The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1890-01-24

;7--;;--7- --:
ST "a. 1862. 4
7 77!I=7- I5I77 70 a. y , Inc e7T-7f---7;
that investigation was a thing which
from that day To 2 this they D have
never ceased To condemn. You men
sworn TO do right, are invited to { puj
yourselves In that position which you
have never ceased to condemn. s Is there
none among you to save this contestant
from his friends : Is there none among
you to protest that the namo OF "a.
Brooks Fleming shall not 20 into the
mouths Of the people OF tho State and
the country as his fraudulency, which
you may remember TO have heard before
You arc to protect, also, the name and
the fame Of this State. \ q q q, re
p A few months iago the Governor oI
this State said that a reproach had been
put upon the State by illegal and cor.
rupt voting In almost every county la
the State. Was that statement borne
out 2 SlSs& 4, X S.{i !.S,fF
S5sa!$ AS TO THE EVIDENCE. ~ n y
Following the Governors figures with
critical analysis, Mr.. Hubbard showed
that In every county except tCabell and
Kanawha the vote exceeded capitations.
II that is evidence Of fraud, why arc
there not in the county. OF Hardy 60 in
dictments, 120 In Randolph, = $40 in
Lewis? This is the sort OF invectiye used
10 persuade you there ought to be con-
test Il How much of that corrupt voting
has that committee found 2iAbsolutely
nothing. There Is not In the majority
report, there was not In; the argument Of
the opening counsel, anything to war.
rant that gross libel on the State. a Tint
committee found no man.in the private
walks OF lie willing To twist "twe' into
twelve. [Applause. There is one in.
stance OF bribery shown, and that In d
Republican county, and still more pain
full, IL occurred in the county Of Tyler.
There Is some evidence that one miner
received s. for voting the Democratic
ticket. To be candid, this is not reason.
ably well proved. You cannot be blind
to the fact that this controversy was set
on foot without reasonable cause X and
provocation and has made this State a
byword and reproach among her sister
commonwealth. .ii -
THE NEXT QUESTION INVOLVED.
There is something deeper and higher
in this great argument; something else on
trial. The men who areIupohitrial here are
tfNmembers OF thiscourt. The important
question is whether there can be found
in the Legislature Of West Virginia men
who are 50 blind and deaf to all appeals
as TO whether one result shall bring one
party or another party into power; y KS
M Judge johnson singled ont forty-six
members Of this court and put them in
the prisoners box upon trial before the
people OF this State. y,2 l could not pre-.
cisely see at first the point OF Judge
johnson sstory about the man who was
going to vote the 4 Democratic ticket
hell or no hell. sIt at last dawned on
me that he was slylv working into you
suggestion that he was urging the forty
ak TO vote for the majority report, to
vote the Democratic ticket, hell or no I,
hell. If you do as Judge johnson wants
the first part of that option won't be .
open to you,-it will be l." Democratic
ticket !hell.n and ii you don't get the
second part you ought to.
~ THAT 1NFALL1BLE COURT.
1 Judge johnson says there was an cleo.
ton in this State, November 9, 1883.
Now the infallible Court Of Appeals says
there wasn't t. ( I do know that since it
began there has been time enough ito
end it and put in the chair the man the
people elected. I was surprised that
Judge johnson devoted so much of his
time 10 defending the L forty.six-time
which it might have been thought he
would invest in Mercer and Mcdowell.
Do these iorty.six need it2 Judge John
son says they were right, because it never
was contemplated that a man should oc
cupySthe Governors seat until it was
absolutely known that he was entitled
to it. 1t certainly never was intended
that man should for ten months hold
the seat who was not entitled to hold it
one day. The minority is criticised for
saying the Court OF Appeals has no ju-
risdictlon in this case. The Court OF
Appeals says SO itself, and that court,
Judge johnson says, is infallible, but
what that has to do with this case is not
easily perceived. N Z ~.
Judge johnson says that the, decision
OF the Supreme Court are infallible until
reversed. Vas the Dret Scott decision
of Sthe Supreme Court Eof the United
States ever reversed, and does anybody
think that the bred Scott decision stands
to-day the law Of tie land s}s?sg:itss r.
i22'5t,. THE LYING {NEswpApEns. 4 ji!ss
+. The 40 approached the consideration
Of this question under the spur OF per-
sons peculiarly interested ia maintain
ing existing political conditions Sin the
State. i They were persuaded that there
had been general corruption in the State,
and what has been shown =? SEE Not a case
Of bribery; or corruption that would
make decent foundation for lying
newspaper paragraph. Yet the report
that has gone to the people through a
party newspaper over the signatures OF a
majority OF committee. lying libelous
statements that never was put in the re-,
port by the committee and could not
have been because there |: had been
nothing onywhich to base these state.
msnts, and not one /. OF them was true.
That is what has gone to the State and
world III the majority report improp-
erly states facts or: draws false conclu-
sions; If shown to be false in any one
respect, it must be rejected as unworthy
Mr.. Hubbard took up Judge Johnson's
suggestion that the majority report is
like that OF "a master commissioner in
chancery,E and demolished it 80 com
pletely that the Democratic members
nodded in assent. s y B.
AN UNPRECEDENTED CASE. g e: 4s
i;;la Is there any precedent for those pro:
~ - non1