The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-08-02
What's the Row About?

z + you would like to own n tempest
in a teapot, buy the daily editions
of the Butte Miner for last week.
dertook to brew one; its efforts are
worth taking account Of.
1t is all about what happened at the
recent meetings OF the state commit
tees. These met on the same day in
the same town. What took place has
been told by the Standard. and It can
easily be told again. but the Butte
newspaper wrangles as vigorously as
II the facts were a part Of ancient, uu-
written history.
When the state democratic committee
was I'm session. II received c~ommunica-
tons from the silver republican and
the populist committees proposing a
conference respecting the time and
place for holding the state conventions.
In the democratic committee was n
faction that promptly proposed to dis
regard these communications. 1t is a
faction that Is operating with the
Butte Miner against fusion-its spokes-
man moved to lay the communications
on the table. Had that motion pre-
vailed, all thought of fusion as far as
Montana democrats are concerned,
must have ended right then and there
and that IS what the men who pro-
posed to lay the communications on the
table wanted to accomplish.
But his faction proved to be a minor
ity OF the committee. Its majority or
dered a conference, as proposed by the
populists and the silver republicans.
A subcommittee was named. Before
this subcommittee finally vent out,
the democratic committee voted, for its
part. its choice OF time and place for
holding the state convention. Al
evening the democratic subcommittee
met delegates from the populist and
the silver republican committees-thc
democratic state committee was under
adjournment until the Subcommittee
might report.
In this conference there were nine
men-three democrats. three populists,
three silver republicans. There were
differences OF opinion among the nine
both as to time and place. Take the
question of place, for instance. The
populists preferred Butte, the silver re-
puhllcans were for Anaconda. Here WINS
a tie: the democrats cut II by voting
for Anaconda. Not for the holding OF
any one convention, mind you. but for
the three conventlons-the democrats
undertook TO settle that point Jointly
with the other two. Otherwise. what
on earth did they cit in the conference
for? What OF so-called courts
sy would IL have been 10 have refuse
TO talk or vote In a conference which
had nothing TO do except TO talk and
vote? In fact. the three democrats
both talked and voted: and the popI-
list convention comes TO Anaconda be-
cause the democrats were the balance
Of power in the conference. These nine
men settled time and place for holding
the three conventions, and the popu-
lists come to Anaconda IN the same day
with the Others not as a popullst frs
choice but because the vote of the three
democrats settled II that way and b.
cause the populist state committed
abided by the conference decision.
The case is simple enough, but th'
wiggling and twisting about IL is some
thing ridiculous. The Tin quotes Mr
Walter Cooper on the question. His in
terview says: "A communication from
the silver republicans was handed in Il
the chairman OF the democratic com
mittee while IL was in session, request
ing that a committee be appointed 4
confer With a like committee OF silNei
republicans ss TO the selection OF n
same date and place OF holding stat
conventions. Some democrats favored