The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1883-09-27

The H9odtcdtOr denies that the cand1-
dates of the late primary were brought out
by the whiskey men denies that they were
supported by the whiskey men denies
that the whiskey men decreed who the
representatives should be, and calls upon
the VIRGINIAN for proof. We know of
no one save our innocent neighbOr to
whom further proof is necessary than that
afforded by his eyes and ears before and
doubt if there was a blind man OF congen-
ital deaf-mute at the Institution, who felt
the least interest in politics, who was un-
aware of the efforts being made by the
liquor dealers to defeat Col. Skim er. But
to come down to particulars. The Vindi-
Gator gives special prominence to the fact
that Geo. M. Cochran, Esq, was consulted
by one of the candidates before he deter
mined to announce himself. But Mr..
Cochran was not the originator Of the call
please inform us who got up that call If
a prominent liquor dealer of the town had
no connection with it, then we are mis-
taken, and are free to acknowledge it.
But that isn't all. One man may suggest
a name, but one man cannot give it prom
inence so pronounced that it may be said
to be drought out'' before the people.
We charge that the candidates nominated
We're drought out' as ticket by the eff
forts of the whiskey men. 1t was a fact
recognized by nearly every intelligent voter
of the town. Ask those men who have
been leaders in the temperance cause in
StauntOn, how they voted, if they voted
at all. Ask the Conservative citizens OF
the town who are Democrats, but not par
tizans if they did not see prior to and on
the day Of the primary that the liquor
dealers had set their faces against Skinner
and Lyle, and were bringing out y Echols
and Opie with all their might and main.
Enquire at Waynesboro, where the temper
sance influence is so strong that local option
is in force, if the men who voted for Skim
ner and Lyle there, did not feel. in meas
ure, as if they were fighting a battle SINH
liar to that in which they drove whiskey
from their town. Ascertain who were the
prominent workers on behalf of the sue
cessfll ticket at Greenville, at Mt. Scion,
at Mt. Sidney, and other precincts in
the county where majority was received
for it, and you will have proof enough as
to the truth of what we have stated.
The VisdScator denies that this ticket
was supported by the whiskey men. We
challenge our contemporary to go to the
poll books, ascertain how many Of the
liquor men voted, and then publish state
ment from each, giving the names OF the
candidates for whom he voted. This won t
be difficult to do, and it will determine,
beyond controversy, which OF us is right
and which of us is wrong. We are anxious
to have the matter tested. Don't dodge
OF evade, but come square up to the mark
and let us put an end to doubt. In the
meantime ask those who were about the
polls on the day of the primary who were
the most active workers for the ticket
nominated, and let us know the result OF
your inquiry.
If we are right as to these two propo-
sitions, then the other naturally follows :
If the liquor dealers of StauntOn prac-
tically controlled the vote of the town and
a good portion of the county, then they de-
creed who the representatives should be,
unless the people take the matter in their
own hands and annul that decree. Our
unsophisticated friend denies, too much