Fergus County argus. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1886-1946, 1892-09-22
SOLD OUT.


nouncement of Mr.. Noble of his indie
pendent candidacy for the Office OF
sheriff, and to his card to the voters
OF the county. In doing So, however,
we do not in any sense endorse his
candidacy or admit anything which
he says concerning the illegality of Mr..
Burg's nomination. 1t has been evil
dent for some time that Mr.. Noble,
melted by the officers of the Johns
Sullivan-Scott company Qimited), has
intended to run as an independent
candidate, because it was announced
privately by the corporation thai
they would get him to enter as such il
possible, and he has been %caucusing
with them very closely for some time
past. From the reading of Mr.. Mobiles
card we were led 10 believe that his
certificate of nomination would be
signed by numerous staunch, time
tried Republicans" but we find that
almost the very reverse of that is
true OF the certificate. We are free to
admit that several of the signers OF
that instrument answer the descrip-
ton, but most of them do not. Be
sides, We had looked for thetaxpayers
of the county to be represented upon
his roll, but as a matter of fact not
one-half OF them appear upon the tax
list OF the county, and of the remain
der but two or three of them pay
taxes upon any considerable amount
of property. To be snre this is not to
the detriment of the signers, and we
do not refer to it for the purl ose OF
saying anything against them, but it
occurs to us that the independent can
didacy of a man for the important
office of sheriff should have some back
ing from the taxpayers OF the county
to siveit standing with hetaxpayers,
and this Mr.. Mobiles candidacy has
not. Then, too, it is known as a fact
that the best men whose names are
upon that paper will not vote for the
man whom they thus endorse, and
only signed the paper as an accommo-
dation to Mr.. Noble, much in the
same spirit that a delegate once NOM |
mated Gov" Brooks for commits |
sioner in 3 Democratic convention in
which he did not get a single vote.
Mr.. Mobiles card is ~disingenuous, if
not willfully intended to deceive. He
says: at was then of course the duty
of the chairman to order another bal
lot; this he refused to do, and de-
clared Charles A. Burg the nominee"
There he stops, and therein is his de-
ception, either willful or otherwise,
for the question of a majority being
required was raised by Mr.. G. W.
Cook, one of Mr.. Burg's strongest
supporters. A motion was then made |
by Mr.. Bower that the nomination be |
made by reclamation. This motion |
vas entertained and put by the chair, |
and carried by a vote of twenty-seven
to nineteen, several not voting upon |
either side of the question. Mr.. Burg
was declared the nominee by acclama-
ton without n dissenting voice. This
is the first time that we ever heard
the right OF a de~liberative body ques-
toned to do it's business in any way
it sees fit, in the absence of positive
rules to the contrary. 1t is a well es-
tablished principle OF parliamentary
law that every de~liberative body is
the master of it's own deliberations,
and a majority vote is always suffi-
cient to make a nomination or an
election by reclamation.
The true spirit OF Mr.. Mobiles card
is plain upon its face. 1t is intended
to be in the interest of Mr.. Sullivan.
The card breathes too much of the
spirit OF the editors of the Mud Geyser, |
not to have emanated from that
office. Mr.. Noble does not expect to
be elected as an independent. All he
asks is that "the ~betrayers of the will
of the party be rebuked by the cleo
ton Of Mr.. Sullivan. Republicans will
bear in mind that a ote for Mr.. Noble
will be in effect, as it is intended to be,
a vote for Sheriff Sullivan and his
private livery stable kept at the ex-
pense OF the county.
Mr.. Noble presumes a good deal on
the wishes of the people, considering
that he only received seven votes in
"A convention containing fifty-fve dele
gates; the vote for all candidates
being as follows: Burg, 90; Clary 16;
Noble, 4; Jackson.4, and Mason, 1.