Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1880-08-15
Mel. Webb's Card. /.

| TACAo q 81 SN@AS VI O0i 0k2SO
again this morning to weak card
from Msj. Webb, in which thai gem
! tie Tar makes another attempt TO show
that Sheriff Reeder went contrary to
the returas Of the late elecsion a:stF the
law when be gave the certifi,a,e, of
election TO Mr.. Gossett. We have
already given great deal of space to
this matter, bu. we are determined
that no cirarge of unfsirness shall lie
sgainss us, and, more 'ver. We are en-.
titeIy satisfied that f4H understand
ing OF The facts will show to the public
that Sheriff Reeder was justifiable
and right in doing what he did.
The three disputed votes and the
only ones are, one each. in the first,
fifth and eighth wards Of the city. II
will be found on examination Of Mai,
Webb's caId. that he has INDUCED in
some very foe hair, splitting, but 10
our mind he dee, not present single
fact or argument showing that Mr..
Reeder went behind the Feturrs in a
single case. EEt#
In the case Of the frat ward, Mr..
Reeder presented in his card Of Thurs
day morning q certified copy of the
certificate made by the officer, judges,
and clerks, who held the election, in
which they state in explicit terms that
Mr.. Anderson received 1873 votes, and
that return, the only one to which he
could lock, the sheriff counted pre-
cisely as certified. Mr.. Webb can not
deny this. Then the sheriff did not
so behind the returns in this case.
| Msj, Webb lays great stress upon Mr..
McAdoo's statement, which appeared
in the CHRONICLE of Thursday morn
ing in Mr.. Reeder's card. Now, that
our readers may see how little there is
in what he says about that card, we
here reproduce it as follows:
This is to certify that was the clerk at
the election held in the first ward of Knox
| VILE On August 9th, 1889, for sheriff, trus-
tee aud other officers; and that [ kept the
tally and wrote out the certificate of the
result of said election. and declare that,
according to my count, said certificate is
true, and that Anderson received at said
election only one hundred and thirty-eight
votes, and did not receive one hundred and
thirty-nlne.
August llth, 1880.
w. G. McADoo jr., Clerk.
He says as positively as language
can make it that according to his count
Andersen had 1873 and not 139 votes,
and if his count is not to be taken,
pray tell US whose count shall be?
And it is significant fact that Mr..
McAdoo's tally sheet, which was doubt
tless well kept, was rot sent in with
: the returns. but, a. we are Informed,
was kept by one of the Judges,
who sill retains il. by the advice of a
prominent democratic cfficial But
the testimony Of E quire Manson, the
offic who held the election, sets this
Mr.. Reeder was rieh'. He states posi-
lively in card published Thursday
M orning that there was one ballot ia
, the box which did not contain the
> name of any candidate for sheriff: The
/ number of votes polled ZIG One Of
J these did not vote for sheriff which
would leave 215. 1t Is not disputed
) that Gossett received II of these. Now
if Maj. Webb. or any other gentle
man can show US by what arithmet-
ical process II can be subtracted
from 2l5 and leave 139
remaining We will give it up and
? acknowledge that Reeder's arithmetic
was wrong. II is said that figures will
not lie, but If Reeder did not count this
first ward right, then they do lie. We
might add that number of by-stand-
ers kept the tally when the votes OF
! this ward were being counted, and,
6 although some OF them had money
bet on the result, no one claimed that
Anderson had more than 1873 votes
9 there, until 1t was ascertained that the
q vote was very close. We do not believe
q there is an unprej judiced, disinterested
/. man in Knox county who thoroughly
informs himself as to the facts, who
will not admit that Sheriff Reedel
counted the votes of this ward accord
ing to the face of the retur and cor
: rectly.
q The case OF the Sth ward has beer
: fully explained. In returning Gossett'G
2, vote, 'S4'' had been written in figures
7 by the clerk, and subsequently, wher
f a majority of the judges decided t.
d count disputed ballot, "5'' was writ
d ten over the ~ " making it IS. Writ
ten as it was there was room for doubt
perhaps, but Mr.. Reeder decided t,
count it 85S as he was clearly justifiabl
in doing, and subsequent proof show
that he was right. The judges ant
q clerks who held the election in tha
+ ward have certified that '85'
IS was what they intende'
q to return as nj Gossets's vote. MAJ
Webb now sAs 3 that The disputed vot
there was double ballot and there
fore illegal. but no one knows bette
than he that Mr.. Reeder had nothipj
to do with that. IF be had had tn
bower to throw o1t double ballots, b
= could ffave thrown out several Ander
son votes, as there is abundant evi
= ldsnee that In several Instances doubl
: haIIots Uora leauuted and returned fo