several others, who professcd TO wish for
the defeat of st. John, could have set the boom
against him, by coming out openly and actively.
But instead of that, 10 the surprise of many of
their friends, they at once tumbled TO ST. Johns
apparent advantage, causing a stampede which
made him irresistible. 1t was asserted and be-
lieyed, and nowhere more firmly than in Atchi-
son, that st. John promised Morrill, help in
turn, in two years from that time, either for the
Governorship or for Congress. When this years
campaign opened, it found an earnest desire to
defeat ST. John for third term, requiring har-
mony and cooperation among all his opponents.
Nowhere was the opposition TO him stronger
than in Atchson, Topeka, Leavenworth, and
four of the best Offices in the State at the head
of them United States Senator, and Topeka
having number of fat offices, and the benefit
of all the offices, Lcavenworth thought it was
not unreasonable that she should ask for a Con-
gresham. When If came to business, it was
found that Atchison and Topeka were going
their full length against the LeavenwOrth man.
and in favor Of the man who had saved st. John
two years ago, thereby making him formidable
for n third term now. They said to Lcaven-
worth: We don't owe You anything; but we
owe this ST. John man local and personal fayors,
and shall pay them by supporting him, against
your man. However, want 10 beat st. John
himself, and expect you to help us. And
they went. They pleaded little local favors as
an excuse for refusing 10 stand by people engag
ed in a cause that they pretended to have great
ly at heart; and now they growl and grumble
at Leavonworlh for not dancing mp and helping
them punish a man whom they owe a grudge.
That's all there is of it, and the Champion con-
frsscs it, in the extract above quoted.
.Iutt what tremendous favoIs came forward,
just at that iuncture, to claim the support of
the anti-St. John County of Atchison for St.
John man against an anti-St. John man,
must plead ignorance. 1t certainly could not
have been in retnrn for votes for n paltry Dis
trict Judceship. 1t could not have been in
tnrn for Morrills support of Ingall, at his last
election, or for defending his right to his seat,
after lie was elected; nor for supporting Guth-
lie for Congress, two years ago. The truth is,
it for the qualification of ancient local en-
nifty, rather than in payment of local fayOrs.
There also n good deal of skunk in it.