The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1900-05-14
WHO'S TO BLAME?
Another Chapter in the Sixth
District Fusion Middle.
Secretary MOrphy Holds FULLY
Scott Responsible.
WAS FAIRLY BEATEN.
Asked POpulist Congressional
Convention For Nomination.
Claims That DIR. Dykes Is in
Better Position.
WAS FAIRLY BEATEN.

The congressional contest in the Sixth
district between the Populists and DEM
ocrats is growing more interesting to
the politicians as time passes. Some
times the statement is made that the
Democrats are responsible; other Incl
dents transpire in which the blame is
attached to the Populists. The workings
by which the existing conditions were
brought about have never been made
public until this time, when in the fol-
lowing statement, James w. Morphy,
chairman of the Populist conference
committees, gives a full statement, one
of the striking features of which is the
fact that Tully Scott, appeared in the
Populist convention as a candidate for
the nomination, and that DR.. Dykes will
pay for all the printing if Scott will
submit to a primary election. Mr..
Morphy says:
THE Populists of the Sixth district
have felt that it was not the part of
wisdom to burden the people of the state
with stories of their tribulations in their
present disagreement with the Demo-
Gratis but so many stories of what has
happened in connection with Sixth dis
trict conventions have been printed that
is now seems advisable to give the facts
from our side 1 was chairman OF the
POpuliSt conference committee, wrote
all Oh the IGpOTLS Oh Iildl committee anu
presented them to the convention.
will also state that as secretary Of the
congressional committee I now have
those reports as well as the records of
the convention before me.
The Democratic convention met April
3, adopted a platform, expressed
preference for Tully Scott and named
conference committee of one from each
county with an expressed view of get
ting together on one candidate. The
Populist convention met the next day
and after an extended discussion named
a similar committee. The Democrats,
through Tully Scott, Populist delegate,
reported their action in writing but
made no mention of any action relative
to an agreement upon a candidate The
objection to the appointment of con-
ference committee in the POpuliSt con-
Vention was based on the ground that 1t
would be foolish to name such a COM
mittee when the other fellows had agreed
upon a man as their choice and we had
no means of knowing which one of the
seven candidates before our convention
would be our choice. Mr.. Scott might
have been named in our convention
which would have obviated any neces-
sity for such committee. Prior to the
appointment OF the conference commit
tee a committee of five was named to
meet with the Democrats and find out
what they wanted.
subsequently an informal ballot was
taken to ascertain the man the PopuliSts
wanted Nominations were regularly
made, Tully Scott and DR.. Dykes names
being presented together with those OF
five other persons. Afterward speeches
were made by the nominees. Mr.. Scott
appeared and spoke at length in his own
interest. In this connection it is proper
! to state that the mere fact that Mr..
| ScOtt'S name was presented in our con-
/ VentiOn did not bind him to abide by the
result but when he came to our conven-
ton and spoke in his own behalf he GER
| tainly entered it as candidate the
| same as the others and was morally
/ bound as they were to abide by the re-
suit It is also proper to state that DR..
| Dykes did not enter his name in the
| Democratic convention in any way or in
any sense.
1.-The. committee of inquiry reported
| similar to the Democratic committee
and such a committee was named. This
| committee later reported that the Dem
| Ocratic proposition was to take the NOM
| inee for congress and give to the Popu-
| lists the nominees for the legislature in
| all of the districts except Ellis county
| The latter was excepted because the
| Democratic vote was larger there thar
| the Populist vote. The Populists con-
| tended that this was a good theory tC
go on in the district and as they greatly
| outnumbered the Democrats that they
| should have the nominee. They also
asked for a statement as to where a dis
trict could be found in the United States
where conditions were reversed, where
the POpulistS had ever been given the
right to name the fusion candidate.
TT was then suggested that the com.
mittee be instructed to return to the
| Democratic committee and suggest tha'
the Democrats endorse the Populis
! nominee and that as far as possible thI
Democrats be given the members of thu
! legislature. This suggestion was adopt
| ed and four informal ballots were taken
There were 120 delegates and 81 VOtei
| were necessary to q choice. DR.. Dykes
| -cAa on 11nr pCnppfiWp ballots
follows: 40, 55. go and rs. Mr. Scotti
vote was as follows: 49, 40, Al and 80
It viii be noted that on the third ballo
DIR. Sykes had majority of the vote
cast one delegate having refrained iron
voting but in order that there might b
no question about his right to the CLAIM
to be the choice of the convention an
| other ballot was ordered with the re
suit that he had a majority of 80 vote
or two to one and II votes more tina
were necessary to a choice.
1.-The conference committees again re
sumed their sessions. The second repoT
recites that the proposition to give tn
| Democrats members of the legislature
the Populists to have the congressman
7 ! was voted down by the Democrat
committee. The report then speaks 20
itself and says: The question of wheth
er any other PopuliSt nominee for cor
gress might be acceptable was submit
ted at the suggestion of the chairma
Z of the Democratic conference commit
4 tee A vote was then taken and tn
: proposition carried but the name of n
Y Populist was given. Further discussio
It on the subject followed. A vote was Ia
ken on the proposition to go back to OIL
= delegation and ask that another Popl
4 list be named, the vote being equally d
y vided The report closes with AN az
Z acknowledgement of courteous treatm =
II and with regrets that we had been Ill
h able to agree
e Now on the last proposition, althoug
> the counties were equally divided, Il
"a counties voting no had 70 votes in Il
81 convention and it would be useless
l. submit the proposition under these eli
D cumstances as each committeeman hs
instructions from the delegates he rel
resented.
le ''AlI of these committee reports we
read to both committees before bei1