OCR Text |
Show I REPUBLICANS DECIDE TO HOLD PRIMARIES TO NAME DELEGATES Heated Arguments Over Proposal to Change Method Result in Overwhelming Vote for 1920 Plan; County Convention Conven-tion Set for July 1 I Weber county's courthouse again Indicated the cominiT of political activities ac-tivities yesterday afternoon, when 5-1 members of the, Republican county c entral committee mot and started Uie hall rolling which will now gather dally impetus and warmth until the day of election. November 7. Tho outstanding feature of the meeting WBJB a rather heated fight ,aer tho method to be used In selecting select-ing the 6S delegates from Weber county coun-ty to the RepObncan state nominating convention to be held In Salt Lake. Julv 14. and to the congressional convention con-vention of the first congressional district, dis-trict, which Will be held the day following fol-lowing Finally the committeemen balloted on the method and overwhelmingly fle-calred fle-calred themselves hi favor of the plan used In 192'' authorized the holding! i nf primaries- in the several election districts of Weber county to elect del-' e gates to a Republican county com en-, tlon at which tho 53 delegates to the state conventions Will be chosen. PR I mar iKs srrr. The date tor the holding of tho primaries is sot for Wednesday, June In the various districts. The county convention for the pur-djm6 pur-djm6 of selecting the delegates to the tate conventions will be held July 1,1 at 3 o'clock In the court house. County Chairmen Arthur Wool ley i I presided. William T. Grtenwell acted) aa secretary. Tho committeemen decided by vote that appointments of committeemen ini districts where vacancies had taken I place since 1920 made by the county chairman, would be recognized. In passing tho resolution deciding the plan of selection of delegates, which was presented by U . II Re dei Jr., the delegates furthei agreed that the apportionment of the delegates from the several districts of the county coun-ty shall be upon tho basis of the vote cast for Governor Mabey in 19 20, mch district Wing entitled io one i delegate, for each i-io vfotea cast nrovlded that such district shall be entitled to at least one delegate, Bald delegates being apportioned among the various voting districts MKISSNKRS PLAN. Fred Meissner. who introduced a substitute resolution, asked that the' c omraattteomen depart from the method meth-od used In 1920 and return to "the I'ong established custom of electing thn delegates to the state conventions by electing them from the districts in which they live, entitling the cit dls- trlcls to SS delegates and the county to IB." ftengthv debate followed the introducing intro-ducing of the two resolutions until a ballot was finally taken in which A 2 votes were cast for Mr. Reader's resolution res-olution and 12 for Mr. Mclssner's. In introducing his resolution, Mr Reeder said he had prepared and presented pre-sented It because after careful consideration con-sideration he could not conceive of a more practical an -1 just manner in j which to select delegate than in the 1920 plan He explained that there iltc 78 districts in the city and county, w hi e there were but 53 delogates to be selected. The plan, be asserted, oppearr. proper and just in that each district may send its representative to th6 county convention and have a voice in the selection of the slate delegates. del-egates. Mr. Meissner a; this point introduced his substitute resolution, and took the opportunity to point out that tho 1920 method had caused unfavorable comment com-ment and general dissatisfaction, and he favored the return to the plan of holding primaries to select delegates from the districts lfT which they reside re-side SAYS PLAN UNFAIR. Earl Geiger then took the floor and declared himself in favor of the Meissner Meiss-ner resolution, at the wrap time Intimating Inti-mating that the 1020 plan was an unfair and underhand method Mr Reeder took exception to Mr. Geiger's remarks and said: "The tone of Mr. Geiger's remarks Is such that It becomes my duty to say some additional ad-ditional words and to say that this , method is not underhand or unfair (I challenge any member of this committee com-mittee to find anything In my position posi-tion in politics which might indicate I any underhand methods, whatsoever ! I am not acting for any person who s eke underhand advantage or meth-j meth-j ods. It has alwavs been tho principle prin-ciple of the Republican party to be 'equally and fairh represented, and I I believe this plan to be tho fair way to select delegates to the state con-: con-: volition.' John C Davis took the floor and declared that the substitute resolution. resolu-tion. In his opinion, was Introduced principally In criticism of the methods meth-ods used In delegate selection in 1920. "I am against tho .substitute.'' he j shouted, "because it attempts to discredit dis-credit The substitute motion is In itself inconsistent, In that it wants people to go to other towns to vote for delegates " At this point Mr. Geiger apologized to Mr. Roeder. declaring; hla remarka were not aimed at him and that ho j meant no offense Mr. MelwHner also l exprvw)td regret that any mention of underhand methods had been made. SAME DISSATISFACTION. . I John D. Hooper declared that in his opinion there had been some dissatisfaction dissatis-faction and roniplMnt. over the 1920; ' method, but that (he county was well 'represented at the Salt Lake conven-I conven-I lion. M i. j(int!S. J. M ForrItall and C R rloliingswortn favored the resolu-! resolu-! tion Introduced bv Mr. Reeder. F. J I i Hendershol spoke In a witty vein on , iho motion. Mr. Meissner then called for a bal-U'f bal-U'f on the resolutions. (..(ore tlu- ballots wore distributed. li Woollej who unnl thin lime had K.ken no part In the discussion, took tho floor and declared thut criticism land jnslnua;ionM over the 1920 method should bo done :iway vlth. "Tho 1920 j plan." he said, proved Itself. Let's forget i hese petty muabhles and rath-.r rath-.r tlmn orltlclse, point to the good records made by Republicans who .SCre in office. Let the people knrw the office-holders are saving; their j money, are building roads, and are not raising taxes The plan of two ! years ago is a fair way of so lectins; delegates and when a delegate goes to Salt Lake he can say, I was choai n by Weber county aa a whole, and not by one district.' "Those who were disappointed 1n not securing ihc nomination of W H. Wattis for governor in 1920. returned to the county and worked ardently to secure th Republican vi( tory which wns achieved In the election. The Republicans of Weber county were unitedly behind the muo lor Mr. Wattla.'' VOTF 52 TO 12. Ths ballot was tfvn taken Which showed the 62 to 12 vote favoring Mr. Reeder's resolution. Tho resolution resolu-tion as passed, follows: "Be It resolved that the chairman and secretary of the Republican county coun-ty central committee be and thoy are hereby authorized and directed to call l Republican primaries to bo hold In tho several election districts of Weber We-ber county, Utah, on Wednesday. June 28, 1922, at 8 o'clock p. m.. for the purpose of electing 1 I k r a to B Republican county convention, which shall be held on July 1, 192L at 3 p. m. in the county court house. Ogden, Utah. Said convention will select tlx-63 tlx-63 delegates and alternates fir.ji p-ber p-ber county to the Republican state nominating convention to be held n July 14. 1922, at Salt Lake City, and! to the Republican congressional con-; vontlon for the First congressional district to be held at Salt Lake City on July 15, 1922. Be it further resolved that the ap-1 porllonment of the delegates from the several districts of Webor county tol said convention shall be upon the I basis of the vote cast for Honorable Charles R. Mabey for governor at the i general election Of 1920, each district j lieln- entitled to one delegate for ' J each forty votes, or major fraction thereof cast for said Charles R ' Mabey Ma-bey at said election, provided that each district shall be entitled to at: I least one delegate, said delegates be-: ' ing apportioned among the various voting district0, and sai-J primaries I shall hiM holH no t r,l Ir.iro DISTRICTS WITHIN OLDIV CITY L Dist No. Delegate-. Held at I 1 2 South Wash, school 2 1 South Wash school 3 1 South Wash, school. 1 2 Pingree school. 5 2 Pingree school. 6 t Pingne school. 7 3 Pingree school S 3 City Hall. 9 4 Citv Hall. 10 I City Hall. 11 2 City Hall. 12 1 Baptist Mission W. Og. 13 I 271 Reeves Ave. 14 3 Armory. 15 1 Armorv IS 2 Third ward hall 17 2 Third ward hall. 18 2 Third ward hall. 19 I Tenth ward hall ! 20 2 Tenth ward hall. 21 2 Klo Points school. 22 Five Points school. 23 3 Five Points school 24 2 Seventh ward hall. 25 1 Seventh ward hall. 26 .1 Seventh ward hall. 27 i Seventh ward hall. 28 3 County court house. 29 3 Ixirin Farr school. 30 2 Lorin Farr school. 31 3 Lorin Farr school 32 3 founty court house ; 33 2 County court house. 34 2 County court house 35 3 County court house. 36 1 County court house. 37 2 ("ount court house ' 38 2 County court house. ,39 3 Lorin Parr school I 40 4 Loiin Farr school. 4 1 3 Lorin Farr school. (42 4 Twelfth ward hall. 43 5 Twelfth ward hall. 441 3 Twelfth ward hall 45 3 Fifth ward hall. 46 4 Fifth ward hall. 47 3 Fifth ward hall. 48 5 Fifth ward hall. 4 9 3 Lewis school 50 3 Lewis school. . T.l 2 Fifth ward hall. I 52 2 Fifth ward hall. 3 Ninth ward hall, i 54 7 Ninth wadr hall 1 30 DISTRICTS OFTSIDF. OF OGDFN. I Dist No. of Delegates. ! Burch Creek 2 Eden . . g 1 Farr West .' 2 ; Harrlsvillo , Hooper No. 1 2 I Hooper No. 2 2 I Huntsville 5 j Kanesvllle ' j Liberty yt 1 Marriott 1 North Ogden No. 1 . . . , , .North Ogden No 2 3 ! Plain City ... j Pleasant View , 2 Randall ' , j ' Rlverdalo , . 3 ; Roy Slaterville ' ' ' 3 I Taylor , Uintah j 1 Warren " ' , 1 West Warren W-est Weber . . , , . t . V 2 Willson !. 2 Be it further resolved tha?1 tho members of the county central committee com-mittee outside of Ogden be authorized and directed To arrange suitable I places for the holding of aid primaries primar-ies In their respective districts and ; to give notice thereof. 1 00 |