The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1904-07-06

! but others say that proposition made
by one of the Pennsylvania leaders is
quite fair.
Proposed by Pennsylvania
1t is said after the action of Penn
sylvania last night number of the
delegation held conference with some
of the. anti-Parker leaders and said
that Pennsylvania, notwithstanding
the Endorsement of Parker, would
give sixty-eig votes to any Eastern
candidate, with the exception of
Hearst, upon whom the opposition
could concentrate with enough pledged
votes, which, with the sixty-eight
votes of Pennsylvania, would make
the necessary one-third votes. Among
the candidates mentioned as satisfac-
tory were Pattison, of Pennsylvania;
German, of Maryland; Gray, of Della
ware; Harmon, of Ohio; Olney, of
Massachusetts. and Coler, of New
York Upon this proposition some Of
the anti-Parker men have been work
Ing with chances of success.
Opposition Without Unity
Union of the opposition to Parker
is apparently impossible. Hearst
cannot transfer his delegates and his
supporters cannot promise the in
structed and pledged Hearst men for
running. Massachusetts will give no
indication or pledge of her delegates
beyond Olney. The same is true of
Wall in Wisconsin, Harmon in Ohio,
and Cockrell in Missouri although it
is supposed that Missouri would go to
German should there be an opportu-
nifty The German men in West Vir-
GINA, Maryland and the District of
Columbia prefer Parker to uncertainty,
and are chafing under the restraint
imposed upon them by the venerable
Henry G. Davis,swho clings to the hope
that something may turn favorable to
German.
kinds the Parker opposition has hung
its hopes, while the Parker men have
been moving for weeks with calm as
suranee to other matters connected
with the convention.
Former Gov. Smith, of New Jersey,
who has been holding his delegation in
the leash while it was anxious to go
to Parker, said that Parker would be
nominated unless the disagreement
over the platform should drive some
state delegations from New Yorks
candidate.
Bailey VS.. Bryan
A story was current that David B.
Hill, flushed with the fruits of victory,
would undertake to force upon the OPP
position a platform so radical that
some of the Southern delegations would
break away from New York's candi-
date But the illusion was dispelled.
1t was tonight learned that Hill would
not be chairman of the resolutions
committee, but that John A. Mcmahon,
of Ohio, or Senator Bailey, of Texas,
would be, and that Bailey had been
selected to cross swords with w ].
Bryan in the debate over the platform
on the floor of the convention.
None the less the efforts of the anti
Parker men have been directed to
preventing a stampede of delegations
bound by instructions or otherwise. 1t
is the rank and file that is pressing
for band-wagon seats; and while the
anti-Parker leaders speak disparaging-
ly of the men who are so anxious to be
on the winning side, they are aware
that these delegates cannot be held
together very long in face CT the COM
pact Parker forces, with an almost
solid South, New York and Pennsyl-
vania for him, as well as delegates in
many other sections. It is very diff
cult to convince the average delegate
how Parker can be defeated under
these conditions, and he is anxious to
participate in the nomination of a sue
cessfui candidate.
An interesting feature of the days