Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1912-12-14


HUNDREDS OF STAND-PAT RE-
PUBLICANS VOTED WITH THE
DEMOCRATS To ASSURE OUR
DEFEAT The united Republican
daily papers of the State, except the
Lewiston Journal. joined in suppress
ing Progressive party news. We were
sneeringly told that we would meet
our Waterloo in November and would
then crawl back to the Republican
fold and beg for forgiveness. These
prophesies received severe jolt in
November. The next step of the
Republican machine was to attempt
10 break down our party organiza-
ton. We were sneeringly asked
where we would be in two years; and
told that the Legislature was Re-
publican and that if those who voted
with the Progressive party in No
vember wanted any favors there, they
must act with the Republicans or
they would sit on the fence and see
the procession pass by. This was
the first intimation we received that
a man could not be a Progressive in
the Legislature as well as out of it
1t was the first notice we had that the
minority of those who voted for Gov.
Haines in September were trying to
coeree the majority.
AS committee we knew these facts
when We met. in Bangor to counsel
what we should do TO strengthen our
Party organization for future work.
The question came up; What should
we recommend to Progressive members
in the Legislature?
w rnfa Of y $50, -.
recommended that Progressive mem
bers-elect in the legislature caucus to
nominate Progressive candidates and
support Progressive legislative meas
ures. Mr.. Dunnack was not present.
Mr.. Hichborn was present and took
active part in the general meeting
Mr.. Hichborn suggested that the COM
mittee urge Progressive legislators TO
caucus respecting all candidates and
offices excepting L. S. Senator.
Mr.. Hichborn, then, as now, claimed
that to include the u. S. Senator in
such action would violate the primary.
How can Mr.. Hichborn justify such
"a position? 1t is indefensible. The
primary law applies only to political
parties in existence at the time such
law as that under which the primaries
We're held in June apply to Progress
sive Party mot yet BORN? The legis-
lators who enacted the law never con-
templated such an application. For
them to have attempted to anticipate
conditions such as arose during the
last year, in the Republican party and
made necessary the Progressive Party,
is too absurd to discuss.
The situation is this: The members
of the Progressive Party, formerly Re-
publicans, allied themselves with the
Progressive Party because they be-
lieved the Republican Party had be-
come un-Republican in principle. Mr.
Burleigh, by indorsing the candidates
of the so-called Republican convention,
allied himself with those men for
whom we, members of the Progress
sive Party formerly Republicans, had
severed our political affiliations. Now,
If We We're violating no obligation in
thus severing our connection with the
Republican Party, how, pray, can we
be violating any moral or political OBJ
legation in refusing to support Mr..
Burleigh, the associate and ally of
drove us from their Party.
In other words, if we in good faith.
whether individuals or Legislators, left
the Republican Party and allied our
selves with the Progressive Party, why
should we support the candidates of
the Republican Party any more than
those of the Democratic Party? That.
so-called Republican convention at
Chicago drove us out of the Republi-
can Party. BY what refinement of
ethical reasoning are we or the men
of our party, legislators or otherwise,
pound to support one opposed to our
political views, or to elect man to
the L. S. Senate for six years who be-
lieves with, and who consequently
would act with, Senators Gallinger
and Penrose and not with such Sena-
tors as Bristow and Clapp?
The legislators were all nominated
at the same primary and elected in.
September. How, pray, can Mr.. HIGH
born advise the legislators who were
then chosen under the label of RE
publicans," but many of whom were
known to be Progressives, to aban-
don n Republican legislative caucus
and act Independently against that
party's candidates or measures and at
the same time advise them to support
Mr.. Burleigh's candidacy? Is this
strictly in accord with the high moral
standard he has invoked? Is it a
square deal? We trust the effort to
make fish of one set of candidates and
flesh of another is not provoked by a
too personal and political relationship
to a candidate at the expense of the
Progressive Party.
The whole situation may be sum-
married. thus: We believe in our Par
tyN and its principles We care for that
Party more than for individuals or
their ambitions. We realize, for the
Progressives in the legislature, that to
act with the Republicans and elect Mr..
Burleigh to the u. S. Senate, gives aid
and comfort to our enemies, adds one
more to the opponents of the Progress
sive Party in the Y. S. Senate and is a
blow TO the Party in the State and
Nation.
Can any man who is interested in
the future of the Party and has it's So