Mexico weekly ledger., 1892-07-21

winch tnefe was q disturbing ele-
ment. Pike and Audrain were
each clamoring for votes of which
they claimed they had been depriv-
ed by the Congressional Committee,
and they also wanted to be fairly
treated.
o. H. Avery stated that when a
political cyclone swept over the
country and the Democrats of Au-
drain and Pike failed to vote they
deprived themselves of their repre-
sentation in the following conven-
ton. An appeal was made to pay
some attention to 735 Democratic
petitioners from Crawford asking
that they have fair treatment.
Mr.. Whitecotton of Rails said
that while claiming to be nonpar-
tisan in this matter, until after he
heard the evidence, he was not salts
fed that there was not a scintilla of
evidence in favor of the regularity
of the Norton delegation.
Hon. G. Pittman Smith of Mont
gomery discussed the legality of the
meeting in Crawford County. He
said that in fact there was no legal
meeting in Crawford County. His
argument was a strong one in favor
of sending the whole matter back to
Crawford County for settlement.
MORE TIE VOTES.
Recess was taken till s O'Clock.
| On the reassembling of the conven-
ton the roll was called on the
minority report, which resulted in a
tie vote of 81 to 81, and it was de-
clared lost. The majority report
being the pending question the roll
was called and motion to adopt de-
clared lost by the same vote, 81 to
81, the Crawford delegation not vot-
ing on either proposition.
After a recess, F. FL. Faris, of
Crawford, offered a resolution refer
ring the matter to Crawford county
to be settled by a primary election
under the Australian system.
Mr.. Bell offered a substitute that
this convention adjourn, instructing
the committee to call a primary cleo
ton to be held under the Australian
system.
Mr.. Walker, of st. Charles, said
there was harder fighting among the
Democrats in Audrain than against
the Republicans in st. Charles.
An Audrain delegate said: "They
have nothing else to fight there"
Mr.. Walker, continuing said: "He
had now come to the conclusion that
Crawford was able to take care of
itselfin any convention. The repre-
sentation in this district was the
same that had been applied for years
and years without complaint. The
idea was absurd that because the
candidates claimed thirteen votes in
Audrain county the convention Or
district was bound by their claim.
They might with equal propriety
have claimed 100 votes, and then
Audrain could come to the conven-
ton andtake the nomination regard
less of the other counties in the dis
trict. II Mr.. Clark carried Craw-
ford by such an overwhelming ma
jority before why can he not do it
again. There were 100 on one side
and 4S0 on the other, nearly two to
one, and yet the Clark men were
not willing to go back and carry it
again."
G.. Pittman Smith said a primary
election, as a general thing, was the
proper thing, but this was a peculiar
case. Delegates could not stand
here day after day like boys. They
owed something to the Democracy
of the district as well as to the candi-
dates.
Nj. Ball said primary was Demo-
cratic and a majority should rule.
When a primary was held in the
district one of the candidates would
receive a majority. 1t would be I'M
fair to send it back to Crawford. If
it went back to Crawford, it would
dump the whole fight again into that