St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1906-02-28

Certainly the least you can do is to give
me sufficient space to reiute this charge
As to the caucus law. You refer to
223. Why you do this is for you to
explain, as S 223 was IAN Act relating
to the Instruction ofAdvanced Pupils in
High Schools and Academies" Perhaps
you needed a little higher education on
ring methods yourself. Ifso, permit me
to inaugui ate the School of Apologies
at once.
The Bureau charged that the republi'
can machine suppressed caucus legsla-
ton in 1902. formally repeat the
charge. Your column Of vituperation
endeavored to explain what happened to
223. What syou meant was 5 233.
That measure was not the first caucus
law introduced. On the second day OF
the session, Senator Brownel of Burling-
ton introduced l, fairly good
measure.
1t was referred to the committee on
judiciary Oct. 2nd. This committee was
composed of Senator Annis OF Orleans
county, Bro wnell of Chittenden, Emery
of Orange, Russell of Chittenden, Downer
OF Windsor, WaIbridge OF Essex, Mayo
of Washington.
These men held the Caucus Reform
measure from Oct. 2 to Dec. 10, and it
never reached the House until Dec. II, In
the afternoon, the last dav of the session,
when it appeared as S. 233.
Read the names and tell me how many
Democrats and Clement men comprised
that committee on judiciary.
On the day that S. 233 met its deserved
fate in the House, 25S separate legls"
lative acts, that is, bills in some stage oil
completeness, came before that body. Do
you wonder that this tender hybrid, this
emasculated remnant, excited derlsion at
such late hour?
Was it strange that both Senator
Backus aud Representative Gale should
have sarcastically moved to amend by
Oub SCGllOu0 AANNRb NhCSN
dealing with bribery and coercion? Is it
strange that Representative Peck should
have vigorously opposed it?
Was it reasonable to suppose that such
an important bill could by any remote
possibility be properly dgestcd, amended
and agreed upon, when three minutes to
bill. not providing for recesses or meals,
was the legislative average that crazy
afternoon?
shall not go into the journeyings be-
tween House and Senate, the frultless
conferences, the impracticability and
fatuous utility of S 233. 1t met with a
deserved fate. 1t wasn't fit to live.
The fault lay with the machine com.
mittee that deliberately" smothered, side.
tracked, pigeon-holed" it for over two
months. then, aroused by the demand fol
action, as voiced by the newspapers
resurrected the drawn, embalmed anc
harmless carcass, trusting to eleventh
hour haste to let the silly thirg &c
through.
Pm glad the Clement men and Demo
Gratis knew corpse when they saw it
l have heard from several of them, ant
they say the reason they fought this bill
was because it contained nothing G
practical value, and was not anything
they cared to stand for at that late hour
Now, Bro. Stone, explain to you
readers why that bill wasn't reported
properly amended, discussed and place.
on the statute books, according to tn
Republican machines promise to tn
voters in the platform of the state con
vention, when the twin Clement plank
was sawed and framed
You will, of course, give this reply to
somewhat serious charge the sam
prominence you gave to the origin
article.
Yours truly,
H. L. HINDLEY.
Rutland, VT, Feb. "a, 1906.