The Portland daily press., 1893-04-08
DEMOCRATS AND THE FRAUD.


DEMOCRATS AND THE FRAUD.
We print on our local page this morn
ing the comments of the Eastern Argus
on the Ward One affair the morning at
ter the facts had been disclosed. We hope
our Democratic friends will read it and
contrast it with the present utterances OF
the Argus. All that is known about the
fraud today was known at that time,
and nothing has transpired since to alter
OF weaken in the slightest degree the
proof which then, according to the Argus,
was strong enough to establish beyond
doubt the fact that an attempt had been
made to falsify the vote of Ward One.
The stand that the Argus took in this
editorial was a manly and decent one.
It was the only stand that an honest
journal or an honest person could take.
The Argus clearly recognized then that
to apologize for the proceedings in Ward
One. to seek to extenuate them or to fail
to denounce them would strongly tend
t,.implicate the Democratic party in the
crooked work. Hence it vigorously con-
demned them and called for the arrest
and punishment of the persons RESPONSE
BILE for them. That this course was
good politics as we'll as common hon
esty can admit of no doubt
But every reader of the Argus knows
that there came time when this manly
and polite course was abandoned, and
in it's stead was adopted policy of ex-
tenuation and excuse. Error took the
place of fraud in referring to the count
in Ward One, and instead of demanding
that the warden be punished, it began to
hint that there was really nothing Grim
inal about his act, and finally grew
SO bold as to wager its reputation that no
jury would ever convict him, a declara-
ton which was only thinly disguised
notification to airy Democrat who might
get on the jury that his party would ex-
pect him to vote for acquittal.
What was the reason of this changer
No new facts had been discovered that
threw any additional light upon the
Warden Harper's proceedings certainly
no new facts that tended in the direction
of his innocence. On the contrary the
proof of fraudulent intent had been in
tensifed, if anything, by the examine
ton of the ballots left in the box and by
the warden's refusal to take the stand in
the municipal court and explain his con-
duct. The change, therefore, cannot be
attributed to new developments which
tended to weaken the evidence on which
the Argus denounced the proceeding as
fraudulent and demanded the punish
ment of the perpetrators, Neither can
it be attributed to any alteration in the
opinion of the Argus as to the proper
attitude of a party when some insignifi-
can't member of it, acting on his own
responsibility and without connivance,
had been guilty of a criminal act, unless
we are to assume that the Argus was
suddenly seized with alteration of mind.
What then remains to explain the
charge?
Suppose a bank cashier had been
caught making false entries in his
books, and the directors after adj
hitting 1.-THE Justification and de-
claring that they believed it was made
with fraudulent intent, should sud-
denly turn roundIand say tWell we don't
know, perhaps he merely made an honest
mistake" Suppose later on the cashier
was arrested and brought before court
and the chance given to him explain his con
duct and deny that his act was committed
with intent to cheat, and he waived his
right preferring to remain under the
imputation of crime for many weeks
longer. Suppose then that the directors
in spite of the refusal of the cashier to
explain or deny, should go right on de-
Tending him, and paying tribute to him and
accusing everybody who spoke deprecat-
ingly of his conduct as maliciously SLAM
dering him, what would be the effect
upon the public mind? There can be no
doubt about it. Everybody of COM
mon ScuoC III thO hOO11Li uAlDJ WOuio
saw that the cashier had some
sort of twist upon the direc-
tors that made it an object for them to
screen him. They would say that some
director, or all of them,. had been guilty
of crookedness and that they were afraid
to denounce the cashier lest he should
disclose their connection with the fraud.
Now the supposititious case of the bank
cashier is exactly paralleled by the real
case of Warden Harper. The directors
of the Democratic party, or some of them,
first denounced him, then they began to
apologize for him and finally to coddle
him. Is it surprising then that the Ipub-
lie is saying today that this change of at
titude toward him is because he knows
something that would implicate men
high in the local councils of the Demo
~