The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1892-07-21
District Convention.
To the Editor Statesman:

Mr.. Cooper does an injustice to the
Travis delegation, L ask space to give
a brief statement of the other side.
Mr.. Cooper endeavors in advance to
nave 1t appear that the delegation
from Williamson was meek, lamb
like crowd, yielding everything, con-
tending for nothing, when contested
except when forced to do so by the
thirteen voters from Travis.
There was no contest over the tenn.
porary craftsmanship. A delegate
from Williamson was nominated by a
Travis delegate and elected temper
airy chairman.
In the committee on permanent or
ganization, of which Mr.. Cooper and
myself both were members, there was
no contest. Mr.. Parker of William
son. proposed Mr.. S. G. Sneed for
permanent chairman which was
unanimously agreed to by
the committee. Thus far
it is clear that the Williamson delega-
tion had not performed the yielding
act any more than had Travis. In adj
dition Mr.. Cooper was made perma-
nent secretary by the committee, but
l presume at his own request Mr..
PENIS name was substituted, to all of
which Travis cheerfully consented.
Had Mr.. Cooper remembered Mr..
Brooks fiery address, in which he
very impressively declared that he
would eat every Democrat who voted
for Mr.. Morris in Williamson county,"
he would not have claimed lamb-like
characteristics for his delegation.
With reference to the substitute Of
fered by Mr.. Parker for the resolution
offered by myself: When Mr.. Parker
offered his substitute 1 withdrew the
original resolution, and Mr.. Parker
withdrew his substitute and refused
to present it as an original PROPOSE
ton. Had he done so the Travis del
egation would have agreed to it and
given him the conference COM
mittee sought. My belief is
that both substitutes offered
fol the original resolution meant the
running in of dark horse, who may,
or may not, have been not far off,
with ten foot lightning rod attach
ed to his spinal column patiently
awaiting the expected shock.
My belief is that Williamson coun-
ty never hoped to nominate Mr.
Cochran. This belief is supported by
the following statement taken from
Mr.. Cooper's letter:
"Prior to the meeting of the conven-
ton the delegates from Williamson
county held a caucus and agreed if
Cochran could not be nominated that
they would vote for the nomination
of any acceptable man from Travis
county. The names of a. s. Walker,
A. H. Graham, d. w. Doome, A. nj.
Jackson, r. H. Ward and others
from Travis county were discussed in
this connection, either of whom
would have been accepted by our
delegation in case Cochran could not
be nominated
Now if they had hoped to nominate
Mr.. Cochran, why should they can
vas in advance of the meeting of the
convention and agree to support any
one of the above named gentlemen?
MY idea is that it was to defeat the
man for whom the Democrats of
Travis had expressed decided choice,
and to put in some one whom this
county did not want. Several
of the Williamson delegation were
asked if they had any objections
to Mr.. Morris. If my information is
correct none of them said they had.
When asked if they were willing to
compromise on Travis man, why
not compromise on Mr.. Morris, the an
swer was far away smile.
Travis county yielded to William
son four years ago, after balloting
about 760 times, and permitted Will
hanson to nominate her choice, not
withstandirg Williamson's candidate
was in the minority during all the
balloting.
Williamson was in the minority at
the last convention, but notwithstand-
ing that fact, she came up smiling,
ready, willing and anxious to dictate
again. The lack of success accounts
for the milk in the cocoanut.
Mr.. Cooper also accuses Mr.. Morris
with having directed the Travis dele
cation how to vote. Taking the dele
cation from Travis as whole, 1
think it was fair body of men who
generally do their own thinking
However much they may have
desired to nominate Mr.. Nor
ris, they would not have
permitted any dictation from him, and
I am sure he never sought to dictate to
them.
So far as 1 am informed, but one
member of the Travis delegation de-
sired to confer with Mr.. Morris prior
to the final vote on the resolutions Of
fered by myself. In the conference
with Mr.. Morris he was informed that
there was disposition to bring in a
dark horse, and was asked if he de-
sired to withdraw. He said that he
did not; that he had anticipated that
move for some days. He was asked if
the adoption of the resolution then
pending to indorse Mr.. Cochran and
himself and turn them both loose
would be satisfactory. He said it
would. That is all of the story.
Had Travis county followed the rule
which am informed obtains in all OF
Williamson county's Democratic con-
ventions and adopted the majority
rule, we could have nominated Mr..
Morris on the first ballot. Travis pre-
ferred to deal fairly, follow Demo-
cratic rules and precedents.
HENRY A. LINN.
Political Hypocricy.