Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1896-06-17
THE CONTESTED SEATS.
No Discrimination Made in Favor Of
MckinIeyite Delegates.

McKinIeyite Delegates.
St. Louis. Mo-, June 15.-An ANALYSIS
of the work Of the national committee
liz regard to the 1913 contests which were
originally filed with it, shows that 1876
cases were acted on: some of the original
number having been abandoned, while
several, notably those of Delaware and Il
portion of the Texas delegation, were
referred to the convention. In many
cases both contestants and contestees
were understood to be Mckinley men,
notably in all of the Mississippi and
South Carolina districts and in certain
districts from Tennessee, Virginia and
elsewhere. Of the 1876 claimants re-
jected by the committee 62 were avoWed
Mckinley men.
The impression which prevailed during
the consideration of these cases that the
committee wGs deciding a large majority
of the cases in favor of Mckinley doubt
less grew out of the fact that nearly all
of the states where there were a large
number of contests both the contestants
and the cOnteSteeS were avOwed Mckin-
ley men, and as a natural result, more
Mckinley men were necessarily given
seats than were anti-Mckinley men,
since in so many of the cases contestants
and contestees were, according to their
own statements, Mckinley men.
In New York three districts were con-
tested covering six delegates. Two of the
contests were decided in favor of the Nc
Kinley delegates and in the other district
both delegations were admitted, giving each
delegate a half vote.
In Pennsylvania there was a contest in
the Third district. The contesting delega-
tiOns were both admitted, each delegate
having half vote.
In Delaware the contest was referred to
the convention
In Virginia there were contests in the
Second, Third and Eighth districts. In the
Third and Eighth the contests were with
drawn, and in the Second both delegations
were admitted, each delegate being given
In North Carolina there was a contest in
the Sixth district. Both delegations were
admitted. each with a half vote.
In South Carolina there was contest in
each of the districts and as to the delegates
at large, covering eighteen votes. Both
the contestants and contestees were Nc
Kfnley men, the contests turning on the
difference between local factions. All the
contests were decided in favor Of the Web
ster faction.
In Georgia there were contests in three
OF the districts and as to two of the dele
gates at large, all of which were decided in
favor Of the Mckinley delegates:
ond district and as to the delegates at large.
The Mckinley delegates were accepted in
the Second district, also the Mckinley dele
the First district being rejected.
In Alabama there were contests in the
First E Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh,
large. The Fifth and Ninth districts were
decided against the Mckinley men. The
others seated were Mckinley men.
In California there were contests in the
Third and Fourth districts both of which
were decided in favor of the Mckinley
men.
In Mississippi there were contests in the
seven districts and as to the delegates at
large All were avowed Mckinley men,
the fight being between local factions The
Hill faction were successful, except IN the
Second, Third and Sixth districts.
Ia Louisiana there were contests In the