Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1890-04-22
A PLEA FOR LOCAL DEMOCRACY.
A Suecinet Reply to Voter by a Second
Ward Democrat.

A succinct Reply to Voter by q Second
Ward Democrat.
To the Gazette.
We deem it necessary to answer the ar
ticle of ''Voter' mainly on account OF
his statement that the convention that
nominated Mr.. Bailey, was not Demo-
cratic convention.
We INDUCED IN no aspersions upon
Mr.. Pendleton's motives or De-
mocracy. We have always regarded
him as q square Democrat, and have al
ways been with him on all the ques-
lions of the day. We simply stated
facts, and left it to others to
Judge of Mr.. Pendleton IS motives.
Full many shaft at random sent
Has found marx the archer little meant
Voter has seen fit to cast reflection
upon ME- Bailey's Democracy, because
a gentleman in the nominating oonYen-
ton had been ga non-partisan and
rounaly denounced Mr.. Pendleton, y and
because some others who had been non
partisans or Independents were support
ing nIrI.
DoesSEoter remember that tYo' of the
most pesminent of the nonspartisans
we're made delegates by thesDemocratio
party toEIhe convention that nominated
Mr.. Pendleton? That oneS0f them was his
most onspicuous supparer in the con-
vention andpue Of hlsmost trus ted adj
visers and Berkers 1.-THE campaign, and
has, since ME- Pepdleton election, re-
ceiyed an Office 2a
Does not 'sater'' know that Mr.
Pendleton owSsis large majority partly
to the "noptlaFfisans, - who have come
back into DE Democratio ranks? Is it
treason tSSBemopeacy to receive into its
fold andsto Receptacle support and votes
of these who |have once opposed
it! Ear from BIT, ne welcome
all lEho hofSstly join US
and Aenestly oo-opeEate with US. One
wors as to Mr.. Esndleton' action
aba;at the appointments of his commit
tees We agree with Npter that he I'M
ddabtedly had the powsr and the right
III one sense, to appoinN and select his
;semmittees. But he Isl responsible for
Sffe proper exercise of shat power and
fright. If he was not in sympathy with
sMr. Bailey on the questioEo finance he
Fcould have readily appointed on the
s&fnance committee two other persons in
sympathy with his peculiar views (Which,
kR the way, no one ever heard of
tiAthe night of his appointment, and
no doubt, everything would have been
smooth and harmonious. We did not
say in our article, and do not say, as
tfVoter'' says of Mr.. Bailey, that Mr..
Pendleton' ''conduct was the height of
presumption. We concede to him an
honest purpose, though perhaps he acted
unwisely.
1t is unwritten law and the rule of
courtesy that a successful opponent
should accord to his meritorious competi-
tor a place of pro minence. Carlisle,
when he defeated Randall for the speak
ership, gave him the Craftsmanship of
one OF the most important committees in
the house. Cleveland gave Bayard who
was his opponent in the convention, the
position Of secretary of state. 1t is use
less to multiply instances.
Mr.. Bailey resigned and accepted re-
nomination. So did John c.. Calhoun,
when his self-respect forced him tn leave
Gen. Jackson IS cabinet. Ccnkllng re-
signed and left it to mis- constituents to
endorse him or not. Then how is Mr..
Bailey so ''ludiorous, foolish or pre-
sumptuous Mr.. Bailey and the
Fourth ward have illustrious precedents.
We have written more than we in
tended IN answer to the immaterial
points upon which 'fVoter' doubtless
hoped to invoke opposition TO Mr.. Bailey
The vital question for Democrats to-
day is whether or not Bailey is the NOM
inee of the Democratic party. t'VoteF'
asserted, andsthe friends of P5adleton,
many of whom were doubtless misin-
formed, asserted that the convention
that nominated Bailey was not g Demo-
cratic conyau ton.
On yesterday. five out of six Of the
members of the city Democratic exeeu-
tive comittee signed a paper indorsing
this convention as Democratic. The