The Delta independent., 1889-01-29
Communication.
Delta. Colorado. Jan. 18th. 1889.

Delta, Colorado. Jan. 18th. 1889.
EDIroa DELTA INDEPENDENT.
| had written this answer for Yeoman
some weeks ago and laid il away until Mr..
Ell. Wilcott would te e.ected u. s. Senator
OF the D. & r. G. and by the earnes: assist.
ance of Representative Chattield, shose cleo
tion Yeoman think quite unwittingiy labor
ed to accomplish.
Time, the great arbitor has proven what
ought TO have been foreseen, even by - feo-
boy, that Il vote for Chattield WAS vote for
Wolcott.
Let us proceed to analyze some efthc loose
filings at the u. 5. Party made by feoman.
lie says: Some weeks go a carl was publish
ed signed by half dozen U. L. men, denying
that they got word from headquarters to cast
heir vote for Bell tor Dist. Judge; then he
ssys there must surely be a mistake about
this somewhere for prominent, U. l.. man
told him that committee ofthe party waited
on Mr.. Bell and found he was all right and
sent Instructions to the others TO cast their
votes for Bell and further more, he says, their
actions talk palmer than their words, for out
of the ten U. l.. votes cast at this precinct
Paonia 9were for Bell and 3were for Hooper.
Now, whether yeom1n intends it or not, he
uses the word instruction in the sense and
definition of n mandate or command, and for
the sake of further instruction as 10 the cor
rectness of his SO using it. | will for the sole
purpose Of information put down SO against
s. Of his, that the prominent U. l.. man he
conversed with, did not and will not tell him,
or any one else that the U. L. vote was sictat-
ed by orders from any person or persons.
Next Yeoman concludes and insnuates that
our actous-our voting contradict our own
words, and is sufficient proof that We did
receive orders to vote for Bell simply be
cause nearly all votes were cast tor Bell
submit that kind of logic might do for 4
Yso-boy but not for a Yeo-man.
We are indeed quite surprised at such an
attack from Yeonian, for we kindly renem-
ber the stalrart way in which he promptly
volunteered, au able defense of a U. l.. Prin-
cipal, against an attack made upon it by
Hoosier, about year ago. He stated then
that we were right-that the principle was
progressive &c. But alas, itseems that when
the old party la.hes were popping on the eve
of election and the whoop-em up hrrders were
saving the air with frantic gesture and loud
velpinrs, II rather bewildered the young
mans political senses he forgot the progressive
idea and dropped back into the state OF in
nocuous desutude.
II any one feels that the U. L. p. wrong
fully took sides or intends to take sides with
one of the old parties to down the other one,
trust they will at last see their mistake.
We iore<sw that the young party was not
strong enough to elect men OF its own ranks,
but could be a balance Of power to elect some
of second choice in the old parties who not so
yenomous and iniolerant toward us, but
cherish hope and sympathy for the political
reforms we advocate. This kind of selection
was difficult TO make satisfactory to all the
members of our own party. mot TO speak OF
the dieus; Of some in the old parties.) But
We succeeded very well in satisfying each
other in our agreement. among ourselves As
to whom We would thus support. II ieoman
still thinks we were ordered TO vote for any
one, let him question anu cross question that
one L. L. voter al Paonia who did not To:e
for Bell aud get him to tell all about the
pressure aud party lash, II any, that they
think was used to make nina or any U. L.
man vote contrary TO his best Judgment.
Yeoman finally weakens his own insinua-
tions and conclusion when he repeats the
fact that Hooper. the Democrat candidate for
representative got OF those L. L. vote; Tor it
was not even charged by any ono that the
labor party got word from any body to vote
Tor Hooper.
1t was supposed that every anti-monopolisi
and granger and hear that yeoman claimed
TO be one in the state would be likely TO vote
for wolcot, for U. 5. Senator and it was we'll
known that Hooper's opponent tor the Lesisla-
,ure, Mr.. Chatheld. was stumpinc the state
the same as Wolcott and for the same ticket.
Time has proven we were right consistent
for last week Mr.. Chatfeld made haste to
record his vote for Woloott in caucus from
which he might have been absent if he bad
wished to save some Of his supporters from sad
disappointment, who had voted for him, with
the inconsistent hope that he wa. anti-Wol-
colt and snti-monopoly.
In conclusion. we are even yet inclined TO
cons,rue this scatter-gun shot from yeonisn,
as kindly wsrnng-a sort of random shot
jus, to keep US from falling asleep on our
skermish line of earnest political reform.
UNION LABOR.