West Virginia argus. [volume] (Kingwood, W. Va.) 1877-1946, 1882-07-28

the publication Of the PAYNE HoaE
controversy over the Fairmont agree.
ment, very pertiDsntly says;
"Mr. PAysE's letter, memorsnd um
and letter of Judge HoGE to him
appears on one side, and a letter en-.
titled Judge. HoaE's Version on the
other.
"The question now tor tho people
to decide is which is correct {? In
order to do this, the circumstances
which surropn nd tho transaction
should be carefully considered.
"Mr. PAYNE, witness in behalf
OF the agreement, speaks from a
memorandum made only four weeks
after the conversation occurred, and
not seeking the nomination himself
is, to great extent, at least a disin.
terested party, who has in the inter
est Of truth aud right voluntarily
PLACED himself In position in which
he has been aud is being assailed by
writer's both known and unknown.
Mr.. HoeE. testifying in opposition to
him, is announced as candidate for
nomination aud election be is there
lore an interested party, witness
speaking in his own behalf, aud with
an admitted faulty recollection, at
ter two years have elapsed. To
which will the impartial mind give
the greater credit TO the inter
ested or to the disinteresaed /; to the
memorandum or to the faulty recol-
lection ?
Mr.. PAYNE claims to have pro-
posed to Mr.. HoaE that LUCAS would
withdraw and bis friends vote for
him If he (HoaE) would agree not to
be a candidate against Lucas in 1882,
aud that HoGE accepted this propo-
sition and asked him TO make a
memorandum Of it. Mr.. HoeE
claims that PAYNE further asked for
the support OF his friends in 1882, in
addition to his retirement; and in
reply thereto, after consultation
with HE friends, he uttered this high
soundin & platitude, that such q
proposition involved a matter oil
principle, and therefore he declined
1T, as no one bad right to deter-
mine matter OF nomination that
belonged to convention but saws
that he agreed to Withdraw in 1882
II the Democrats Of the Eastern
Counties should signify their pref
erence for LUCAS, and has some rec
election oil adding that he did not
know that he would care to serve a
second term in Congress. This is
tie substance OF both statements.
1T is noticeable that what PAYNE
asked HoGE to do, wit; Not to
be candidate, invo vsd no matter
OF principle, usurped no powers of a
convention, required only his indi-
vldua! action, his abstinence from an
official feast after two years of en-
joyment. There was, therefore, NO
necessity to invoke principle, no ex-
cuse Tor the parade Of injustice to
friends Ii is also noticeable that
while HoGE could not speak for bis
friends AMI was not asked to speak
for then, that be could speak for
himself, and according to his own
statement said that he did not know
that he would care TO serve a second
term in Congress. Is it not peculiar
that the very thing Re did not care
to do at that time was the thing
that PAYNE proposed for him not ia
do2 Did Judge HoaE think by say
ing THE that he would leave PAYNE
under the impression that be was &C.
ceding to his proposition and thus
get LUCAS to retire, receive the cup
port Of his friends, by that means
get the nomination and then in 1892
come before the people and deny it
Was it an srtful dodge2 or were
Senatorial honors so apparently close
at hand just then that be could az
ford TO make such a bargain, and
not charge bis memory with it ?
Now let US view this matter 10 the
light Of surrounding facts. Its GER
tam that PAYNE and HoGE had a
conversation that after it Mr.LUcAs
Withdrew; that it was the interest
then Of Mr.. LUCAS, without an ar
rangement with Mr.. HoGE, TO elect
| MARTIEj tina, MARTIN was the
strongest candidate aud the easiest
nominated that LUCAS was master
Of the situation, and could elect bin.
1t 10 equilIy certain thst Mr.. LUCAS
labored to get his friends TO vote for
HoaE, and that too against The pro
test Of many Of the delegates: that