The Indianapolis journal., 1904-05-13
CONVENTION IN BRIEF.


w. III. O'Brien, John w. Kern, Benja-
min +. ShiveIy and Major G. ". Mem
zies.
Alternate Delegates at LarGe-Ora
F. CraigmiIe, willis Kickam, A. f.
MeIehing and Ben f. DeahI.
Electors at Large-Hugh Dougherty
and warder w. stevens.
Contingent Electors at Large-W. IA.
Kelly and Thomas Duncan.
of the district delegates to the
national convention, twenty-four are
for Parker and two, from the Twelfth,
for Hearst.
Under the instructions adopted by
the convention, however, the dele
CATION will vote n unit for Parker.
Thomas Taggart Endorsed for re-
election as national committeeman,
and commended for the national
chnirmanship.
On test vote, Hearst had 46S dele
gates in the convention to 1,O19 for
Parker, although through error the
Parker vote was recorded as 1,O94.
The Democratic state convention yester-
day selected twenty Parker delegates
and two Hearst delegates to the national
convention and then, by applying the unit
rule and adopting cast-iron instruction for
Parker, insured that Indiana's thirty votes
at ST. Louis will be cast solidly for the
candidate of the Empire State.
By well-informed. unbiased politicians. as
well as by the enthusiastic advocates of
Judge Parker's nomination. it is thought
that this action of Indiana Democrats has
practically settled the nomination Of the
New York jurist and effectually eliminat-
ed William r. Hearst from the race.
Hearst's supporters do not agree with this
conclusion. but it was apparent from the
manner in which the multi-millionaire's
money and salaried professional politicians
from other States were poured into Indiana
to wage an unprecedented campaign for
Indiana's delegate vote that a Hearst vic
tory in this State was deemed absolutely
necessary to their candidates success at
ST. Louis.
The victory of the Parker forces in In
diana is likewise regarded as a distinct
triumph for Thomas Taggart, national
committeeman from this State and candi-
date for the national Craftsmanship. The
Hearst leaders charged that Mr.. Taggart
had made a deal with New York politicians
to deliver Indiana to Parker and they
made him the issue of their campaign.
Whether the charge was justified, IL was
generally recognized that Mr.. Taggart
headed the Parker forces and that he had
absolute command of the machinery of
the state organization with which he Is
identified treasurer.
The resolutions adopted by the conven-
ton in addition to applying the unit rule
and instructing for Parker, instructed the
national delegates to re-elect Mr.. Taggart
as national committeeman and indorsed
him for national chairman.
STUBBORN FIGHT OF HEARSTITES.
The Parker victory was not won without
a long and stubborn fight from the Hearst
delegates, into which such bitterness. acri-
monies and sensational features were in
iected as to make the convention one of
the most exciting and most spectacular in
the history of Indiana. The Hearstites
contested with all the resources at their
command every step in the proceed
committee on rules and permanent organ
ization to the adoption of the Parker res
olutions. BY the presentation of minority
reports from the committees, on each of
which they had one member. by impas-
stoned speeches in debate, by repeated in
terruptions on points of order and by the
use of all the filibustering tactics and par
liamentary tricks their ingenuity could de-
~, 70. . he
adjournment of the convention.
They sought to break the Parker slate of
national delegates; they endeavored to
stampede the convention for Mayor George
b. Mcclellan. of New York. and. failing in
everything else, they offered to concede the
reelection of Taggart national COM
mitteeman and his Endorsement for national
chairman and concentrated all their efforts
to defeat Parker instructions. By declara-
tions that the adoption OF Parker instruc-
tions would completely disrupt the party in
Indiana by thinly-veiled threats that the
40 per cent. of Indiana Democrats whom
they claimed to represent would not sup
port the ticket at the polls in November.
and by appeals to the generosity and fair
play of their opponents, they sought to
intimidate or TO cajole the Parkerites into
retreating from the stand they had taken
for instructions.
MACHINE WAS RELENTLESS.
All their efforts were vain. Appeals, ex-
postulations. threats alike fell on deaf ears
| The Parkerites had a substantial majority
and relentlessy and irresistibly they used
1 the convention machinery to accomplish h
their purposes. They would rebuke Hearst
| and Hearstism, they declared. and they
did all they set out 10 do.
The Hearstites had the empty satisfac-
| ton of reducing the Parker vote from l.O9i
on the first ballot to S5i on the last on the
| question of Instructions.
A rump convention was not organized by
the Hearst supporters. They went into the
| the majority pursued a gag policy and
! did not give them voice in the proceed
| ings or did not order a vote by counties
1 on the questions they believed should be
nut TO such a vote. They had made all
| their plans for a rump convention in such
| an emergency at caucus held at the
| Claypool Hotel Immediately preceding the
| convention. But the majority disarmed
| them OF this pretext for boting. gave them
| limited opportunities TO relieve themselves
| of their surcharged feeling and ordered two
votes by counties. AS result the Hearst
| ties left the hall sore. disgruntled out
| ragged in spirit. and. many OF them. rebel
1 lious and recalcitrant at heart, vowfng that
Aheir day will come when the politicians