St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-06-12

cause he hated Harrison. These three
men are against Harrison and they can
hurt him.
These men who have been mentioned
were not. strictly speaking, Blaine men.
They were anti-HarrisOn men. "Any-
thing to beat Harrison was their Shib-
boleth. But the positive Blaine men,
the men who stood py Blaine because
they love him, and who could not be
turned to any other candidate to beat
Harrison, are just as bitter toward the
president as are the first mentioned.
WoIcOtt's Bitterness.
Wolcott, of Colorado, is one of these.
A little incident of the convention indi-
Gates how these men stand. When the
ballot had progressed until Harrison had
enough votes TO nominate, Mckinley
moved to suspend the rules and nOmi-
nate Harrison by reclamation. Wolcott
and NJ. Ii. De Young were among the
scores that shouted against it. Old Joe
Cannon came around to Wolcott and
said:
Now. see here, Wolcott, let's make
this thing unanimous and end the con-
Vention tremendously
"You 60 to Ill.," was the Colorado
mans conciliatOrY answer.
After the roll of states had been called
and all the votes had been recorded, a
GLOBE man asked Senator WOlcottif he
and his followers would vote to make
the nomina ton unanimous.
Never" he said, and he seemed to
mean it.
That indicates that the breach exists.
And it is remarkable to find men in a
convention who boldly declare, after
the nomination has been made, that
they will not vote to make the nolnina-
ton unanimous.
The convention was remarkable in
its makeup. When has a convention
assembled with so few of the men who
are called great, for want Of more eX-
plicit term, numbered on its rolls? How
many of these delegates were known.
even by name, to the American public.
familiar with the names of all prOmi-
| nent:men? 70 be sure, there Depew and
| Clarkson and Plat and Warner Miller
and Quay and ingalls, and Lew Wallace
and Foraker and Malone and Mckinley
| ten men out Of 900 whose names have
| been before the people as leaders Of the
party. Where were the senators and
| orators, the giants of debate and the
masters of politics who are supposed to
| find opportunities for increasing their
| fame in national conventions? They
|
| of the battle that was fought.
No Striking OratOry.
/ And from these prominent men who
were here how little was heard. Peo-
! pie go to national convention to hear
orators. They expect to listen to the
| voices that have reSounded through the
halls of congress and have had an in
fiuence in moiding the history of the
| q q
exceptions. Depew spoke, and SO
did Mckinley - these two out
of all the orators supposed to
exist in the Republican party
and supposed to lift their voices in its
behalf. Miller said little, but it was
commonplace and deserves no place i'll
the summary of the oratory of the occa-
sion. The other names that have been
mentioned are not those of orators.
They were in the convention in place
of the orators. The manager of the
machines were they, and that was why
they were IL Minneapolis, yet it is
claimed that the Republican party is
not a machine party. ingalls, and Fora
ker, the two greatest orators in all
the gathering, were as quiet as the
grave. ingalls, never raised his voice
but once. and then it was to merely an
nounce the choice of his delegation fol
chairman of the delegation. Foraker
spoke enough to record his vote moth
ing more. The spectators crowded the
building at each session, eager to heal
these iugglers of words ''cut loose
But the orators slid into the hall quietly
as the obscurest delegate from Alaska
and took thier seats. Ever after they
preserved silence.
1t was disappointing, but 1t was re
nlarkable.
Still another noticeable feature was
the impotency of the men who have
controlled politics in their respective
states that have come to be looked upor
as men who cannot fail. They came Il