The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1896-08-26
HOW LOWE EXPLAINS 1T.
Why He Is For Fusion Now and
Wasn't In 1892.
Now POpulists IndOrse Demo.
Gratis and Their Principles.
Those Democrats, he Says, Who are
Critieizing Fusion Now Were
Loudest for It in 1892.

Judge ]. G. Lowe, who opposed the
fusion of the Democrats and Populists
in the Democratic convention in 1882
and has been making speeches for the
fusion ticket this year was asked by a
reporter as to how he reconciled his po-
sition this year with the one he occu-
pied in 1892. He replied:
There is no room for just compari-
sonny position is the same now, as
it was in 1892. I did not oppose but
favored fusion then as / support II
now, only denounced surrender then
expressed myself in favor of just such
fusion then as we have this year. Ny
self and friends then demanded the
electors and were willing to give the
Popuhsts the state ticket. BY a ma
jOrity vote of the convention surrender
was adopted and fusion defeated ThlS
year we have honorable fusion. In
1892 we had nothing, even surrendered
the organization. / opposed that as did
hundreds of loyal and true Democrats.
This difference in the position Occu-
pied by the Democracy of Kansas is
sufficient to influence the judgment of
q Kansas Democrat if there was Moth
ing else. Then I was an unwilling guest
at the political banquet forced by the
votes and action of those who today
condemn the action of the Democracy
My position then was perfectly consist
ent with what I am doing now. Be
sides the issues are different. Upon
the prevailing and paramount issue.
that issue upon which the contest must
be lost or won this fall both the Popu-
list and Democratic parties are in per
feet accord. Each OF the national and
state conventions having declared in
favor of a certain policy. That issue
overrides all others. 1t is now as
though all belonged to one political or
ganization. Men of different political
parties voting together to accomplish
one purpose
IN 1892 the platforms were widely
different upon many of the economic
questions. Now they are together and
with them many Republicans who can
not longer affiliate with that party be-
cause of it's attitude upon the main is
sue.
Il cannot object to having 119. 900
Populists and $4,000 Republicans vote
for Bryan and constitutional money L
presume that if there had been surren-
der, however disgraceful by the state
convention it would have proven en-
tirely satisfactory to those now criti-
ciZing the action of the convention as
such course was encouraged by them
in 1892 and have heard no expressions
of regret from them since. No; oc
cupy the same position I did in 1892.
We will get affirmative relief by having
Kansas ten electoral votes cast in the
electoral college for Bryan and Demo-
cratic principles whereas under the
unjustifiable action in 1892 they were
cast against the Democratic nominee
and Democratic principles and for the
Populist candidate and POpulistic ideas.
The difference is so apparent that any
thinking man VINO wants 10 can as
cover it. 1t requires no thought, only
an exercise of the memory.
The object of those who protested in
1892 was to have supported, Democrat
lie men and Democratic measures The
purpose of those now protesting is to
prevent the endorsement and support of
such. In 1892 the platform and nomi-
nees were always fully endorsed by the
dissenters, now both platform and men
are denounced in terms of bitterness
exceeding anything and everything
said by the Republican enemies In
fact the denunciation is so bitter as to
make Republican comment and critic
ism respectable. In 1892 the Democrat
&c party of the state was condemned
because by its action Democrats were
denied the right and privilege of sup
porting the Democratic platform and
nominees, now they are condemned
and censured because they are solicit
ted to do it. I think it is apparent from
this that my position is very consist
ent p"