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

| s'S tNsa ttntp w ulGil CulLlb ~ Wltulu
the time set by the JOINT Assembly were
In due form and those that come In later
MIR. ST., Clair explained II was done BY
the clerk TO save time-takenl from the
Alderson.McGinnis case. "A ! JS55
Nlr. Hubbard Just, 30, and just the
same 1T was never put In here as eyi.
dencc. The explanation does not OK;
plainS why 4 the certificates Of Nlerce,
county, dated In due season, were print.
cd and those from Mel Dowell not dated
~ due time are not printed. This calls
fora turther explanation from somebody
something to- show that these papers
were ever before the committee. 1t ap.
pears that II these papers ever got to the
committee at all, here is ono that got
there three months after you said the
taking of testimony should sbe closed.
The constitution OF West Virginia pre-
scribes how you shall trygn contest for
Governor, and It does not prescribe the
way laid down by the National House
Of Representatives In the trial OF con-
tested election cases. Il, &
THE COMMITTEE INCOMPETENT. 4,
n Now, It Is absolutely clear. that not a
syllable.ofey evidence taken aftcr the statu.
tory time is admissible. But you under.
took to extend the time. Did you
mean that time to J mark the limit
Is proof still coming I in? Is the
majority still engaged 4 in receiving
proof AS to matters OF small moment
you. have "a most elaborate brief of the
testimony in fifty counties, When 1T
comes to matters OF real Importance,
when this court might be served by care
fully prepared briefs, the committee in
its own words, finds the Testimony too
difficult to Sarrange.p,@ OF course 1t was.
iWhensin q law case q plaintiff has a case
too difficult to arrange II he has good
sense he takes q non.suit, and when he
doesn't he loses his case. ~
5f4.s3 a MIC CONTRACT. III 8
Will you arrange this for yourself in
each case or are you going to take the
mass Of testimony as furnished and gulp
down the whole mess E The question
is rs to each individual vote and the
right OF the voter to cast 1t. This Is
what you arc to consider, although you
have to do what the majority found 1t
difficult to do-arrange the testimony.
N Here is the case Of William Moore,
Bethany, Brooke county, Republican
ticket vote rejected to on the ground
OF non-residence. Now take the case of
Edwin @. Ewing, vote rejected 3.to e;
voted in Ohio county voted the Repub.
lican ticket. WA. Delaplain, Ohio
county, Dem charge non-residence.
Majority refused to reject the vote. In
the Greathouse case seven witnesses, in.
cluding the mother of the twins, testify
that !: they We're rightful voters. Yet
Judge Johnson thinks it a hard case
that the minority would not agree to re-
ject them. John F. Paugh, Of Harrison,
says himself that he voted in Missouri
and then voted here in 1885, and Judge
johnson thought the majority did right
not to throw out his vote. There is no
evidence that the colored men whose
votes have been thrown: out had voted
elsewhere, but this white Democrat was
held to be a good voter. I; -
SOME CASES IN POINT. s3i:.
4 O. y. simons, Jackson county, charge
non.residence, Democrat; majority held
his vote was good, and yet on their own
showing it appeared that two months
before this election he was living in Co.
lumbus, O., and that vas his home.
" The = case Of + Holly G. Armstrong
shows that his residence, If in this State
at all, was in Kanawha; yet he voted in
Jackson. What did the committee do
with the cases Of Thomas J. Moore, Ran
som Bennett, and Robert Bennett,
Wood and R. L. Harris, OF Bar
bour county What was done with these
votes. The report does not say. These
voters were,D Democrats. Do these votes
come under, the head OF CONTESTED by
contestee and not rejected ~ The
register OF birth shows one was not OF
age. The majority say he was good
voter. Harris'6own testimony showed
bis home was in Taylor. He. voted in
Harrison and voted the Democratic
ticket. The majority held him good
voter. O.; E. Windsor, Of Fayette coun-
ty, born 1870; charge, minor; ;&voted the
Democratic ticket. The majority held
him a good voter. II. ID. Dickinson, Of
the same county, voted in the district in
which be did not live. The majority,
held it was a good vote. Ss3 .5st&5
3!:.ii .5.s IAN IMPERFECT REPORT.
Take the case Of Vance Gray, Of JEFF
ferson county; charge, minor; proof,