The Green Forest tribune., 1900-05-24

out, alter UneSG unlmpOft2NG things were disposed of, two of us, Wade James and myself, are put on the important committee to select delegates to the state convention. Goudelock, how ever, was sent along as chairman to see that we did not go too far wrong.
 Three of us, Golden, Mccall and myself, were made the very important committee to selectdel- egates to the congressional and judicial conventions, and to select a senatorial committeeman.
 Are these facts, this nicety of choice in certain committees, at all significant? ? Did the Chair man know, before the convention convened, whom he would ap- point, and did not certain naem- bers of this committee know, be- fore they were appointed, that certain parties were to be put on the Central Committee
 Let us look again at the mem- bers of this new committee and see how nearly we have the old.
 1. Cooksey, of Carrollton.-A perfect gentleman but young and totally ignorant of the tricks of politics. Though he would al- ways want the right thing, his chance of always getting it would be meagre.
 2. c. c. Edmondson .-I do not know the gentleman, and hence do not know whether he will stand in" or not.
 3. c. M. Golden, of Eureka 1 first met Mr. Golden at the con- vention, and he impressed me fa- vorably. He opposed the 1 and IT there, and this makes us hope ful but, will he be constantly on the watch for ''snakes ??'' They sometimes bite when not suspect ed to be about.
 4. Claude Fuller.-One of the famous 17 and that settles his work on the committee.
 5. Granville Norris.-A mem- Der of the old committee.
 6. Reid Goudelock.-A mem- Der of the old committee.
 '. Joe Fancher.-An excellent young man, as far as 1 know, but does he not follow strictly the moral code ? and has he not read, "Children, obey your parents for this is the first commandment with promise ?''
 Again, has not the committee for the last two years, to all in- tents and purposes, been Fanch- CT, Norris and Goudelock ? Has it not been the custom of Fancher and Goudelock to secure enough proxies to give them control of the committee as completely as they had it of the late convention ? Did not J. P. Fancher insist on hav- ing Norris proxy for the "dying' meeting of the committee :? Was he not told that it had already been sent to T. H. Fancher Was it not agreed that, if, from any cause, fne written proxy failed to reach T. H. Fancher, Goudelocl1 was to write it out for J. P. Fan cher ? Why this intense, almost torturing anxiety ? The answer is vivid. If this proxy had not been there the vote for County Judge would have been recount ed. Ii this wedge had once been entered, 8 vigorous and, perhaps, successful effort would have been made to drive it to the bottom of those boxes. There were Demo- crats in the convention, and in all parts of the county who not only knew that those boxes contained the votes of people from Newton county, Missouri and other states, besides several hundred Republi- can votes, but they believed, and belive now that they contain q number of votes that were not counted as voted. Partially blind judges to inspect the ticket after it had been called and recorded were not altogether wanting.
 Ihad intended at the close of this article, to recapitulate and bring all the facts, as know them or. believe them to be facts, in brief review, but the article Is already