The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1916-07-08

man of the national committee, made public last night a report he has pre- pared for the delegates to the na- tional convention regarding the pro- cedure before the national committee at the meeting held in Chicago on June 26, when the committee voted to indorsa Charles E. Hughes, the Re- publican nominee for President. In the report he sharply censures the &C., tion of the committee, over whose proceedings he presided.
 Salient features of MT. Hale's re- port, which was given out at the Hotel Manhattan last night, are his assertion that no effort was made, prior to the final action of the na- tional committee to ascertain the sen- timent of the Progressive organiza- tions in the various states. relative to the indorsement of MT. Hughes and his statement that the national com- mitteemen from Alabama, Michigan. New Jersey and Virginia voted con- traEy to the mandate of the Bull Moose organizations in their respect i've states.
 He said that in each of these states : and in Tennessee the state commit i adopted resolutions calling upon their representative on the national com mittee to vote against indorsing MT. Hughes. The proxy for Tennessee, MT. Hale said in his report, was dis qualified in technicality.
 Mir Hale makes the following sum- mary in the report of developments at, the national committee meeting and his own conclusions:
 Says Party Was Delivered. You as delegates to the Pro- gressive national convention made it clear that you were not in fla |. vor of surrendering to the Re- publican party or abandoning the Progressive party.
 When you gave the Progress i've national committee the right to fill vacancies you did not in- ! tend to give it the right to de- l liver the Progressive party or l ganization to the Republican | candidate or to repudiate your I candidate for Vice President, Colonel John M. Parker, whom ! you unanimously nominated in I your convention.
 l +
 ton of the National Committee in-
 dorsing the Republican candidate
 neither the delegates to the Ma ! tional Convention, nor the mem bers of the state organization | were called together by the Ma tional committeeman for consul tation or action. Action on the part l of the state organizations prior to I @f lican candidate by the National | Committee was expressly discour- l aged by the chairman of the ex- | ecutive committee of the National l < Committee, MT. George w. Per- l kins.
 1 In Alabama, Michigan, New | Jersey, Tennessee and Virginia either the delegates to the Ma tional Convention or the state or- ganizations had officially express
 ed their opposition to the indorse-
 ment of the Republican candidate.
 In spite of these official express
 sions of opposition. the National l Committeeman from Alabama,
 Michigan, New Jersey, and Vir-,
 ginia voted for the indorsement; l.. and the proxy of the national
 committeeman who represented
 the wishes of the Tennessee or
 ganization was not allowed to vote
 on account of a technicality. | In Minnesota and Louisiana the national committee had every req
 son to believe that the state or
 ganizations were opposed to the
 indorsemeht of the Republican k candidate; yet the national com
 mitteemen from those states
 voted for the indorsement and
 against any delay for the purpose
 of consulting the state organiza-
 tions or the delegates to the na-
 tional convention.
 No Authority from Delegates.
 In Maryland and New York
 there was a reasonable ground
 for uncertainty as to what the
 delegates to the national convens
 tion or the state organizations
 wanted in regard to the indorse-
 ment; yet the national commit
 teemen voted for the indorse-
 ment and against any delay.
 In Indiana the state organiza- ll ton. has officially repudiated the / action of the national committee ! in indorsing the Republican can-
 didate; the national committee
 man voted for the indorsement :, and against any delay.
 The indorsement of the Repub- lican candidate by the Progress
 i've national committee was made without authority either from you
 who represent the Progressive
 party nationally, or from the
 state organizations, which repre-
 sent the Progressive party in the
 different states, and without any attempt to get that authority. , The indorsement of the Repub-
 1ican candidate for President by the Progressive national commit t tee violated one of the fundamen- :, tai principles of the Progressive
 party. The Progressive plat
 form of 1912 provided that the
 selection of party candidates
 should be made after consultation. :, with the rank and file of the par ty, and in accordance with their wishes; and should not be made ], by a small grJup of leaders in l accordance with their own indi- vidual wishes, acting without con- t sultation with the rank and file s of the party, and in some in- :, stances directly contrary to the
 expressed wishes of the rank and ' file. By inserting that principle
 fin their platform Progressives
 hoped to prevent Q recurrence of 0 1 the steam-rollels tactics employed