Shepherdstown register. [volume] (Shepherdstown, Va. [W. Va.]) 1849-1955, 1884-09-05

COMMG.SlC&TED.
DIR PRIMARY ELECTION.

OUh lON.
.Nessrs Edaors.-As your paper has been
the only one of our county honest and in
dependent enough to notice and protest
against the error made and injustice that
has been done in regard to our nominees
for the county offices, desire to place the
following before your readers and the
Old County Executive Committee, that ii
may be seen how just it is that there
should be some action to correct the errors
that exist:
Look ut the self-evident proof Of error
in the published result of our primary
election in the vote recorded from Middle
way. This poll seems TO be the one to
which all eyes are directed. Taking the
vote and passing by all other candidates
! let us examine the votes cast for Commits
| sioner. The regular vote of this poll is
when full some few votes ever $50. The
vote polIed at the primary was between
| l40 and $50, the true number being ll2.
Now the published vote reads: Lewis
/ (unexpired term II, Kearsley (fuil term)
| 20, Hootf full term) los, Knott full term
! 20, Kcplinger full term IS. Not count
| ing Lewis vote, who, being the only can
! didate for the uneXpired term, was for
! distinct Office from the rest, we Will sum
up the vote for the others, which sum
should equal the total number Of votes
polled, if no voter voted for two OF them.
! Their sums is 232, which is 80 more votes
than were cast. Equal to 100 more than
"Uncle Tom got or 9G more than Dick
Alexander got, each without opposition
for their respective offices. \ difference
by nearly 40 votes greater than Mayor
Hooff's plurality over Kcarsley or KEEP
linger. 1t is shame that this error should
20 Mncorrectcd.
When the Committee met on the 9Th
uit., according to the ordering Of Rule 4,
which was passed to govern the primary,
there came before them charges of error,
and no matter how the willy lawyer chose
Ia interpret The meaning of that part OF
the rule which says ''the Executive Com
mittec shall meet within five days after
the said primary election, and shall open
and count the rotes and declare tie result, "
&C.. it was the evident duty of the Com
mittee TO correct the error, and if this
could not have been doac by examining
the returns on the poll books, it was the
! duty of the Committee 10 open and re-
count the ballots, and failing to do :his,
the whole vote of MidJleway poll should
/ have been thrown out.
No one Of honest principles will grant
! that Major IIooif had any right to inter-
fere with the Committee in the work be-
fore them. Not one of the other candi-
dates dared sncIl an assumption of author
I ity, and why shonld he? Why did the
| Major object to the counting of the ballots
when there was charge Of error if he did
| not know there was fraud existing?
But why talk of action on the part OF
the Committee when really there has
never been any compliance with the rule
that they should meet. count votes, &c.
There was a meeting Oh the 9th ult., and
there was a quorum OF members present
for few minutes, but Mcssrs. Strider and
Lewis had to leave their places and 20
into court, leaving less than quorum 10
! transact business. y quorum consists Of
nRe members. This quorum was not
present, and therefore nothing could or
| should have been done, and so that meet
ing so far as anything they did is con-
4
order declaring the men nominees whose
names appear in your colImn of nominees
was of no Importance, though it bears the
signature Of the President and Secretary
of the Committee, the Committee never
having ordered such in business meeting
assembled.
IL is evident then that this work " hich
has not been done should be done by the
Committee. | fully believe there would
have been action taken in the matter last
Thursday (2Sth ult.) had all the members
of the Committee been present. But
know some members WI. o did not know OF
n meeting, or they would have been pres
ent. This duty of counting these votes
rests upon the old Committee according
to the rule mentioned, and as they have
not yet had Il lawful business meeting the
work remains unattended to. There never
has been full attendance of members ut
either of the meetings, and ii is certainly
the duty of the president of the old Com
mttee to call another meeting, and to no
tify each member in time, and let them
all attend and see that justice is done.
Should they let this matter rest they
will be emdangering the election of DEM
ocratic candidates, for have heard many
say that they did not deem it their duty
to vote for the so-callcG nominees until
their nomination is known to be true.
! And can any Democrat be duly bound to
vote for nominees unjustly thrust upon
them? We dare not in this case of Com
missioner vote for a man to conduct the
finances Of our county that is dishonesty
thrust upon us. JEFFERSON.
Small Army Itself.