Lexington weekly intelligencer. (Lexington, Mo.) 1871-1887, 1882-02-04

the privilege. such mon as those So"Se
mentioned may safely be trusted to see
that the vote is a fair one. 1t is always Il
much fuller enc than can be obtained
for dsle2atss to a convention. Let us
for a moment consider the objections to
II, An anonymous writer in one OF u
county newspapers says:--"The people
of our county are being used
by a coter;e at the county seat, to keep
themselves IN Office during life. The
means is the primary election system
that has been in vogue for four or six
years, and the way is to get as MANY
candidates in the fold for the Office they
want, As they and their friends can in
duce to run, and the result. certain aud
unfailing. is that with the large vote
(aud they a make it as large
So they want iD Of Lexington
as basis, and their scatter
ing friends throughout the county,
they have a plurality ALL that is requir-
ed-ot the votes, when absolutely there
is a great majority voting against them"
II this charge were true 1t would have
considerable weight ~ an argument
against the. primary election system.
but no statement could be more SANDER.
Gus or less warranted BY facts. The
majority of the present officers of the
county, whom this gentleman attacks
even more venomousIy elsewhere in his
article, were first nominated by q eon-
vention, and have since been re.nomina-
tee by primary election, having receiy-
ed a clear majority over all competitors,
and in esarly every case without coun-
ting the vote of Lexington at all. The
assertion that 'thsy," or any M else,
can make 1t (the vote of Lexington) as
large as they want 1t, Is also an unfound-
cd and slanderous "a. The judges,
whose names We have mentioned, are
not the kind OF msn to permit such a
thing; the candidates from the county
largely remain at this poll during the
elections, A. 1t is the largest n in the
county, aud no such charge has ever be-
fore been made or dreamed OF. On the
contrary, the number of interested per-
sons on the watch here, render this one
OF the fairest polls in the county. We
perfectly understand the necessity of
Watching closely all town votes where
there Is any floating population, and it
is done very carefully in Lexington.
The objection, II fairly urged, that a
primary election gives the more popu-
lous portions of a sounty undue repre-
ssntation, can be met by the undoubtsd
TACT that = large delegation IN a conven.
ton always has more influence than the
proportion of the votes which elects it
everybody wants its vote, and is ready
to make concessions to secure it. The
charge that the "csteris," as our critic
calls it, bring out candidates to help it
out &c, is also without foundation, as
an examination OF the high character of
their opponents will clearly show. But
even If it were true the same thing may
be dono. and with much mor effect, to
control conventions. Let US see how
the primary election mas worked In this
county. In 1873 DR.. Fulkerson was
nominated by q majority OF 564 over his
only opponent. Mr. Ireland received
2,5o5 votes; he had no opponent. Mr..
Steele had a majority of 1892 over his
only opponent. Mr.. Trigg had a ma
joriiy OF / 1876 over both of his opponents
their combined vote being but 1888
Mr.. Blackwell received 1852 votes, hav.
ing no opposition. Capt. Conner had q
majority of 1900 votes, his opponent
having only 696 in all. Mr.. Mountjoy
was nominated by q plurality of 800, hi'
vote nearly equallnE the combined vote
of his two opponents. Mr.. White wal
nominated by . plurality. received out
side OF Lexington. Judge Prather had
no opposition. How was it in 1880 ?
Nj. Smith was nominotsd by q majority
in Lexington, and also out of It. Sheriff
Elliott wss nominated by a plurality out
side of Lexington. Mr.. Ireland wa!
nominated by . majority of 1887 ovel
his only opponent. Mr.. Blackwell had
no opposition. Judge Ryland had
plurality outside Of Lexington. Mr.
Weedin had . majority ' e both of hi
opponents. Judge Lockhart had q ma
jority vote. Judge Harrison had no op
position. Mr.. Mountjoy had a plural
ity not only in, but also outside Of Lexing
ton. The Istelligenosr is not urgin,
any OF these gentlemen for Office. 1t i
tor the entire democratic party. and 70
no man, but the attack upon tn
administration of the party Is an attacl
upon the party itself. and that we shal
defend to the best of our limited ability
The assertion made by our contempora
~ at Odessa. that no one but hummer
favored primary elections was, we doub
not, 4 lapsus ealams as he would hard
~ 30 designate = very large majority o
the democrats OF the coanty, who hav.
twice expressed themselves rs lavorinl
that mode. A glance ut the returns Q
the two primary elections which ",
have had will shsw that lar better at
tendance of democrats has breu secure,
than we have had at primary meeting
to elect delegates. The vote in 1873 wa
over $500; and In 1880 it wa
over 5000. The peop,e In this count,
are intelligent enough, and well enougl
acquainted with county candidates, t
know who they want tor office. without
turning the matter of their judgment o
choice over to Il superior intellect in tn
way of a delegate. The necessary res
buttons. &c, of the campaign are full,
provided for in the convention to sen
delegates to the state convention. w
appreciate the weakness OF this plan i
the occasional nomin ltion of q candi
date by a plurality, but this objection
also found at the general election. Th
people understand this system and, s
tar as We have heard, like II because {
Its purely representative character, an,
will be 10th to return to old tash:one
conventions.
There Is a system, however, which
better than any Of the abov
mentioned methods, which we shout,