The daily enterprise. [volume] (Livingston, Mont.) 1883-1884, 1884-09-16

! nominated, but he very prompt
ly declined to take step backward in the
race for such honors as the convention had
in its gift: the name of ]. E. Hendry. of
Livingston, was presented and he readily
declined to take the risk of being defeat
ed for nomination to an office he had never
wanted. Then an adjournment until 7 D.
III. was asked and though strongly op-
posed was granted on vote. What was
done in dark lantern caucus, on the streets
and around the places of public resort
during the recess of three or four hours
it would be hard to tell. A proposition
was made to the Livingston delegation
that it return to the convention and again
present Savage and Hendry for the two
branches of the legislature, and that
Armstrong would withdraw in favor of
such an arrangement. Judge Savage
could not see his way clear to honorably
appear before a convention that
had already repudiated his candidacy
and Mr. Hendry did not want anything at
the hands of that convention. At the last
moment the Livingston delegation agreed
to present the names of D. j. Kennedy of
Mission for the council and G. G.. Allen
of Paradise Valley for the lower house of
the Legislature, if Armstrong desired to
withdraw. Armstrong would agree to
nothing but his original proposition, so
the arrangement fell to the ground when
the convention assembled in the evening.
Nomination of three representatives was
then proceeded with, the Livingston dele
gates not participating. VIM. Martin and
John NJ. Robinson, of Gallatin valley, and
Alfred Myers, of Custer county, who has
some property on Shields river, were
voted in with little opposition. Next the
of one county commissioner
was proceeded with and G. L. Duke, of
Willow creek, was given the place with
out a dissenting voice. Next occurred
one of the most striking episodes I have
ever seen in a convention, even though
this was but county meeting away out
here in the Territory of Montana. Sheriff
c. P. Blakely it is we'll known has been a
candidate for denomination to the office
he now holds. To that end the solid
delegation of IA members from Bozeman
precinct was elected to support him. We
supposed that he was able to
control that delegation in any matter that
nearly affected his own candidacy. Living
ston, | believe, is very favorably disposed
70 Sheriff Blakely and, while not one of
the delegates from here was pledged to
support him,sit is probable that no other
nan was thought of by them for the office
when they first went into the convention.
When the solid Bozeman delegation voted
against Judge Savage it was natural that
Blakely should be suspected of at least
it. With such unsatistied sus-
picions the delegation from this precinct
did not feel like supporting hlm, and in
Iced all but four of them had given no.
ice of their withdrawal from the conven
ton just previous to the proposal of can
iidates for sheriff. The three delegates
from Cooke did the same thing. When
the sheriff's office was reached by the con-
vention the name of c. P. Blakely was
proposed and accepted by acclamation,
though almost in silencc-a large chunk
Of gloom seemed to hang over the meet
ing about that time. Just then Sheriff
Blakely got upon bench in the rear OF
the hall and addressed the convention.
Pe referred to the divided elements from
Livingston and Bozeman; he believed that
The Livingston delegation had been grossly
ii treated in the convention. He had
ever tried to advocate business and fair
ness to this portion of the county. and had
beer greatly blamed by the people of
Bozeman for SO doing. In view of all
hat had occurred. he then and there de-
lined the nomination to the office Of
sheriff. Sheriff Blakely's action in thus
nomination for which he had
abored hard and which was finally
endered him unanimously, and in declin-
ng fairly and squareIy because Of the