New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1908-10-21

RepuDllcan party ha6 three candi-
dates for the congressional nomina-
tion last month. Two were avowedly
against Cannonism and gag-rule. One
was not. Through the unfortunate
operation of the plebiscite the men
who formed decided minority on the
real issue of the campaign were sue
cessful and J. T. McCleary received
minority nomination. He has been
asked to declare himself on the ques-
ton of Cannonism. In his debate
with W. S. Hammond at Fairmont last
Friday evening, he stated that he pro-
posed to consult the wishes of the
people OF the district and be guided
by them. At the joint meeting in
Pipestone on Saturday, although the
issue was up to him squarely, he had
not word to say in answer or in ex-
planatin. We have not yet learned
how he proposes to ascertain the
wishes OF the district. We consider
this statement on his part piece of
pitiful EVASION. Mr.. McCleary knows
how the Republicans of this district
stand on the question of Cannon and we
know how McCleary stands. We have
not forgotten the laudatory remarks
bestowed upon the speaker by Nc
Cleary in his campaign of two years
ago, nor the manifest effort to link
his own name with that of Cannon, as
confident and friend, nor, indeed, the
certificate of safe and political
moral character given to him by the
speaker and circulated through the
district for the purpose OF convincing
McCleary's constituents that he was
entitled to standing room near the
seats of the mighty and that he en-
joyed the confidence Of the good and
the great. Mr.. McCleary has so en-
phasized this distinguished friendship
that we cannot, even N Difference to
his very evident wishes, forget that
it has ever been. Let us meet the
issue fairly. McCleary is a close
friend of Cannon and he is in SYM
pathy with and has habitually Coop
Grated in the cut-throat methods for
which Cannon stands, as his congress
sional record clearly demonstrates.
Cannon is his type of statesman;
Roosevelt is not. In the Second Min
nesota district Roosevelt is the type
of statesman we prefer; Cannon is
not. To what purpose do we engage
in a strenuous campaign, put forth our
individual and party strength, elect
representative and send him to con-
gress to sit in idleness with 1914 of
his fellows because Mr.. Cannon con-
siders it unwise to engage in legisla-
tive work at this time? The people
may CRY for action, Independent con-
gressmen of either party may chafe,
but the interests must be respected!
To what purpose did we in the state
of Minnesota give Theodore Roose-
welt majority of 100000 votes to help
send him to the White House to di-
rect the policy of the nation, if his
most urgent recommendations are to
be blocked by man whose hands our
party nominee is seeking to uphold.
Let us strike at the root of this evil
and make sure that when the next
vote is taken on the election of a
speaker for the house, and the repre-
sentatives Of the Third and Fifth,
the Seventh and the Eighth Minneso-
ia districts cast their votes against
Cannon and Cannonism, in whatever
form it may be displayed, the repre-
sentative of the Second Minnesota dis
trict will also stand up, as the man
who is to represent us should do, and
cast his vote as the registration Of
our protest against this political can
Ger on the body polite which is con.
tamin ating the doctrines of Abraham
Lincoln and vitiating the policies Of
Theodore Roosevelt. y