The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-06-23
AUTHORITY For THE BOLT.

Commenting on the action of part
of the Utah delegation to tho st. Louis
convention in boiling, Friday last The
Herald said:
The action of the Utah delegation to
the st. Louis convention will be more
or less of a disappointment to the Re-
publicans in the. state. They are all
for silver. but it is not at all certain
that they are all in favor of a bolt.
The convention which elected them
gave them no instructions upon the
question, and the absence of any such
instructions can only be construed as
being against a bolt. Their case is
entirely different from that of the Colo
RADIO delegation. 1t was instructed to
follow whatever course Senator Teller
deemed best.
Our morning contemporary contro-
vened our position. declaring it unten-
able. 1t said:
Our morning contemporary affects TO
believe that Messrs. Cannon, Allen and
kearns did wrong in Withdrawing from
the convention; that they rightly
should have remained and submitted
the matter to their constituents, as
they were Simply representing the Re
publicans of Utah and they had no in
structions to draw out of the conven-
ton in case they, in their judgment,
thought ii best to do so. When the
Republicans Of Utah elected them dele
gates to st. Louis without instructions,
they did it with the full understand
ing that those gentlemen should do
what they thought was best to do in
that convention, and, to show how I'M
tenable is the position of our contem-
porary, we have but to make an ap-
plication in another way
If there is any one entitled to speak
authoritatively on the rights and duties
of a state delegation to a national con-
vention, it is the party's national COM
mitteeman. He is supposed to know
the law and ethics governing his party
and his dictum is generally accepted
as correct.
The Republican national committee
man for Utah is Mr.. o. j. Salisbury
He was at the st. Louis convention
and was perfectly familiar with all
that transpired there and the reasons
which prompted the boiling delegates
to do as they did. He has returned to
Utah and has been interviewed upon
the bolt of Nessrs. Cannon, Allen and
Kearns. Asked if he approved the bolt.
he said mo" and gave his reasons for
his disapproval as follows:
No Before left here and after
reached ST. Louis ! advised against
such step by the Utah delegation
The Colorado delegates having been in
structed to follow Senator Teller, and
he having been given authority to do
whatev seemed to him best, were JUS
tilted in boiling. The Utah delegation
had no such privilege. The state con-
vention which selected them gave them
no instructions. 1t was absolutely
silent upon the question. That being
the case, l argued that the party sent
its delegates there to represent it and
1 to make the strongest fight they could
! for silver in the convention, but not to
leave Utah without its due representa-
ton in that body. The party here may
and doubtless viii, approve the course
of Senator Cannon, Congressman Allen
/ and Delegate Kearns in leaving the
hall, but If it should not they would
be placed in the attitude of having
been recreant TO a trust. Hence in the
absence of explicit instructions, l adj
vised the delegates to remain in the
convention, and would have done so
myself had l been a delegate. MIR Nc
Cornick took the same stand that l did
and while proclaiming his fidelity to
silver, decided that it was his duty to
remain in the convention. Colonel
Trumbo took practically the same view
of the situation. He announced that
he could support neither Mckinley nor
the platform. Senator Brown was the
only one of the original delegates, to
my knowledge, who proclaimed himself
ready and willing to support the ticket
and the platform.
Mr. Salisbury takes exactly the
same position that The Herald did.
While the Utah seceders had good
cause for boiling, they had no author
ity for boiling.