The Hattiesburg News

WHAT IS A BOLTER?
Blazoria (Tex.) Bazoo.

Senator Aldrich, of Rhode Island rises to remark that he is not bound by the national platform utterance of the Republican party. Senator Bailey, of Texas, that he may not be eclipsed by Aldrich, states that the latest enunciation of Democratic principles from a national point of view can not control his action, and he refuses to subscribe to the platform made by the Denver convention. In view of these fulminations from Senators Bailey and Aldrich, the question naturally suggests itself, "Where are we at?" and the complement query, "Where will we be," as party organizations, if Senators may disregard at will the instructions of their respective party conventions. The evidence is cumulative that Aldrich is the Republican party, or what is practically the same thing, its despotic boss. But is Mr. Bailey the Democratic party? We had supposed up to a few days ago that the Democratic party was composed of approximately 6,500,000 units, and that those units assembled in convention, through their accredited delegates, made the party platform. Mr. Bailey, however, adopts a contrary view. Indeed, he very nearly arrogates to himself all of the wisdom and also the ownership of the Democratic party. Mr. Bailey was an accredited delegate to the Denver convention, and was present at the deliberations thereof in the person of a proxy. In repudiating the platform of that convention is not Mr. Bailey a self-confessed bolter? In reading over Mr. Bailey's speeches delivered to his Texas constituents last year we find much to sustain the belief that a man who repudiates his party nominees and platform is a bolter. Is it really a fact that to be or not to be a bolter depends upon the answer to the conundrum as to whose ox is being gored? In the estimate of many Mr. Bailey is a past master of casuistry, and yet in this instance we are of the opinion that he will experience much difficulty in defining the difference 'twixt tweedledum and tweedledee.