Barbour County index. [volume] (Medicine Lodge, Kan.) 1880-current, 1891-01-14

The report of the committee on Gre
dentials gives the following accredited
| delegates:
Arkansas-L H. Moore, J. E. Bryant, d. E.
Barker, l. p Langley.
Alabama-H. p. Bone, j. p r. Beck, B. w.
Grice.
Louisiana-J I. w. Hancock, T. s. Adams.
A. D. Lafargue. T. j. Guice.
Mississippi-J. H. Beeman, Frank Burkett,
w. s. McAllister, A. NJ Street.
Indiana-W. w. Briggs, Thomas w. Force.
Hlinois-M. l.. Crum, FL. NJ. Gilbert.
Mssouri-U. s. Hall, N j. Holland, j. G. A.
Hitler, L. Leonard, Ahiram Manring, j. w
Gray.
Georgia.. F. Livingston, w. l.. Peek, w.
A. Broughton, II. A. Wright, II. 3. TrammelI,
w. S. Copeland, A. O. Moody.
North Carolina-M. l.. Wood, S. q. Alexan.
der, Elias Carr, George Williamson, r. B.
Vance, E. A Nope.
South Carolina-J. W. Stokes, WI. TaIbert,
8. G. Latimer, j. L. Jarnfgan.
Texas-J NJ. Perdue, G. L. Clark, Samuel
Fl. Dickson, S. G. Dawes.
Colorada-W. s Store, f. III. Bruton.
Tennessee-J. p Buchanan, j. Fl. Mellow
ell, E. w. Wade, w. c. Ligbtfoot.
Maryland-Hugh Michel, J. w. Kerr.
Kansas-James Blakely, Frank McGrath, p.
| B. Maxon, D. II. Walker, Mrs. b. II. Glover, A.
| Terrell, j. NJ. Nesell, w. B. James.
Florida-B. F. Rogers, Thomas Hines, r.
| Turnbull, s. s. Harvey.
North Dakota-E. NJ. Sanford, Walter Muir.
South Dakota-H. L. Loucks, L. ID. Hinck
| ley, A. E. vandorn.
Kentucky-S. B. Irwin, NJ. d. Davis, w. I.
| Winn. p. H Haney.
| Pennsylvania-A. w. Knipper, III. G. Dem
| ming.
Michigan-A E. Cole, a. n. Howe. George
Northup.
Indian Territory--J. W. Stewart, r. G. Betty.
Virgina-Mann Page, q. 7. Barbee G. Chris
man, Robert Beverley.
West Virginia-D II. Houston, J. r. Cars
| kadon.
New York-D. F. Allen.
| Minnesota-E. w. Fish
To these must be added L. l. Polk,
president; b. H. Clover, vice-p president;
j. H. Turner, secretary, and six or eight
other officials entitled to vote, making
the total voting strength of the conven-
| ton about 100 So far as the sub-treas-
ury plan is concerned, the vote upon it
was almost unanimous in it's favor, as
will be seen from the following edito-
rial statement in the National Econ
omist:
One of the most gratifying results of the
| late National meeting was the adoption of
the sub treasury plan with but four dissent
/ ing votes After year of discussion from
every possible point of view, after all the
| rldicule ana cOntemptuouS treatment tt has
received from the hands of its opponents.
but four votes could be found against it In a
| convention that represented thirty five
| States. No better evidence is needed of the
! rapid advancement of economic education
among the people
| So far as the absurd report is con-
cerned, as set afioat by Democratic
! sheet down in Florida, that the Alliance
in the Northwest did not indorse the
sub-treasury bill, but that the delegates
from the Northwestern States voted for
the plan in order to induce the Southern
| delegates to indorse the call for the
formation of an Independent political
party, the following dispatch complete
| ly sets that report at rest;
| TOPEKA, Kan, Dec. i5.-The various prornf
nent Kansas Farmers Alliance men men.
| toned in last nights dispatches as hayins
| been concerned in plot TO disintegrate the
| Southern Democracy by supporting the sub
treaSu bill ct the recent Farmers AIliant
| convention laughed at the story to-day
| Aessrs Willetts, Chase and others said the,
voted for the sub-treasary bin because thsy
believed In 1t, and they have no apologies Il
make to their constituents for having 8,
| voted.
The sub-treasury plan will win upon
Its own merits. 1t is the most remark
able and benefcent financial reform
measure of the age, and those who op
pose 1t are simply bntting against ,
stone wall. GEORGE C. WARD.