Morning Appeal

THE SO-CALLED "SUPPRESSED" PLANK IN THE REPUBLICAN STATE PLATFORM.

Some days ago there appeared in the Eureka Leader a communication from Hon. Thos. Wren to the effect that a certain resolution offered by himself in the State Convention and passed by that body had been suppressed. Following is a copy of said resolution:

Resolved, That the Republican party of the State of Nevada is opposed to and protests against any repeal, modification or change of the law taxing the net proceeds of mines, commonly known as the Bullion Tax Law.

At a meeting of the State Central Committee, held about a week ago, attention was called to Mr. Wren's newspaper statement, and while no conclusion was reached concerning it, the matter to which it has reference was left to the consideration of a future meeting of the Committee; and in the meantime a sub-committee was appointed to revise the platform. The so-called "suppressed" resolution was thus held in abeyance, as it were, while the platform itself was to be subjected to such revision as its hurried construction had rendered necessary.

The fact of the matter is that the platform, as it appeared in the Eureka Sentinel, and not as it is presented in Mr. Loomis' manuscript, has been reproduced by the press. At the last meeting of the State Central Committee, namely, on Thursday last, this revising committee were asked if they had anything to report; and upon their making it known that they had done nothing, they were discharged from any further consideration of the subject.

In the meantime, Mr. Wren's communication was discussed: and gentlemen who were present at the State Convention stated their recollection of the matter. Mr. Wren's action upon the floor of the Convention in offering amendments to the platform as reported by the committee was recited; and it was the more general impression, or recollection, that he had offered but two amendments, namely: The resolution touching Legislative action upon railway freights and fares, and the resolution denouncing those who break their pledges. As we say, it was the recollection of the majority of those who had anything to say that Mr. Wren had introduced these two resolutions, and no others.

As to the so-called "suppressed" resolution, it remains still a subject of discussion; the Committee, meanwhile, having done nothing about it.

Now it is but just to Mr. Wren to say that his averment that he did offer that resolution and that it did pass, and that it had been left out of the platform, is very strong evidence that he did offer it and that it did pass, though some of the best memories of some of the most credible members of the Convention fail to recall it. But Mr. Wren failed to take such steps as he ought to have taken to bring this matter fairly to the attention of the State Central Committee. In all fairness to the party and its candidates he should have addressed the Committee upon the subject before going to the public with it especially in view of the fact that his own particular friend Hart, of the Reveille, was the Secretary of the Committee on Platform, and took charge of its reading, its writing and its presentation to the Convention.

Now what is the remedy, if any omission has been made? Certainly Mr. Wren's plank ought to be ingrafted in and printed with the platform if it was adopted by the Convention; and we beg to suggest to the State Committee that its Secretary open correspondence with the officers and members of the State Convention with a view to ascertaining what, in their recollection of the transactions of that body, was done in regard of this matter. If Mr. Wren's resolution was presented and adopted (and there is a wide variance of recollection upon the subject), the preponderance of opinion, pro and con, ought to have sufficient weight with the State Committee to determine their action in the premises. This is fair, all round; though Mr. Wren would have shown himself far more considerate to the party and its nominees if he had gone to the State Committee instead of the public with this matter.