Wood River times. [volume] (Hailey, Idaho) 1882-1915, 1884-10-16

HALEY, Oct. Is, 1884.
To THE EDITOR OF THE TINES:
I am Democrat and not "carpet-
bagger" or tenderfoot; a plain, blunt
man, who loves his friends aud de.
spises a trucking sycophant. have
been a friend aud warm admirer of
"Uncle" John HALEY for many years,
ard should bitterly regret to have to
desert him now and Withdraw from
his support as Delegate to Congress
duty which every DEMOCRAT owes
to himself, to society, to TRUE, LOYAL
DEMOCRACY. If it be y fact, as init
mated by Colonel Wall at the Haley
Theater last night, that the nominx-
ton of Mr.. Haley was incubated at a
midnight caucus controlled by polygA-
nous emissaries of the Mormon
Church, wish to ask of Democratic
friends, if any there be possessing the
information, what are the bedrock
facts? Of course our alleged Demo-
cratic paper would not publish this
inquiry, for obvious reasons, and
hence must appeal to you.
Colonel Wall credited Hon. James
H. Hawley with 16 delegates, abso-
lutely under his personal control. to-
wit: Alturas 7, Boise 3, Cassia 2, Gus
ter 2, and Lemhi 2, to which Mr..
HALEY added two more 1.-THE Craw-
fords) from Oneida-in all, 18. In
addition, Shoshone's two votes we're
represented by Colonel Wall, and
presumably favorable tc Mr.. Hawley.
There were AZ votes in all, Kootenai
not being represented; and thus it ap.
pears that bare majority RENAME d.
sufficient to nominate. Six of this
number were Mormons, one at least a
4-ply polyganist (Budge), and two
others reputed polygamists, and hence
it will be seen that the nomination of
Mr.. HALEY could not possibly have
been procured without the aid of ALL
the Mormons, ard that the exclusion
of the D1sFRANcH1sED Bulge would
have rendered his nomination abso-
lutely impossible.
But 1t appears tina. Idaho's 2 and
Nez Perce's + votes were instructed
for Colonel Wall, Nez Perce's 4 votes
being instructed first for Ben. Morris,
but failing to secure his nomination,
then to be cast for Wall.
Now, Mr.. HALEY stated that he
would not knowingly receive the vote
or support of polygamist, and the
questions l desire to PROFOUND are:
First-!s the foregoing a true cast of
the position of the respective dele
gates to that convention with respect
to the various candidates? If so, did
the friends of Mr.. Hawley participate
in any secret caucus held at the resi-.
dence of Mr.. HALEY or elsewhere,
whereat the nomination of Mr.. HALEY
was agreed to? And if so, did such
friends of Mr.. Ilawley assent to said
nomination then and there, and before
the general caucus into which the
convention resolved immediately be.
fore the public announcement of the
nomination of Mr.. Haley? If not,
will the friends of Mr.. Haley inform
me how the protestations of Mr..
HALEY, "that he would not receive
polygamous Mormon support" are to
be reconciled with the facts herein
above indicated?
These questions being answered, l
desire to know what influence was
brought to bear upon Mr.. Morris, to
induce him to desert himself and
ignore and suppress the written in
struction of Nee Perez county, in
order that the nomination of Mr..
HALEY might be secured, regardless of
the manifest rights of Mr.. Hawley, a.
by majority of the LOYAL
DELEGATES to that convention?
And lastly, has the Mormon Church
funds to cover any ex-
penses Of the campaign. and il SO,
does Mr.. Tsylor's mongrel, pretended
represent that corruption
interest?
Very respectfully,