Phillipsburg herald. [volume] (Phillipsburg, Kan.) 1882-1905, 1889-09-06
The Cold Facts.


Heat, anger, swelling words, vitu-
peration, bitterness, all avail nothing
in the presence Of cold, fixed facts.
The facts in the judicial business are
as follows:
Cheyenne county elected a major
ity of the delegates to her county
convention instructed for S. D. Deck
er for Judge Twenty-seven of the
delegates, a majority, there being
only ffty-twO in the convention, made
affidavit that they cast their ballots,
or ordered them cast by their chair
men, for Decker, A petition. recit-
ing these facts and others quite as
damaging, was signed by the chair
man and secretary of the Cheyenne
county convention, praying that the
delegates voted for by these twenty
seven delegates be seated in the ju-
dicial convention. In the face of this
statement of facts, backed up by af
fdaYIts, one Of the other set of dele
gates was named for temporary chair
man by the Pratt faction, and the
chairman Of the judicial central com
mittee decided that this other set of
delegates should be allowed to vote
on temporary organization. This he
did without calling the central com
mittee together to take action, though
the committee were all present,
either in person or by proxy, thereby
assuming responsibilities that were
unwarranted and acting with preju-
dice for the Pratt faction.
The convention would not submit
to such action and organized with
Phillips and Decatur, admitting the
Decker delegates from Cheyenne,
which gave a majority of the votes of
the legally elected delegates.
It is true that the cOntesting dele
cation from Norton was admitted on
credentials, but this was because the
regularly elected delegates from that
county, as from Rawlins, refused to
submit credentials, and their pres
ence had no effect upon the conven-
ton, for Decker was nominated by
Decatur and Cheyenne, the contest
ing delegates from Norton dividing
their votes between Decker and
w. H Pratt.
Those cOnversant with the facts
will not for a moment claim that the
Norton contestants had any right in
the convention, and our claim is,
and the fact bears out the assertion.
that Decker received, by the motion
of John Bissell making his nomina-
ton unanimous, the votes of The le-
gally elected delegates in Phillips.
Decatur and Cheyenne counties, max
ing twenty-one to only fourteen legal
votes for Louis K. Pratt This being
true it follows that Decker received
the nomination fairly, and without
question at the Atwood convention.
What the result would have beer
had Louis K. Pratt's men come int
the convention with Norton .ant
!, Rawlins counties is a matter purely
of speculation.
In this we do not signify approva
Of the methods used at Atwood. w
fear that there were those at tina
= convention who forgot party in thei
= interest IN the man they supported
T We are only giving the facts which
seem to Justify the nomination of Nh
! Decker, and the placing Of his nam
! at the head of our columns.
= We have not been hasty in thi
matter. We have studied both side
, Of the question, and while we fin
= much heat to condemn, much passio
~ OF which to disapprove. the logic c
IS facts and the good Of the party aIik.
e point to the name OF Samuel D. Deel
he er as that of the nominee of the il
dIclaI convention. - OberIin Eye.