St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1906-02-21
The filndley-CIement Gospel Is Not
the Gospel of Truth.

the Gospel of Truth.
We would Ike CALIFORNIAN readers to |
turn back to our last weeks issue and |
read the Hiudley. Clement "Ad.' Ifyou
read it fresh from the press, read it
again. The CALIFORNIAN is surprised at
the style and subject matter OF the Hind
ley.Clement Manifesto. II any one has
heretofore had any thought that the
Hindley. Clement Bureau would turn
thinking, intelligent voters towards Mr..
Clement they will be disappointed. The
subject OF Hindley's last weeks sermon,
TO which we call our readers attention
is Pursuing Principle" The claim
that the license local option open saloon
legislation now rife in Vermont is due
more TO the efforts oil Mr.. Clement than |
any other person, is probably true, and
occupying the position OF parent to the
law, is, the CALIFORNIAN believes, a most
notable example OF being damned by
faint praise" With all its good, viewed
from every cardinal point, we are con-
tent that Mr.. Clement should have all
the praise due any one for the law.
However, it is true, that he stepped
away from his lowing, at Montpelier
in 1902. after failing in his delay tactics
at the opening OF the session. No one,
faV ao The & Al z hoe phcarvaI
has ever denied that the greater principle
persistently pursued by Mr.. Clement was
embodied in Vermont's governorship
instead OF liquor law. Why? II it was
only the principle Of a license law which
was to satisfy Mr.. Clement, if that was
the ultimatum OF his ambition, he would
have been satisfied to have remained in
that 1902 convention and stood by its
nominee. No, No, Hndley, your sermon
is too thin a veil to shut off clear vision
of Mr.. Clements principle, from an intel
ligent people.
You say in your sermon herein being
discussed, What happened to Caucus
Reform, the twin Clement Plank in the
same platform Smothered, side.tracked,
pigeon holed-and why? Because the
bosses thought they could do it safely"
Then, Mr.. Hiudley, the Bosses were
democrats and Clement men. Per.
haps, Mr.. Hindley, you and Mr.
Clement do not intend to falsify, and
grossly mlsrepresent and distort facts;
ifnot, your ignorance OF the history Of
caucus legislation at the 1902 session is
no excuse for your undertaking to de-
ceive the people, for like the CALIFORNIAN
you have access to the record. Let US
see about your twin plank OF caucus re.
form. Two bills on the caucus subject
were introduced in the session OF 1902
First, Senate Bill 223. 1t came into the
House Dec. IL, see journal page sol
was amended in the House, see page
513. Every body who desired had a hanc
in amending that bil;it was passed will
proposals of amendment. The Senat
refused to concur (page 516). Com
mittee OF Conference by House and Ser
ate tpages 51S.519). Committee Repor
pages 520-52l.l A midnight debat
ensued on that report. DR.. Peck, tn
member from Brandon, the leader of tn
Clement forces on the floor, streuuousl
opposed the report;other followers OF Nj
Clement did the same. They were r,
iuforced by leading democratic member,
1t was well understood at that midnigh
hour that il the conference committee
report was rejected that ended caucu
legislation for that session. At the en-
Of one Of the most spirited debates of til
session, the report was defeated by
very close vote OF 81 to 67,see page 52G
The second caucus measure was Hous
Bill 467, see House Journal page 4S4
Immediately following the defeat Of tn
Senate Caucus bill, this House bill wa
brought forward lsee page 522). Th
anticaucus members were in the saddI
by small maj jrity and this is the brit
record Of Caucus bill No 2 ION motto
of Mr. Pape, OF Barre city, the bill wa
dismissed" Messrs. Clement ami Hino
ley, you are respectfully called upon t
publish that yea and nav vote on til
Senate bill above referred toll yea
81 nays-and point out the men VIII,