Barbour County index. [volume] (Medicine Lodge, Kan.) 1880-current, 1896-08-26
he DIDN'T WEAR a NEcK-rIE.

4
In the language of our gold bug con-
| gresham. this very peculiar cam
paign.D It seems that there re sever
al 'peculiarities'' about the g. o. D..
cruciixion OF Chief Justice David Mar
| tin and one of them is that he persist
emily refused to wear a neck-tie and
thus according to the g. o. p. poIitl-
cians) disgraees the republican party,
| the state of Kansas as well as the en-
mine of the bench. Since when has it
come to pass that man can not proper
ly represent the people of the great
wearing a neck-tie? By whose decree
are the affairs of state to be managed
by Ward McAllister or, forsoCth, the
| fashions of Paris? How will it inure
| to the benefit of mankind to admins
ter the government by dudes and arts
tOcrats instead of men with brains and
common sense? Do the people of Kan
| sas believe that an ofiiceholder must be
bedecked with all the latest frilis of
fashions invention to maintain the
dignity of the state? We hardly think
that the majority do but the republl-
cans, as party, do. Anything that
has tendency to 90 little farther from
the masses and little nearer to the
classeS-the wealthy classes-iS modern
republicanism. The turning down of
Chief Justice Martin because he is too
plain and common in his habits, dress
and personal bearing as we'll as his
honesty and independence, is in per-
feet harmony with other republican
Improve ments." That these were
the reasons for Martins defeat cannot
be successfully denied; the secret was
not given to the public by Populist
but by repubhcan-one that is en-
Enthusiastically supporting the entire re-
publican ticket and Therefore he has
no bias in the matter. After the re-
publican ticket was nominated at To-
peka the reporter of the Wichita Eagle
instituted an inquiry as to why David
Martin was defeated. Some, of course,
said it was because of his radical free
silver views and others said it was be-
cause Of his decision In the equity-re-
demption act, but the following is the
strong argument t?) published in the
Eagle of August 18th, by "Ginrai'
Hughes; and Hughes is one of the big
guns IN republican councils:
"A wellknOwn friend of the admins
Acknowledgement f. II. Hughes-told
the Eagle correspondent that David
Martin ought to have been defeated.
He did not exactly object to the chief
justice on the ground of his financial
views, but he objected to him for rea-
sons equally logical. His objection to
Justice Martin was that he never wore
neck-tie The fact is that Justice
Martin was never known to wear a
neck-tie. He wears clean shirt and
scent brass collar button. but the
poor old man never wears a neck tie.
He ought to wear neck-tie. How can
any chief justice decide a case who
does not wear neck The people
of Kansas who never did believe In a
chief justice talking through his hat
think that he should wear necktle to
talk through when he is passing on a
great judicial question that is of inter-
est to the public. General Hughes,
with great deal of indignation, told
the Eagle man that when Mrs. Chad
Brown, most delightful ard amiable
lady, gave a reception in honor ofJudge
Martin, the chief justice attended it
without wearing a necktie. There is no
evidence that Mrs. Brown, wife of the
clerk of the supreme court, shared in
the objections Of Major Hughes, the
court martialed commander of the
army of Kansas, nice fellow and
brave man, because the Eagle CORE
spondent learned that in the goodness
of true woman's heart she wept over
the crucifiX of the chief justice when he
was defeated for the nomination. The
| necktie business is purely a question
| between the sweet heart of Mrs. Brown
the heart that knows more than the
| head of the man-and the ethical code
of the militia of the state of Kansas.
The defeat of Judge Martin should he
a warning to the barristers of the state
never to cultivate the habit of not
wearing necktie.''