Saint Mary's beacon. [volume] (Leonard Town, Md.) 1867-1983, 1892-11-24
THE ST. MARY's ELECTION.
BOTH SIDES OF TIE QUESTION.

tracing attention not only in our
county but also throughout the
State. In the BEACON OF the 10th
instant, We called attention to re-
ports of interference by Federal
Supervisors with our election, char
acterized such actions as unwar-
ranted usurpation Of authority" and
called upon our party leaders to
have the matter Investigated. Be-
lieving as we do that Maryland is
supreme in Maryland we felt deep
ly the indignity put upon our State
by Federal officers overriding its
laws and disregsrding their express
mandates, and we said briefly what
we thought about it.
In the Baltimore Sun of Noyem-
Der 10th, 1892, we notice report
Of an interview with Mr.. j. Frank
Ford, Clerk to the Court of APP
peals, which refers to this subject
and we here reproduce it
Mr.. J. Frank Ford. clerk Of the Court Of
Appeals, in referring TO the action Of the
federal supervisors of election In Sc. Mary's
county, of which mention was made In
to-day's Sun, said "The democrats of St.
Mary's viii take Steps 10 prosecute the
offenders. Those who have violated the
State law will be brought TO trial In the
State courts and the United States commits.
sioner will be asked TO punish the supervi
sors who exceeded their authority as Unit
Ford says, was begun year ago, when
certain democratic election officers were
brought To trial in st. Mary's coun-
ty. The grand jury at the Spring
term had failed to indict them, but at the
Fall term jury, composed mostly Of re-
publicans brought an indictment The
court, however, promptly acquitted the off,
Gals. But for the federal election officer,
he says, 81. Mary's would have been ex-
ceedingly close this year instead Of return
ing republican majority of over 200. Mr..
Ford resides in the third, or Leonardtown
district.
On Tuesday last, Mr.. William
Frank Ford, of the 9Th district,
one of the neutrality-suspicious. there,
called at our Office and gave his side
OF the case which we cheerfully
publish and ask that in common
justice it be carefully read, for no
man should be judged without an
opportunity to state his case.
Mr.. WILLIAM r. FoRD's STATEMENT
II went into the voting room in the
morning and showed the judges my ap-
pointment IS q Federal Supervisor and
told them that didn't wish TO do anything
except what was proper and right. The
Judges examined my papers and told me
had a perfect right TO see the ticket of an
illiterate voter made out by the ballot clerks,
provided the illiterate voter asked me TO
see it and also, that l had right to ex-
plain to illiterate voters that they had the
privilege of calling upon me 10 see their
tickets made ont. When I was called on
by illiterate voters / watched the ballot
clerks mark their tickets and 50 did the
other Federal Supervisor Mr.. Dukel and
also the two police [Messrs. Richard Ham
NETT and Alfred Sannerl I exercised NO
privilege which was not also accorded the |
other supervisor and the two State police. |
When Messrs. J. G. Craddock and David |
Hammett raised an objection to my actions
/ said that if did anything wrong deputy
sheriff Mr.. Hammett1 was present and
had power TO arrest me. Noobjection was
eyer made by the judges to my actions. |
The judges and other election officers of |
the Eighth District, in my opinion, tried to |
do as near right as possible and to accord
exact justice to every voter"
The statement of Mr.. Ford shows
conclusively that in the 9Th district
our State election law was fragrant
ly violated in its most essential par
ticular and that in many instances
there was in that district no SEM
blance of a secret ballot. What
Marylander does not feel his cheek
tingle with the blush of shame at
such spectacle of his State tram
pied under foot and her laws defied.
We have no reason to doubt Mr..
Ford's statement that he did only
what he thought fright and prop
er, for partisan though he be, we
believe him to be man without
fear. But, if Mr.. Ford was right
in his construction of the law and
We are wrong, then proud old Mary
land is a Federal Satrapy and moth
ing more, and the Lodge-Dayen-
port Force Bill was an idle and a
senseless menace, for its counter
part is already on the statute books.
There is still another phase to this
subject, and what will our Maryland
Court do about it ? We all remem-
Der how earnestly our Judge, last
-
Spring, inveighed against violations
of the election law. The ink il vet