Year: 1876

The Editor OF the Argus. who figured
in both the regular and boiling conycn
tons, and who sets up n bigger how
than any one else at the injustice done
northwest, in his last paper, has this to
say


TIE TRUTH.


That the Northwest never desired to
control the late congressional conven-
ton, is proved beyond cavl or contro-
versey by the result of the proposition
made by Mcclure of Yell county. His
proposition would have resulted in GRAY
ems having Is votes, and. Newton and
Stuart 10 votes. 1t is thus seen that the
Northwest made no effort to control the
| Convention but only desired iairp
and proper representation of the dem
ocratic people of the district. Was this
tactious, unfair or undemocratic? Did
| ii bctrav II glaspiDg or selfish spirit
The adoption of the above basis left the
power to organize and nominate IN the
hands of Newton and Stuart. Let II
candid democracy judge between the
contending parties.


This is an admission, we hclievc to be
true and what we contended for, was,
that no matter what the basis Of repre-
sentation adopted, whether that propos-
ed by the friends Of Col. Cravens, or that
ON the other side, the organization and
election of candidate. if united, was in
the hands of the friends Of Newton and
Stuart Mr.. Wilcox admits this fact, and
contends that the friends of Cravens
never desired to control the convention.


We should really like to know, if Col.
Graven's friends could not, and did
not desire to control the convention in
its organization or in the election of
candidate, what mattered it what the ba-
sis was, that was to be adopted, provided
they were to receive no benefit from it,
either way. And was the excuse for
leaving the Convention, under these cir
cumstanees, OF sufficient importance for
the disruption of the democratic party,
and insubordination sowed broadcast
throughout the District? There has been
no convention, where there were two or
more candidates for an office, that some
one of them was not disappointed and
dissatisfied with the result, if decided
against him. Taking Mr.. Wicox's arti-
ele, which he SAYS is the truth in the
matter, the bolt from the convention on
the ground, that they the boilers, con
tended, that the basis was not fair or
equitable on which the convention pro-
posed to organize, was unjustitiable and
Il mistake, in the face of the fact that
the basis asked for, would not change the
result. Taking, we say, Mr.. Wilcox's
statement, there was no warrant, in an
unprejudiced mind, for Col. Cravcns
friends leaving the convention, and no
excuse, unless it was they had adopted
the "rule or ruin y policy and were de-
tcrmined to have split in the ranks of
the democracy of this district We be-
leve the majority of the Delegates that
left the convention did so in good faith,
believing the basis of representation ask
ed for was equitable and right, and that
it would give them the organization OF
the convention and the nomination, and
we feel confident they would not have
left, but for the prctcx of the leader.
that such was the case. They knew bet
ter, as the article of Mr.. Wilcox shows
above, They knew they could not con
troll the convention in the organization
or nomination, therefore the withdrawal
We hope an amicable settlement will b,
had, and that we shall unite on one man
and with an united democratic party
victory is sure.