Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1892-04-22

couhiittct snDtfo Throw open the DOCKS
throughout the whole city. for there had
other precincts.
II they want TO prove all the frauds
that have been committed. possibly ] may
take hand IN IL myself said MIR. Smith,
rs he resumed his seat. There was an out
burst OF applause, which the chair quickly
quelled.
COLONEL yrLErT's REMARKS.
Colonel Elicit, who followed Mr. Smith.
said be simply desired to present what he
considered the present status OF the case.
He could not better do this than read q
few extracts from the plan under which
the primary was conducted. The plan did
not contemplate new election. II states
that the person receiving the highest num-
Der OF legal votes should be declared the
nominee. He then read several sections
from the plan.
Where do we find ourselves tonight no
asked. The committee represented 10000
Democrats. The contestee says there are
such irregularities that he cannot take the
nomination. Was it necessary for the con-
testant TO produce any evidence in the face
of this admission? Could the committee
under these circumstances alone refuse to
give the contestant recountY But thatwas
not all. His client bad produced fifty
illegal votes and the testimony of seventy
men who swear they voted for Spotswood
at the Third Precinct of Jefferson Ward,
whereas he was oaly accorded thirty-six.
The speaker stated as a fact. and as re-
markablc fact, that out OF the seventy who
had made affidavit that they voted tor
Spotswood not one was recorded as an
illegal voter. He. therefore. concluded by
asking the committee for q recanvass and
recount, trusting IN their fairness and
impartiaiiiy.
Mr.. SMITH RESPONDS.
Mr.. Smith. replying TO Colonel Elicit.
said that when he came 10 the meeting be
didn't expect 30 have anything 70 say, but
that he felt II proper that he should take
the committee into bis confidence as well
as everybody else who had an interest in
the matter, and that he wanted to explain
through them the reasons which induced
him TO saw what he did IN his letter.
Since Colonel Elicit had relied TO some
extent upon a technicallty he (Smith) felt
that II was proper for him to state that
there was technlcality based upon the
same line of argument which Colonel Ell
lett had adopted that would have forced
the committee to give him this nomina-
tion, even if they had believed that he was
fraudulently elected. The principle which
Colonel Elicit bad laid down would have
forced the committee 10 give him this
nomination, even if they had believed that
he was not entitled to it. 1t was for this
reason that be wrote his letter.
He then cited several sections of the
primary plan relative TO the canvass of the
returns, and said that a recanvass, accord
ing 10 the provisions OF the plan, enabled
the committee TO do only one thing to
find out whether there were any clerical
errors IN addition or otherwise by which
any one might have been injured. IL they
found out that there was no mistake they
could ask for a recount of the ballots, but
this plan gives the committee no right TO
go behind the returns.
COULD HOLD THE NOMINATION..
Mir. Smith said that this was techni-
cality which Colonel Spotswood would
have ayailed himself of, and that if he
chose 10 stand upon II no power of the
committee could take from him the ncml-
nation which be held. To rid the COM
mittee aud the Democratic party of this
embarrassment, and 10 let them see that
he had intended TO call their attention to
the fact that their plan should be amended
in this respect, he would state as an honest
man that the committee ought to have q
right to 90 behind the returns and the
ballots.
Mr.. Smith said that. relying upon the
technically which Colonel Elicit had an
nuunced to the committee, they would
have no rlsnt 10 20 btuiHu luiS Diau, anu
II was for that reason that he had said
that he would not take the nomination.
when he felt satisfied that there might be
doubts as TO the legality OF his election.
IL they wanted 10 stand on techncalitles
he would withdraw his letter ana follow
their example.
Il say" concluded Mr.. Smith, that
this plan gives me no right to do any more
than recanvass the ballots. There Is not a
a A . Hon, ha rfrhf n 90
hind the ballots; and. therefore, TO rid the
committee of their embarrassment and 70
clear their own consciences, / stated that
would waive the nomination and consent
that the matter might 20 back to the peo-
ple. / have said tonight all that intend
TO say. I trust that it will be the pleasure
of the committee to give Colonel spots
wood access TO all OF the poll-books III the
CITY,"
COLONEL ELLErr AGAIN.
Colonel Elicit, in replying to NJ. Smith,
said the plan laid down was for the
guidance of the committee, and they were
the sole Judges. as well as the canvassers,
i'm the case. From the first he (the speak
| err had contended that all technIcallties
| he discarded and the committee go down
| to hard pan and make a thorough investi-
| CATION in the matter. What was the tech
| nicality Mr.. Smith suggested Ihat
under the plan the committees duties
were simply ministerial. and If fraud had
| been perpetrated they could not look into
| II. He had known Mr.. Smith for num-
| her of wears and did not believe he or any
! other honorable man would stand on such
| q technlcallty.
Mr.. smith: THAT is why | wrote my
| letter"
Colonel Elicit, resumlng. said that as &c
/ the gentleman's letter his side and the
! - ,af To I.
/ cissd II. but had accepted II In good faith
/ Why had his client been compelled e
| spend SO much time In getting athdavlts
| and why had they been compelled 10 pre-
| sent the petition of 500 voters, but for the
| fact that impediments had been met al
every step in the investigation The pc
| tition requested the committee TO discard
| all techmcalities and 90 TO the bottom OF
! the matter Honest men did not impede
| going TO the bottom of irregularities
/ Honest men did not put barriers In th'
wav of a thorough Investigation OF irregu
! larities.
| MR.. INQUIRE SPEAKS AGAIN.
AT the conclusion of Colonel Ellett's re
| ma-ks Mr.. Mcclure again took the floor
| The committee. he said, might DO laborinl
under mistake. What his side asked wa
a recanYass and d recountand the OPENING
up of the books. The question was. flat
| they shown enough fraud 10 make TIT
committee open the doors and examine TN
ballots? They had, he contended, shown
enough TO Justify changing the deciara
ton of the committee. All they. asked
was the opportunity 10 prove their posi-
| ton. IL they had demonstrated tina
| Spotswood was elected by rs. 10, OF, II
votes. was il for the committee TO say tina
they should prove that he was elected bl
/. OOO2 The case was whether the commit
tee could order a recount. If they ordered
| il his client could come III an.
prove that lie had been wronged. l
Mr.. Smith could prove traus
by which Spotswood had been nominated
then let Mr.. Smith have the nomination
If Mr.. Smith can show a fraud by whicl
ne has been injured, let him do 1t. VIVA
his SIDE asked of the committee was I
punish those who had debauehed the pr
mary. The committee was not here !
order a new election. but TO ascertain IN
result of the election already held.
GIVE HIM THE PoLI-BooKs.
When Mr.. Mcclure had concluded MI
Tenser moved that the poll-books OF III
whole city be turned over TO Coiont
G,o4amond 10 he examined under the ST