Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1888-12-08
From Jacksonville.
TO the Chronicle:

iHC b'Cht polltlChi DdttiC 10 OfCi
and the Democracy is vanquished,
though the smoke from the Press
artillery that SO recently engaged in
the deadly paper contest, has not yet
passed away.
The position of the Democracy was
well taken, and the battle, fought
with commendable zeal, and courage
upon platform of equal and exact
justice to all classes, but unfortu-
nately for the party we had too many
politicians with petty ambitions to
crafty, who wasted their influence,
not only here but elsewhere in per-
sonal wrangles, and frivolous objec-
tions to our candidates.
1t really seems that the Democrats
will never learn that there is strength
in unity of action.
The GAINESVILLE Democrat, and
some of our leading Democrats,
played conspicuous part in this
line, and do not seem to have yet
ceased their strife.
That imprudent, pertinacious jour
nal, and we suppose, its kicking
boiling, scratching followers, still
believe they constitute the whole
Democracy of the county, and that
their independent, unilateral pri-
mary, voiced the sentiment of a
majority of the Democrats of the
county. We are aware that any at
tempt to reason with the unreason-
able, is folly, but to dispel some of
the mist that very ingenious matter
of course paper, and its distempered
gang seem endeavoring to throw
around their so called primary, we
will attempt to show to the commu-
nifty, how the vote really stands,
when stripped of one of its frauds
only. If we are not mistaken it
was understood and so promulgated,
by the Democrat, that none were to
vote in the primary but Democrats
who voted the straight Democratic
ticket. 1t will be understood that
there was no official surveillance of
the action Of the self-constituted
officers that pretended to hold that
election. They had the affair en-
tirely to themselves and conducted it
according to their peculiar views of
Democracy.
Did they adhere to that simple
qualification of voter, that none
should vote but those that voted the
straight Democratic ticket? Let us
see. In District No. q, seven Demo
Gratis scratched Mr.. Goodpasture, and
three Mr.. CorbaS. Would it not sur
prise the community to know that
these same gentlemen voted in the
primary for Mr.. Harris? Even the
self constituted officials, that held the
SO called primary, expunged from
their tickets the names of Mr.. Good
pasture and Corban, then voted in
struction to the very men they had
refused to support. Was there ever
such inconsistency? In District
No. 80, the official poll shows but
four scratches, when there was really
fifteen. Eight Republicans and four
Third Party men voted for our Rep
resentatives, which brought them
within four votes of MIR. Cleveland.
AS in No. q, so in No. 10, all who
scratched voted in the primary. In
No. there were ten who scratched
Goodpasture and Corban, and voted
in the primary for Harris.
From the best information we
have been able to obtain from reliable
sources concerning the scratching
throughout the county, is that 24S
Democrats scratched Mr.. Goodpas-
ture and Mr.. Corban, all of whom
voted in the primary.
Will the Democrat and its follow
ers have the boldnesS to claim these
24S voters who repudiated our Rep
resentatives by expunging from their
tickets their names, as votes for Mr.
Harris, after having defined the quail
tication of voter to be one who
voted thes traight Democratic ticket
If so any Republican had right tc
vote in their primary.
By erasing from their ticket the
names of our candidates they cease
to be Democrats that far, there
fore forfeited their rights tC
instruct for they cease from that very
act to be constituents. Constituent
"applies to those who appoint OF
elect some one oftheir representative
to an Office" not to those who at
tempt to stigmatize, the political
standing of our candidates. by the