Herald and news. [volume] (West Randolph, Vt.) 1878-1943, 1892-04-07
Interesting Correspondence between
Hiram Atkins and Thomas III. Chubb.

HIRAM AtklnS anu IHOmaS IL. (nuDD.
Montpelier, March 18th, 1892
Capt. Thomas III. Chubb, Post Mills, VT.
Dear Sir
You have a right to your own
opinion as to matters, but / submit that
when you tell people, as ] am informed
that you have done at st. Johnsbury, that
am "a Hill man and down ON Cleveland
you go farther than you are warranted in
doing by the facts. You have no more
reason for saying am Hill man, than |
have for saying that you favor the su-
premacy of the Devil IN the affairs of the
here and the hereafter. / am sorry Broth
er Chubb you have worked yourself up in
to such state of mind as you have, with
the internal affairs of the Democratic par
1 ty in this State After the thing is all
over you will fully realize that you sim
ply have had your labor for your pains.
The contest is very onesided, as will be
demonstrated when the convention meets.
| That is neither here nor there; my only
object in writing you is to ask that you
will not misrepresent me by sayingI that
| am a Hill man and opposed to Cleve-
| land. Yours truly,
HIRAM ATKINS.
Hiram Atkins, Esq, Dear SIR
Replying to your
communication Of the 29th inst, in which
you cOmpiuln Oh having De6n nllS-repre-
sented with reference to your choice for
the Presidential Nomination, beg to say,
that so far as can learn you have never
made your preference clearly understood,
either through your paper or in any other
way, and am led to infer from the he
peated assertions of those upon whom
| you seem to rely for your political
support, that you are lat heart in sympa-
thy with the Hill movement. II | am
misinformed will you kindly point out
to me a single line in your paper in which
you have ever clearly defined your posi-
ton, upon the subject of Presidential
Candidates. have looked in vain for an
unequivocal declaration of your personal
choice while your selected political asso-
ciates are generally proclaiming your feal-
ity to the Hill candidacy. Certainly your
communication herewith affords me no
light, in as much as your preference is not
definitely expressed. However, now the
nomination OF Mr.. Hill is out of the ques-
tion shall expect you to exhibit your u.s.
nal characteristic and vehemently pro-
claim that you. have been a consistent
supporter of Mr.. Cleveland. But evident
ly the main object of your letter was not
to define your position on Presidential
Candidates, but to warn me against med
ding with the internal affairs OF the Dem
oeratic Party in the State. This / know
to be in your estimation rank heresy and
confess to certain degree OF temerity,
in choosing to differ with you concerning
my right to criticise your management of
the party in the past few years.
For some time back | have noticed a
growing sentiment of dissatisfaction a
gainst you as the responsible head of the
organization in Vermont
No man was ever more Loyalty and faith
fully supported than you have been by the
Democracy. They have followed your
leadership with untiring devotion and
now at the end of long lease OF political
power what are the results? Instead OF
Vermont contributing to the grand dem
ocratic impetus which for the last ten
years has gained force in every Republic
can stronghold she has hesitated, SEEM
ingly, indifferent il not actually faltering
in the principles professed by her Democ-
racy. Men are now interested in looking |
for cause for such condition of affairs. |
Not "Mugwumps," not ''Sore- heads
not disappointed Office Seekers but those |
who have the best interests of the party at |
heart. Many of them were your active |
supporters only few years ago, and they |
seemingly have all arrived at the same |
conclusion, regarding at least one course. |
| will not charge you with being person |
ally responsible for the lethargy which |
has affected the party in the past, but do |
ask you in all sincerity If considering the |
wide spread dissatisfaction which is rap |
idly crystaliZing into open revolt and di- /
rected at you as the head of the party, ii /
is not your duty in the interest of harmo-
ny and for the welfare of the democracy |
to retire and give your influence and sup
port to some one on whom the party can |
unite.
In your letter you assume the move
ment against you is of little consequence.
In this beg to differ with you. 1 have
taken some pains to inform myself re-
garding the feeling entertained by the
- 49,,
and II ] had any doubts before, they have
been completely removed by the over
whelming sentiment / have discovered
that a change should be made in the
Craftsmanship of the State Committee.
Burlington is opposed to you with one or
two exceptions. Rutland has decided a.
gainst you. Colchester is not to your
credit, and il these were the only centers
of party activity and growth where con
demnation awaits you, it would be in my
estimation sufficient cause to arouse dis
trust of your future usefulness in the po-
sition you occupy.
claim, and believe that my course in
the past justifies the belief, that l have al
ways labored for the purposes aud priL-
ciples of the party In Vermont. 1t was
with this feeling that / sought personal
interview with you and endeavored TO i'm
press upon you the fact that in order to
allay dissensionss rapidly accumulating,
and for the future good of the party, as
whole you should retain your post OF hon
or as a member of the National Commit
tee and yield to some one free from the
antsgonisms of long party management,
the charge OF the party in the State. To.
this you turned a deaf ear apparently pre-
ferring to force personal issue with your
party, conclusion, which l regret and
which believe will not be justified by
future events. Yours Truly,
THos. II CHuRB
Post Mills, Apr. 5, '92.