Lexington weekly intelligencer. (Lexington, Mo.) 1871-1887, 1880-09-11

ways has something TO say when occa-
zion demands it. and, rhetorically, he
speaks well. He is no fool, either. But
were he to say good words from now
until the day OF his death, and do good
deeds t outmatch. his words. he could
mot 1--we long enough to recompense his
country for this dual crime.
THE mrY OoUNgrpAND REGISTER.
There has 80 much that is loose. de.
msralizing and corrupt crept into Amer
icanpol,tics during the past ffteen years,
that the nice perception toi right and
wrong which once Distinguished the
people has, to 2 very great extent. been
Aobliterated. .Aacrlme against popular
Sovereignty which. twentyssyears ago,
would hsvs arrayed the whole country
sgainst its perpetrators Il. to-day. by
too many merely regarded IS . sharp
trick, as much t. ~ commended for its
smsftness as condemned for its rascali-
". We are led to this reflection by re-
memberlug that the council Of the
city OF Lexington is to meet next Mon
day night, and by the singular doubt
which presents itself as to whether or not
the mayor and council will do their duty
in the matter of the contest between Mr..
Thos. B. Clagett and Mr.. Henry Turner.
No such question should arise, but it
does. and the eason why 1t does, can
best be presented by a review of the
facts in the case.
On Tuesday. June l, 1880. there was
an election to fill the various Offices in
the city OF Lexington. among them that
of register. Mr.. Thomas B. Clagett, an
old and highly esteemed citlzen, and Mr..
Henry Turner were candidates for this
Office. According to the returns of the
judges Mr.. Turner received 800 votes,
and Mr.. Clagett 3s9. thus giving Mr..
Turner a majority OF one vote. A ma
jority OF n vote is as conclusive. as a
majority OF 100. provided 1t is honestly
recorded. and the majority is legally in
the ballot-box. This is a proposition
which no one will try to refate; but in
this case there was immediate and fla
grant cause to doubt that MI. Turner
had received q majority of the legal
votes cast. In the first ward the judges
of election certified that MI. Turner re-
ceived 1913 votes and Mr.. Clagett 80,
making q total OF 2lS votes; at the same
time they certified that but PIP persons
voted at their precinct. Here, then. was
something that suggested a reasonable
doubt as to Mr. Turner's majority OF one
vote. In addition to this, but a few days
elapsed after the election until several
negroes, who were known to have voted
for Mr.. Turner. were arrested and pros
ecuted Tor illegal voting. and they are
still languishing IN Jail awaiting the
next term OF the criminal court. It was
further made apparent that many others
had voted at the election who were not
entitled to vote, who were republicans,
and who. consequently. presumably, had
voted for Mr.. Turner.
With these facts In possession. MIR.
Clagett filed u notice OF contest against
Mr.. Turner, and prayed the council to
take 1t up, judicially weigh and consider
the evidence in the case. and find accord
ingly, either for him or his opponent.
There was nothing wrong in this pro-
ceedins OF MIR. Clagett's. 1t was in pur-
suance of his rights, under the law with
no intent to wrong anybody, but simply
with a view to protect himself. His op-
ponent. instead OF meeting him In a fair
and candid spirit, became incensed at
what he seemed to think an unwarranted
interference with a piece of personal
property, the Office Of register of the
city of Lexington, threw every obstacle
In the way OF a full, fair and free inves-
tigatlon Of the matter, carrying his con-
tumacy SO far as to DEFY the council by
refusing to bring the ballots, which he
has in his possession. before it, though
ordered to do no. Several meetings
have been held with q view to trying the
case, but. so far, all efforts to get the
ballots before the council have tailed.
This conduct subjects Mr.. Turner to very
severe criticism. The public generally
says that he is ~endeavoring by obstinate
resistance. to prevent justice being done
in the case. A prominent republican.
and n of his supporters in the election,
has intimated to us that the ballots in his
hands, personally interested as he is in
the result. are not safe from being tam.
pered with. Equity would suggest tt
a tair-minded man, under such circum'
stances. that he was not the proper Gus
todian for the ballots, but nothing O.
the kind seems to occur to him.
The contest is not a factious one. sim
ply gotten up to annoy him. 1t is has
ed OF a genuine conviction that he wa
not legally elected, and If he does no
dread the result of q trial. why does h
SO persistently avoid it? Mr.. Clagett'l
attorney, j. D. Shewalter, Esq, ha
challenged over GO votes, which he think
he a prove were illegally deposlte
for Mr.. Turner. He has already prove
20 OF the votes as illegal, and cast TO
|, Mr.. Turner. The majority of the council
seem 10 be satisfied that this number vo
ted illegally but they insist on seeing tn
, ballots as necessary proof as to how tb!
!. persons voted. MIR. Turner refuses to pre-
duce the ballots; 50 here is q dead loo
| and a d%isgraceiul one. This is not a quel
, ton of jugglery;i it is a question OF equit,
. involving the SACRED privilege of tn
elective franchise. 1t the council cannt
compel n Of its own officers to ODE
its lawful and proper mandate. and tn
q rights of another are involved, it shoul
proceed as best it may to hear evident
In the matter. 1t is not necessary
1, have the ballots in order to prove
t any unparalleled person that more tbs
q one illegal vote was cast for Mr.. Tu
ner. Among the 90 votes proven by NJ
v Shewalter to have been illegally cas-
some were fictitious, others undenIab
republicans, and as to others it "
d positively shown how they had vote