Lewiston teller. [volume] (Lewiston, North Idaho) 1878-1900, 1884-08-14
WE CANNOT TELL.

The present attitude Of the Democrats
Of the south part OF the Territory is such
Is 10 indicate that they ATE going to adopt
Aiuslie's views on annexation, and oppose
the severance of North Idaho. This is
eyinced in their talk Of nominating either
John Haley or Mr.. Hawly, both of
whom are avowedly opposed to the north's
going to Washington, and the republ ca
leaders who are trying to shove Singiser
of the track are also giving evidence that
they regret that they voted for Singiser,
when they found that he was in earnest
in his views on annexation, aud inducing
men in the north 10 be candidates, and to
secure delegates to 90 to Boise pledged to
themselves, or any ether person rather
than Singiser, who has been tbs only man
that has ever succeeded in all parts Of the
territory, in obtaining an election, while
espousing the annexation question. The
north has always been quite solid on that
question, ard pursued a bold and indie
pendent course at different times, and es
pecially at the last canvass was the only
means that brought the leaders 10 the
south u concede that We mad any ri.hts
which they were bound to respect in the
matter Of annexation. 1t seems now that
they are determined to withdraw
the concessions which they tn u
made, and scheme with the democratic
leaders, who are with them on the Issue
Of annexation, and if possible regain their
former position on the question, even ii
it result in the election Of democrat t.
congress. The democrats Of the south
who supported Ainslie at the last election
are consistent when they seek to nom
mate man Ike Haley or Hawlcy, who
are avowed opponents Of annexation.
But those republicans Of the south who
nominated Singiser and urged men Of the
north to endorse him, promising that h.
would represent the people Of the north
fairly aud truthfully, and because he has
done so, now to endeayor 10 shove him
TO one side, and put up new man, who
has no record, merely that he may be
beaten by the democratic nominee, are
treacherous and unworthy of confidence
The people Of the south did not object t."
annexation (save some of.the leaders and
mere politicians) and hence voted for
Singiser with good will, and hence the
republican nomiaee was elected by over
800 majority in the south alone, vic
tory that was unprecedented in the hsto-
~ Of idaho, besides carrying nearly all
the north.
Now, We are told that republicans Of
the south are striving to overthrow Singi
ser, who led them to victory, and against
whom they have not even breathed "a
the public unfai,hfulness as representa-
tive Of the people Why do they do this?
The people of the territory who voted for
him at the last election would like to know
why this change in programme Is i,
to give place for some other aspirant
whom the people have not triedP Give
the masses Of the people chance, and
they will soon express their approval or
disapproval Of the fidelity of representa-
tive, and not sink him out OF existence by
packed convention 1t is no more than
right that Slngiser should be allowed to
50 before the people again by nomina-
ton, and give the masses Of the voters a
chance to say whether he has been faith
full delegate, and not let his record Of
deeds done be hidden BY the management
Of other en- ious aspiran,s for his position.
Give him chance to go before the people
and show his own record, and challenge
others to show that it is not true. This
is usual in territory so remote from the
scene Of his labors, unless be has done
some fragrant act as representative that
has become patent to all.