The Canon City record with which is consolidated the Canon City cannon., 1912-09-26
Mr.. TROU UTMAn EXPLAINS
PROGRESSIVE ATTITUDE
Canon City. Colo. Sept. 2

1 have noticed in this weeks issue
of the Leader" an article headed
Regulars Working The Progressives'
and as / am one OF the so-caiied
"would-be" and "self-constituted'
leaders of the Progressive party In
Fremont county. l feel constrained TO
reply.
The gentleman who wrote this
article did not have the nerve TO sign
a name to It. but It has the same ear
marks" that several other instances
have had that have arisen lately IN
this district relative TO tho nominal
tions OF the Progressive party.
The gentleman above referred -
must have been OF in the back woods
for many months. otherwise he would
be more familiar with Progressive con
ditions in this district. and would not
have made the assertion that the
Progressive leaders were TAFT sup
porters. and had tied the Progressive
party to the tall OF the Republican
kite"
The facts are. that most Of the Re
publican workers In Fremont county
are Progerssives. and early in the
summer. before there was any Pro
gressive party. the Progressive Re-
publicans. who were Roosevelt admir-
ers. caucused and determined to con-
troll the Republican county assembly.
which subsequently occurred and the
Progressives selected the men and
women they wished to lead the nght
in the county and district
After the forming Of the Progress
sive party IL was felt to be desirous
that there be full county and dis
trict Progressive tickets In the Geld.
Ms well as state and national
The Progressives. however. had IL
ready designated their choice for the
county and district tickets. and there
fore. as in many othA counties OF the
state. the logical snd wise thing to do
was TO nominate on the Progressive
ticket the candidates designated BY the
ProgressIyes In an earlier convention
And this action was approved by the
state executive committee Of the Pro
gressive party.
II is not approved. OF course. by the
opposition. and Is a great disaster from
the standpoint OF our Democratic
friends. II Is a shame that the Pro-
gressive party should have such In
comparable and high toned candidates
in the county and district. but ve
should not be blamed for our mis-
fortunes and even n. to the gentle
man without a namej the grapes are
sour" II really isn't any OF his, or
any ones else concern. who we uomi-
nate. except the ProgressIves them
selves. And We decline 20 be dictated
to by our opponents. an to whom ,we
shall. or shall not. choose 20 lead rs.
The gentleman who wrote this ar
tIcle referred TO. must not be n law
yer. for II he was. he would not have
made the gross niisstatement, Of facts.
regarding the provisions of Section es
OF the Primary Law.
This section OF the law provides
means by which Independent tickets
may be nominated and nled. AND
NOTHING THAT CAN POSSIBLY BE
INTERPRETER TO MEAN THAT
CANDIDATES CANNOT RUN oS
MORE THAN ONE TICKET.
In fact. II there was such n clause
In the Law II would be unconstitutional
as both the constitution OF the state
and nation. provides for the utmost
freedom of elections. Furthermore.
the last clause in Section 2e provides
for a liberal Interpretation OF the
section.