New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1910-06-13
CONTENTION IN INDIANA
kern's Charges Against Shlvely
MAJ Disrupt State Democracy.
ASKED TO WITHDRAW THEM
Ee Alleged That Eight Legis-
iators Were Bribed oy
Brewery Interests.
- r.lc-raet % &c TrIbnne J

rEv Telegraph 70 The Tribune
r,7isnsn,lis June 1.-THE nomination
Of l-sc " Kern, followed by the almost
.ene,sl belief that such a settlement OF
she Tinted States Senatorship had elimi-
mated tho most veNatious question that
could present itself in the Indiana cam
pa.cn. has suddenly brought into being
problem that is giving the party leaders
no little concern. and Mr.. Kern is not ex-
emp1 from it himself. 1t was noticed
y hsr the several candidates for the SEN
atorship were before the convention that
Senator Shively. who had spoken against
making nomination. was intensely IN
terested in tie increasing vote from ballot
10 ballot for Kern. and that the delegates
in the northern part of the state where
ShiveIy is best known and most popular.
we're concentrating their votes on other
candidates.
The reason for this has come to the sur
face since the convention made its noml-
nation in a persistent demand that Kern
relieve Senator Shively from the effects of
his sltterances of two years ago that eight
members Of the caucus that nominated
Shively had been purchased by the brew
cry element and had thus won them away
from their allegiance and pledges 10 Kern
snd their constituency. Mr.. Kern made
The charges openly and without reserva-
ton and within the present year repeated
them with circumstances of detail that
left no question as 10 his honesty in the
belief Not only that. but within the last
Two weeks one Of the men who was
charged with having voted against Kern,
though pledged ny his constituency to vote
for him. was refused denomination be-
cause Of the suspicious against him
The alleged betrayal of his constituency
was So deeply impressed upon the delegates
10 the nominating convention that. though
the man spoke TO the delegates. asserting
that ne had voted for Kern i'm accordance
with his pledges. he received few votes for
denomination. The delegates simply did
not believe him. and refused to take his
word The caucus was secret. the ballot
in il secret. and no man could positively
know how the member had voted except
himself The people OF the county, how
ever. had made an investigation. and had
become conh inced that the charges were
irue. and the influence Of Kern was such
that the nomination went 10 another man.
Charges in New Light.
I-p 10 this time the friends of Shively
had not taken any part in the controversy.
They were content 10 reply to Kern's
charges that they were simply the vapor-
ings OF a defeated candidate. and as such
could not have any weight outside Of the
immediate circles of Kern's friends But
the nomination of Kern has placed the
matter in an entirely new light. 1t is con-
strued 10 mean that the party of the state
las taken up his cause and made il their
own. The defeat for denomination of the
BIackford County candidate has empha size
tho charges made by Kern and this taken
in connection with his nomination for Sena-
tor. has been construed by many 10 ha We
placed Mr. Shivelv in position where it is
due to him TO speak la his own defence. or
rather in the defence OF his title IN the
Senatorship, which he secured through the
caucus that Kern charges was in part cor
I1ipted-
Mr.. Kern has not charged that Shively
Vas engaged in corruptng his vote in the
caucus but be has asserted that the brew
ers bought eight members away from him
snd thpt Air. Slively was the beneficiary of
This corr lii1tiun. Democratic newspapers in
Northern Indiana, where Shiveiy has long
heen popular, have called upon Kern for a
hin of particulars. They want to know
. the names Or the eight men who it is al
legged. were bought. They want to know
al that Kern himself knows of the meth
ods practised. the source of his inforn1a-
ton and other things in connection with
the alleged bribery. and especially if
ShiVelv had anything 70 do with il or was
even Cognizant of il They say that Kern
owes this 10 the party. and. as he is asking
the Democracy Of his state TO seat him
with Shively i'm the Senate, he ought either
TO absolve Shively from all blame for his
defeat two years ago or refuse TO be a can
didate and let the question he again rele-
gated the legislative caucus as though
the state convention had never acted.
An Acute Question.
The Democratic managers understand
that rhe question IS going to be an acute
one in The campaign. but they have not yet
irvented q way 10 meet ii. II it remains
unsettled SIR. Kern will lose votes in
Northern Indiana beyond a doubt, and the
loss even in one Congress district might
erdanger Democratic control of the Legis-
lature That the influence Of The eight men
under suspicion will be against Kern in
their respective counties is admitted, and as
four at least are in very close counties,
their influence may be felt.
L is the judgment, apparently. of all
members OF the party-friends of Kern,
friends OF Shively and men who owe no
specfal allegiance 10 either-that kern's
nomination mas placed the party in an awk-
ward position. The Republicans are pr
pairing 10 90 into the Senatorial campaign
with the theory that Kern is unworthy of
the Office for which lie was nominated IL he
stands silent when he knows that certain
representative In the Legislature were coz:
rrIpted with brewery money and yet re-
fuses because OF a political exigency. TO
bring these men into public view that they
may be dealt with by the law. They are
already flooding the state with literature
snten6ed 10 show that Shiyely holds his
seat as the result Of corruption. and that
Kern, knowing all the facts. keeps them
% himself because of fear of the influence
they might have il the full details of the
transaction were made public.