Seattle daily post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1884-10-30
rnE eTrIcE eE snEEsTF.


The Present Contest fsr tfs Possession.
ssd she Plain Dusy or Cisixess.
No intelligent person need be told OF
the great importance Of the ofhce Of
Sheriff, and Of the necessity 20 the bust
ness interests of the county that its
affairs be well administered. IL is In
many respects the most important of
the county Offices, and its administra-
ton Affects the people in a manner that
that OF no ether Office can. The bust
ness men. tbs lawyers, the farmers, all
recognize this fact. and know that il Is
10 tllsir interest 70 have a reliable and
competent man in this important posi-
tion. In view of this fact We think il
our duty 10 give the voters Of King
County calm and dispassionate state
mant Of the qualifications and claims
Of the two gentlemen who will be be-
fore thsm a. candidates for Sheriff at
she coming election.
The Democratic candidate In Robert
Abrams. Nothing need be said regard
ing Mr.. Abrams character as man
and citizen. We wish to discuss sim
ply his qualifications for the office to
which be aspires, that alone being OF
interest 10 the people. Mr.. Abrams 70
totally snft for the office ef Sheriff. Ev-
cry voter who casts ballot for him,
votes against the best interests of King
County. de Ii q man without eduea
lion. and without experience in COM
msrcial or legal business (; q man Who'll
IL inc smpetent TO psrferm the duties of
the Office, and man too old to acquire
the systematic aud business like meth
oda aud manner OF thinking which he
would find necessary. He is man of
considerable wealth. and he was nomi-
natad la the expectation that ne would
speud four or i've thousand dollars in
the Canvass snn equal TO the income
from the Office for an entire term. Had
itinot been for this no one would have
thought Of placing him In nomination.
Allowing Mr. Abrams everything that
his friends claim for him, We fail to see
single reasen for his election. He Is
inexperienced, incompetent and with
out the slightest recommendation.
Opposed 10 Mr.. Abrams We have a
man OF liberal education and ideas a
man who had seven years experience in
active commercial life before coming to
this coast; q man who. during the three
years that be has held the office, has
devoted bis time and undivided atten.
tian 10 the study and performance of its
duties man who Ii as well grounded
la the principles of law as are many of
the lawyers now engaged in active prac
toe at the bar man who has made
no mistakes in the performance of his
duties a man against whose honesty,
integrity aud ability nothing can De
tIulhfully said. In short, we have John
II McGraw, the Republican NOMINEES.
About his qualifications there oan be
no uncertainty. His record is known
to every voter in the county, and We
challenge any one to present siugle
valid reason for his removal from office.
Has the office not been honestly admin
istered 7 Is Mr.. McGraw not compe-
tent Ii he not affable and courteous,
aud has he not been conscientious in
the discharge of his duties IL there
another man in King County so thor.
oughly acquainted with the duties Of
the office, and so competent TO perform
them as he 7 Let the voters ponder
over these questions, and let each one
answer them for himself.
With this plain statement of facts We
leave the question In your hands To
such contest there can be but Que ter
mination.
TIE people of King County are intel
igent and thoughtful. and they cannot
fail 10 decide correctly. whom, as in this
case. every consideration Of justice,
common sense and self interest urges
them 10 one course. John X. McGraw
will be reelected by an overwhel lining
majority.