New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1910-10-26
UTRPRYS CANDIDATE.


/ Our esteemed contemporary The New
f.. York World" thought his nomination 10y
. Murphy and Corners was a count
/ against Mr.. Chanier when he was run
ming in 1905, Mr.. CHAMBER, who was
nominated by Corners and Murphy on
n Ryan reactionary, corporation plat
form" it called him. And most Of the
other New York City journals that are
now supporting Dix pointed out that the
control Of the Democratic convention
TWO years ago by Tammany and the
Buffalo boss was Il reason for distrust-
inc Mr.. Chanler and compelling him TO
/ pledge himself 10 certain policies. But
how much more is Mr.. Dix the Tam
many b0ss's nominee than was Mr..
/ Chanler or. in fact any other Demo-
cratic candidate in recent years,
NuTphy's control Of the last cOnven-
ton was much more complete than he
had ever exercised before over a party
council To this fact all of the Demo
cratic and Independent newspapers bore
witness At the time Moreover, to com
pare Mr.. Dix with Mr. Chanler, the
Democratic candidate Two years ago had
strength Of his own in the convention.
He was. so 10 speak. the logical candi-
date" It would have been safe to pre-
dicr his nomination two months before
the convention met Nh Dix, on the
other hand. was never heard Of as a
candidate until the conferences in
Room ID" had been in operation for
several days. There was no popular de-
W8nd for his nomination. The conven-
ton cooled its heels while Apply in
Room DO picked the candidate. When
the boss had reached his decision no
ether name was mentioned
Moreover. the political relations Of Mr..
Dix 10 the boss are close and intimate
Chanler. so far as any one knows. had
lao relations with Murphy. ChanIer had
never been one Of the organizers IF u
movement whose purpose and result it
was 10 remove from power the only eff
fective rival Of AIurphy's ambition
Ihanler had never been chosen by Muir
ply % he his chairman CT the Demo
cratic State Committee. CEanler had
never served as chairman Of that com
nirJee during q time when Murphy's
control of the party was being steadily
promoted. until il could be said after 4
few months Of the state chairman's
work. a was said by Democratic news
papers Of The recent state convention.
that Murphy held the party in the hol-
low IF his hand" Chanler was not
picked out by Murphy as the party's
candidate for Governor after such a rec
ord Of scrviceability 10 Murphy. If he
bad been. there would have been ten
times the point 10 the objection 10 him
that he had been nominated bv Murphy
and Corners.
Furthermore. Mr. Dix i the most dis /
rinctly Tammanv candidate for Gov
clnor that the Democratic bosses have
dared L. Offer 70 the state since Richard
Croker nominated Van Wyck. in 1855. /
Take the list: Stanchfeld. in 1900: Coler. /
in 1892: Herrick, in 1904; Hearst. in
1895 and Chanler in 1905 Stanchfeld, I
perhaps smelled as much Of HiU as Dix I
does Of Murphy. but the utilization was
not q Tammany utilization. Coler was
T1n on the theory that YOU can fool all /
of the people all Of the time. but he
had $40 visible connection with the Tam F.
many machinery. HeTTick had been q
boss all 10y himself and bad one. but
he was distinctly an upstate product 1
Whatever was thought # the decency
OF Hearsr's deal with Murphy. no one 7.
regarded him as q Tlmmdny candidate F..
Nor one of these men. from Stanchfield /
to Chsuler. was first picked ont by the /
Tammany boss and tried as state chair +
man and then. having proved useful in .
that capacity. nominated by the boss for .
Governor. Murphy. who is accustomed +
te the abuse If The World" The .
Post and The Times" must cnuckle .
10 himself at having them al support .
ing the man who helped him get the
Democratic party ''in1o the hollow II his .
hand"