Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1888-08-03
ronrgn,s wIrmpnAwAL.
Indiana Republicans Nightly Per
picked ever the GubcrnstoriaI
Problem.

An fUuiaUaDcil3 linusl bIc'st w W. ~
aid says: The tRbst Significant movement
in regard 10 plscing Porter at the head OF
the Republican State ticket, notwiihstsnd-
ing bis letter discouraging any such steps
and stating IN effect that he could not accept,
occurred al the Congressional District Con-
yention to-day. After nominating Thomas
c. Chandler, a manufacturer OF engines, Tor
Congress. the convention adopted resolll-
ton endorsing Porter and asking his nomi-
nation for Governor from the state Conyen'
ton.
ANGRY AT PORTER.
The Harrison managers are very much dis
gusted with the action OF Ex-Governor Por-
ter in declining to stand, and arc making no
secre; OF the causes which impeiled him to
write letter positively refusing TO be can
didate. They say that Porter practically
consented Of the Chicago Convention 10 take
the nomination II Harrison were selected by
The national party for the presidency. and
that his aud ilarriSon's friends were thus led
20 pledge the party 70 nominate him, thiog
that could have been done without OPPOSE
ton, ~ Robertson could not possibly stand
against the popular tide that had begun to
set in for Porter. His Withdrawal Is de-
nounced as ON net Of cowardice, and Is said
TO have been accomplished by n little piece OF
engineering on the part OF Robertson's
friends, who knew P0rter's sensitive dispo-
silion and BIS fear Of being a party TO any
factional fight
When Robertson was in the city last week
he was interviewed regarding the outlook,
aud in response 10 a question declared tbst
he would not accept the nomination TOR the
second place on TIE state ticket. He went
home on Friday, aud the next DAY one OF
his friends came over from Fort Wayne and
called 10 see Porter. Ilc stated that be had
come as the friend both Of Robertson and his
host, and that the object Of his visit was to
ind out exactly his position regarding the
gubernatorial nomination. Porter referred
10 his expressions In February, In which he
s2id that be would not be q candidate. and
asked il they were not explicit enough for
Robertson and his friends. The gentleman
replied thai they were at the time
and that Robertson accepted them IN
good faith, hut the eX-GoyernOTs friends
were engaged In systematic canvass Of the
State, and that they were urging ms name
even IN RobertS0n's own county, ana posi-
lively asserted that Porter would accept the
uOminaii0n If Il were rendered him. At
this Porter said that he bad not authorized
auy one 10 use his name in connection with
the nomination, and lie would not De q candi-
date. lie acknowledged that he WAS daily
IN receipt Of numerous letters urging him 10
be candidate, and drew one from bis pocket
and showed It to his visitor as sample OF
the many urgent cpisiIes that he had received.
The lcttsr prcccd 10 be from stlte.senator
Johnson, and the visitor. selling upon the
opportunity, asked Porter il he still enter
'e'ned tho sentiments that he expressed in
February.
Il most certainly do" was the reply.
"and DO not want the Office, and would
not have II II nominated"
"Then why not say 20 in reply TO John
son, and put 81 end to the unwise action on
the part OF your iriendsf" queried his yisi.
for.