Martinsburg independent. [volume] (Martinsburg, W. Va.) 1875-1900, 1880-08-07

with industrious zeal in dividing
counties otherwise solid, and weak
ening Mr.. Faulkner throughout the
section west Of the Alleghanies in
this district.
4th. The opposition to Mr.. Faux
ner and warm support of Mr.. Jack
son from prominent and influential
agents Of the two great railroads in
this State was sensibly felt in the
result.
9Th. May we not add among these
causes the isolated condition of our
Eastern Panhandle and its limited
connection with the State at large
as compared with Wheeling and
Parkersburg, Clarksburg, &c. This
was fully forseen and commented
upon by Mr.. Faulkner in his great
argument before the Supreme Court
in the case of Virginia VS.. West Vir-
ginia, which resulted in annexing
this panhandle to West Virginia.
And yet with all these difficulties
in his path, it is an ascertained fact,
the result of careful canvass, con-
coded by friend and foe, that when
the delegates met in this place on
the 2Sth ult., there was a majority
in favor of the nomination of Mr..
Faulkner. We have high authority
for saying such was the opinion ex-
pressed by those opposed to him.
During the long interval which
elapsed from the temporary to the
permanent OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES eight
hours-a change was observable un-
favorable to Mr.. Faulkner's nomina-
ton, growing out of the eager rival
ry and competition which occurred
for the positions of Attorney Gen
eral, Superintendent of Public
Schools and Judge of the Court of
Appeals, which, without at this time
giving any details, authorize us in
saying, took from Mr.. Faulkner four
counties in the Third District and
from half to two-thirds of three
counties in the Second District.
There were confident statements of
other influences brought to bear
upon the general result, but we shall
not refer to them here, as they rest
merely upon rumor, and are not
based upon evidence satisfactory to
our minds.
Mr.. Faulkner received support
from some forty of the fifty-six coun-
ties of the State, from Mcdowell in
the extreme south to Hancock in
the extreme north, showing popu-1
. .S..ty not local; but coextensive
with Its limits. We repeat then that
a scrutiny Of the membership of that
convention will show that it was not
tt. the people of West Virginia that
the defeat of Mr.. Faulkner is to be
traced. He had then, and he has
now the hearts of the people with
him. He was their choice, and we
believe that he is at this moment
stronger in the confidence and affec-
tons of the people of West Virginia
than he was on the day when the
State Convention met. He has the
further consolation of knowing that
no acts Of electioneering smartness
and dexterity has, or can be charged
to him, or any of his friends ia this
canvass. AS we said in our last is
sue, his defeat is personal gain to
him, but serious loss to the people
of our State. ea
The people Of West Virginia will
not permit the large experience, the
matured craftsmanship, the active
and irrepressible energies of one of
her sons like Mr.. Faulkner "to rust
in honor unused" They will avail
themselves Of these qualities on the
first proper occasion that offers, and
especially as they now see his own
inherent, unborrowed and unaided
strength as developed in our recent
Stata Convention