Martinsburg independent. [volume] (Martinsburg, W. Va.) 1875-1900, 1880-04-24


precincts, is it not an absurdity to
say, that the same committee had
not the power to subdivide the city
of Martinsburg ?n The answer to
his query is easily made. The one is
practicable, the other impracticable.
Under the election plan, the subdi-
vision OF the county into districts is
unimportant, so far as it affects the
nomination for county officers. 1t is
the aggregate vote cast for any par
ticular candidate within the limits
of the county, that makes the nomi-
nation. Under the convention sys-
tenn, delegates sent to county con-
vention, cast only such votes as is
included within the district which
sends them, as ascertained by the re-
turns of the last genera, election.
Martinsburg, having but one voting
precinct, cannot therefore be subdi-
vided into five subdistricts, as the
delegates sent from each of the
wards, would be unable to ascertain
the basis of representation to which
the ward they he represented were
entitled, and not having, under his
appointment, any authority to repre-
sent the democratic vote of any other
ward, Martinsburg would be exclu-
ded from any representation in the
county convention.
Mr.. E. knows no objection to the
primary convention system per se,"
but admits that dissatisfaction has
grown out of that system, by the use
made of it by "ringsters, tricksters
and manipulators," and virtually
admits that the primary election sys-
tenn would remedy the disease, and
restore the party to its former vigor
and harmony. This is the kernel of
the whole controversy. Experience
in other States has demonstrated,
that the elective system is a sove-
reign and never failing remedy for
such diseases. 1t appeals immedi-
ately to the members of the party, to
turn out and assert their supremacy,
by selecting their own officers for the
transaction of the puplic business.
If with every convenience and OPP
portunity held out to the members of
party, to select their own agents it
should prove failure, the democrat
ic theory, that government is insti-
tuted for the benefit of the people,
and controlled in the interest of the
people, must necessarily prove a fail
ure. Believing that the elective
system will accomplish the great OBJ
ject we all have in view, of removing
dissatisfacti0ny quieting nneasinesS,
and tend to convince the doubling
members Of our organization, that
the nominees OF the party are the
fairly chosen representatives Of the
voters who are called to sustain them
at the polls, and not the representa-
tives OF q few self-appointed "ring-
sters," designing wtricksters" or ac-
tive manipulation shall always
be found actively supporting the
elective system.
Permit me to add, Mr.. Editors,
that nothing which / have said in
this or the former card over my sig
nature, is intended to reflect upon
the integrity, devotion to party and
honest intentions of my associates in
the committee, who voted against
the resolutions. l claim no higher
motive in supporting them, than they
have a right to, and do claim, in vo-
ting against them.
As members of the Democratic
Executive Committee, we all have
the same object in view, to make
such recommendation as will
bring about harmony in the party,
remove all dissatisfaction, and cause
united action at the coming election.
These are my feelings, and l have no
doubt, my associates entertain the
same. AN~
CHAs. J. FAULKNER, JR.