Lewiston teller. [volume] (Lewiston, North Idaho) 1878-1900, 1884-08-21
THE APPROACHING CANVASS

So far as we can learn. efforts are bang
made to demoralizc the people Of the
north on the question Of annexation. Al
indices point to the fact that Washington
territory will be admitted as State prior
to the next congrcs-ihat i. will be al
mitted by the presen, congress at Its nrxi
session. or that the enabling act will be
passed during that session. After the
passage Of the enabling act, unless al
nitted under the constitution Of 1873, a
new convention will have to ass mtle and
frame new constitution. That consti
tuition will have to be submitted to the
people, and adopted before any proelama
ton of the President fer the admission
Of the State. This will require lime and
may extend into ,hc pcriod Of the sitting
of the next consress.
What concerns the people of North
Idaho most, is to provide against tn
dropping from the present bill before tn
house and senate Of the provision which
includes North Idaho within the terrific
rial bouniaries Of the contemplated new
State. If the people Of North Idaho.
whether democrats or republicans, were
in earnes, and acting in good faith wheu
they voted for Singisor in 1882, bctaus
he was in favor Of annexation, and thcy
are in earnest now in favor of the meas
ure, there is no reason which they car
show why they should drop Mr.. Singistl
now, and take up a new and un'ried man
upon that question, and vote for him al
the coming election. Mr. singiser in
congress and out Of congress has kept hi
pledges with US faithfully upon thi,
question as the record will show
Mr. Sinsiscr challenges the cxamina~
.tion Of the record, and calls upon Sena-
tor Dolph and other senators, De!egat,
Brents and other members Of the houfe
4 to prove his fidelity to bis pledges gwen
here in North Idaho when he received th
nomination at the hands of the norther,
people. and we cannot think that the PEG
pie of North Idaho haze material,
changed in their views since that tim
upon this question. nor will they bctray
the trust which Mr.. Sin-i.er placed it,
them when he esroused thair cause and
resolved to advocate it in congress.
We end that there are several asriraut.
in the north for Mr.. Sinaiscr's position
One of them has always been known t
be opposed to annexation, and, as a re-
publican, did not support Mr.. Singiser on
the ground of his favoring the measure
Another has proved himself incompe.
tent to manage the question in lcgisla
tive body. We know not how much fol
lowing either Of these men may have in
the north. They boast of considerable
strength, but we are inclined to think
from cur standpoint, that their boast i,
idle--that they are counting withor,
their hosts.
We hear il talked much that those
calling themselves democrats in the north,
are organizing with view of presen,ne
to the people strictly partisan candi-
date; whether he be in favor or against
annexation. The only candidates named
by them that would be acceptable to them
arc John HALEY aud Mr. Hawley OF
South Idaho. The former has a record
in congress against annexation, and in
the last canvass in Ada county, on the
delegateship, took strong grounds against
annexation. The latter Mr.. Hawlgy,
who, 20 far as we know, has made no
public speeches on the question, but h.
is represented by both his friends and
enemies to be as strongly opposed to an.
nexation as Mr. HALEY. If this senti-
ment obtains among the democrats of the
north, aud they stand in for either OF
these men, the inference is irresistible
that they have changed their ground on
the question Of annexation, or that they |
place his her value upon partisan can
didate in territory where they have no
vote upon national politics, than they do
upon the question of annexation. 1t re.
mains to be seen whether any great ror
ton of the people of the north viii stul-
tify themselves aud "sell their bir,hrish,
for mess of pottage."