Mexico weekly ledger., 1892-05-19
Congressional Committee.
ITS ACTION AT MosTGoMRRy CITY
sEyERELY CRITICISED.
The Basis Of Representation Made on
the State Vote OF 1880 Instead
Of the National Yete of 1883
Mich Complaint.

To the Editor OF the Ledger.
MEXICO, No., May 18.--The ac-
ton of the Congressional Commit
tee at Montgomery City on the 18th
in making the vote of Judge CAN'T
in 1890 the basis of representation
is severely criticised and condemned
by all honest, fair-minded men.
The Democratic State Central Com
mittee, in fixing the basis Of repre-
sentation TO the Jefferson City con-
vention 10 nominate State officers,
to st. Louis TO nominate Judges of
the Supreme Court, to Hannibal
and Kansas City to nominate Judges
for Court Of Appeals and to Sedalia
to select delegates to the National
Convention at Chicago, put the basis
OF representation upon the vote cast
for Cleveland for President in 1898.
Why did the committee do this ?
Because it is well known to every
thinking man that during a Presi-
Dental canvass a full vote of the
Democrats is polled and it is the on
ly fair test of getting at the strength
of the party in any given county.
In looking at the vote cast by Au-
drain for Cleveland for President in
1888 and the vote of Audrain cast
for CAN'T for Judge in 1890 it will be
found that Audrain cast for Cleve-
land
For President in 1888 .3le votes
A difference OF. s1s votes
Pike cast for Cleveland in 1883 ........ 1888 votes
Pike cast for CAN'T for Judge in 1880 ,395 votes
A difference Is votes
Rails east for Cleveland in 1888 49,. 1912 votes
Rails cast for CAN'T for Judge in 1880 1873 votes
A difference OF. .........--...... 1g votes
st Charles cast for Cleveland in 1888 zs1 votes
st Charles cast forGantt forJudge 1890 225s votes
A difference of .Iss votes
The action of the Congressional
Committee in making the CAN'T
vote the basis, contrary to the pre-
cedent of the State Central Commit
tee, the highest committee in the
State, takes from Audrain in the
Congressional Convention two votes,
from Pike one vote, Rails one vote
and from st. Charles one vote.
Now, [ ask in all good conscience
and fairness, why this was done?
In whose interest was it done? 1t
takes three votes from Pike and
Audrain - already instructed for
Clark-and one from a county
st. Charles, concededto Norton, and
one from Rails, which has not YET
spoken. 1 ask the loyal Democrats
of this county, who have ever beer
true to their party, if this is right
Is it right for a set of men who hap
pen to hold the office of Contra
Committeeman to meet together ane
deny S3S of our Democratic voters
the right of representation in nomi
mating a candidate for Congressi
The Observation-Disclosures on the par
of this committee toward the S3s
Democratic voters in this distric'
ought to and will be denounced by
every honest Democrat in the dis
trict.
They will tell you in justification
of their action that they have a pre-
cedent for it. Was this pre-.
cedent made by the Democratic
voters? No. Let the Democrats O
this District establish a prece
dent, based on the right, whicl
can never be overridden by de
signing men. When anyone doe
you a fragrant wrong and yol
complain and he says "Smitl
did you the same wrong, - doestha
Justify the party who did you thu
wrong2 mol Mol Did the Stat,
Central Democratic Committee com
posed of the ablest and best men il
our party, set them the precedent
No! mol
The Democrats of this county
knowing their rights, ought to a
once arise in their might and pas
resolutions denouncing this uni us