The weekly Floridian. [volume] (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1867-19??, 1884-09-23

Their Record On the C0asai ilnttsns ri
Coavepsioa Question Compnress.

Their Record ON the C0asai amttou sel
COaveRsIoa Q~e~sion Compnresi.
To the editor OF the Economist
SIR: In your Issue of the 23d ult you do na
correctly represent what l said at TaTAt,A il
reference to The position Of the Independents ot
the question of Constitutional Conventicti. NJ,
argument was that while they claimed to be tht
special friends of . Constitutional Convention
and some of them strain 50 far ~ to give thSt a
a reason for quitting the Democratic party, they
now supporting candidate for Leutknani
Governor who net only voted against the. th,,ri
cut pan, as il is called, but who ai>st, voted
against the Joint resolution recommending the
the electors at the next general election 70 vote
tor against Convent ion" See Senate .Tojifhal
pages 596-7 On the other hand Mr. Malry
the Democratic Candidate for Eieutenant Crow
ernDr, voled IN the Assembly for the resolution
and is now advocating n new Constitution
Though Mr. Mabry did not favor the short cut
bill, he was tor Convention according Il, the
mode pointed out by the Constitution while Mr..
Greeley was opposed to Convention nti nny
terms, and if his policy had prevailed the people
would not have au opportunity of voting for n
Convention At the cnming election Thcsefore
il cannot in the same way be- proven th3t the
Democrats are opposed 10 a new Constitution y
Tor Mr. Mnbry and Mr.. Greeley did not avo,e
The same way" And thiS leads me to say that
n" tue trIenl tn a new Constitution can bfsfer
Mr. Greeley 10 Mr.. MaDry for The Office Of Lieu
tenant Governor.
Since the action of Democrats OF the House
in v"iing against the "stnrt Gu bill has been
80 sharply criticised in The h'erest oi the lnie
pendents IT Is interesting To examine the Jour
nails OF the Assembly, and to note what was the
action OF the Independents themselves on:thaf
question, (.nd this you have evidently over
lmkei) Out of the 10 members elected and
classed Independents, Of thein, including
Mr. Stripping, the Chairman of their Executive
Committee voted against the bill; an out Of
80 Democrats the same number. Z, voted against
it-observe the proportion. Now it is as well
to say that the Independents " drieated: this
measure by coalition with the Radicals" as.
that the Democrats =" defeated IL by u GOA.
liton with the Radicals" unless you class
the Independents and the Radicals as one
and the same which you doubtless felt jus.
tilted in doing in the light of recent political al
lianccs. Al all events, if we are to judge from
the votes in the Assembly, and their preaent:sur.
rOundings, il is far more likely that they have
been "captared" by the Republicans on! the
Constitutional Convention question than THAI
tney have captured" the Republicans
You say, and which learn Mr.. Pope Rs.ver
fails TO charge, that one of the members who
voted against the bill in question was after ards
rewarded by appointment " to a very profitable
office" But do not understand that either of
you have said that the Executive at the same
time appointed to n similar Office another nrem-
Der who voted for the BILL which fact shtsnId,
in fairness, 60 with the other statement.
You are pleased To ask me in your editorial TO
tell what l did at the last session OF the
Legislature in the direction of a Constitutional
Convention. l think the public have already
had enough OF my position on that subject but
will answer your question. and say that aHaile
made no attempt To control any legislator
and gave no opinion except when asked, on any
subject before The Legislature Whenever nay
views on the :" short cut bill were sought, rbey
were promptly given in favor of The bill WilAl
other members of the administration did fox or
against il l am unable To slate, for l do not
know. W. D. BARNks.
TALLAHASSEE, Sept 4, 1884. ::