The Kalispell bee. [volume] (Kalispell, Mont.) 1900-192?, 1900-09-18

II. Moore. The motion was promptly
seconded, but the genial Colonel had no
notion Of allowing himself to be deprived
Of the craftsmanship, so he ignored that
motion entirely and put one by Jack
Graves to adopt the report and declared
it carried in spite of the chorus of noes"
which greeted it. 1t was as raw an ex-
hibition of unfairness and seltshness as
was ever seen. 1t would not have been
SO glaring had Moore himself not been
party to the contest. Common decency
demanded that he let someone else sub
NIT the motion to substitute Burnes for
but he not only did not put the
motion at all but declared his own cleo
tion when there was abundant room to
doubt it, There will probably be more
democratic conventions in Flathead
county, but it is to be hoped that they
will not be presided over by such petty
spirit as occupied the chairin Saturdays
gathering. There we're signs of revolt at
once and when nominations for members
of the legislature were called for, Dele
gate Small arose and suggested that
inasmuch as the chairman showed no
disposition to act with the fairness
which common honor demanded of him,
that he be allowed to transact the bust
ness of the convention himself and let
the delegates go home. Having thus
expressed himself, Mr.. Small left the
courtroom, followed by several other
delegates. Delegate McKisson suggested
that the chairman pull the slate out of
his pocket and name the legislative
nominees and save the delegates the
trouble of balloting. The chairman
gravely declared the suggestions of Del
egates Small and McKisson as CLEARLY
out of order" and renewed the demand
for nominations after the uproar had
subsided little.
Major Baldwin nominated j. c. Ed
wards, but Mr.. Edwards, being free of
Clark influences, was not in it for mo-
ment, receiving but 18 votes.
Thos. Lee nominated VIM. G. Fitzpat
rick, and Mr.. Fitzpatrick, having the
necessary qualifications, was made one
of the elect. So were Tom Long and M.
J. Brown. Other nominees were A. j.
Burnes and A. d. Duncan. Mr. Duncan
got but seven votes.
Mr.. Burnes absolutely declined the
nomination, saying that the whole thing
was cut and dried that pledges and
promises had been broken; that he was
not dominated by money, and such
being the case, he would be wholly out
of place on Clark Legislative ticket
such as it was the apparent intention of
the convention to nominate.
Mr.. Burnes' remarks were received
with thunderous applause by the spec
tators. The chances of that Legislative
ticket in the election this fall are about
as good as Clark's chance to get into the
senate.
The names of the successful ones
were all printed on the same ballot. re
all intents and purposes the ballot might
as well have read: I'VE endorse the use
of money for the purchase of Legislative
votes and pledge our unwavering sup
port to w. A. Clark as long as his barrel
holds out"
1t is asserted on good authority that
the legislative ticket chosen cost Clark
close to $4,000 at the primaries and in
the convention. On that basis it will
probably cost him s15O,OOO to elect the
nominees.
After the legislative ticket had been
fixed to the satisfaction of those in
charge of the Clark barrel, the conven
ton proceeded to nominate county
ticket. Sheriff was first on the list, and
John Gravelle was placed in nomination
by A. j. King. T. G. Hand was nomi
mated by G. d. Morton and w. d. Trout
was nominated by d. r. Peeler. There
were 1O1 votes in the entire convention
but the ballot for sheriff disclosed lO4
OF these Mr.. Hand received 53, Mr.. Ora
velle 46 and Mr.. Trout 5. It was appar
ent that there was skullduggery some
where, for if the extra three votes hae
been taken from the vote for Hand, non'
of the candidates would have received ;
majority of all the votes cast. But ;
little thing like that did not faze Chair
man Moore. He announced that as tn
throwing out of the extra ballots woult
not change the result he would declar