The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1893-12-02
THE DISPATCH AND THE ELECTION
LAWS

making general allegations against ou
! election laws without specifying any cases
in which it claimed that fraud had beer
, committed We referred the Dispatch Il
the case Of Portsmouth, where, out OF
more than 5000 voters, Cooke was giver
ony five votes; to that Of Norfolk, where
! they voted one voter to every three-quar-
4 ters Of a rninute-an impossible thing
under a press-but when there was no
press at all. and to the Second congress
sional district, which gave O'Ferrall 1924
votes in year when Democrats would
turn out in no other part Of the
State although In the contest be-
tween Cleveland and Blaine, when
the country was reused from its
very centre, 1t gave Cleveland only 1913
votes We asked the Dispatch what 1t had
10 say to these cases. whereupon it says:
when The Times specifies the time and
place Of an election fraud, 1t does all
that we asked 1t to do. and therefore we
have no further controversy with IL on
that point"
And here the Dispatch proposes 10 leave
the matter. This irresistibly recalls
part of the dialogue between Bob Acres
ana Sir Lucius O'Trigger upon the duel
ling ground.
Sir Luc: pho Pho. You are little bet
ter than a coward, Mr.. Acres"
Acres: "Alind, gentlemen, he calls me
q coward. Coward was the word now, by
my valor."
Sir Luc: "well, sir?'
Acres: Look ee, Sir Lucius 'tisn't that
/ mind the word coward; coward may DE
said in joke. But if you had called me
poltroon. odds. daggers, and balls
Sir Lucius: We'll. sir?"
Acres: Il should have thought you
very ill-bred man."
In answer to the cases which we have
cited the Dispatch, resorting to the
you're another" argument says:
LAS a full offset TO these cases we cite
the contested-election case In the Virginia
Senate. of Knight VS.. Bradley T. john
son, in which case two or three times as
many lawful voters as he was credited
with at some voting precincts here made
oath that they had voted for Knight.
The new law cannot be charged with any
thing worse than that"
Now. we do insist that when the Dis
patch discusses matters of record, it shall
stand by the record. In the Johnson ana
Knight contested-eiection case evidence Of
fraud was only taken regarding one pre-
cinct, First jefferson. Only 11S persons
swore they voted for Knight at that pre-
cinct, of whom 50 were negroes, of
whom less than one-third could read their
ballots, as they testified and therefore
they did not know whether they voted for
him or not.
But there was, undoubtedly, fraud prac-
ticed at that precinct. What happened5
One of the judges of the election was
promptly indicted in the Hastings Court
Of this city for participating in the fraud,
but, for want of proof. he was acquitted
by the jury. But Judge Gugon knew,
nevertheless. that he was a guilty man,
and he Immediately issued a rule against
him to show cause why he should not be
removed from his Office Of judge. His
counsel, as we have already stated. APP
piled TO the Court Of Appeals for writ
of prohibition against Judge Gugon upon
the ground that as the man had been ac-
quilted by jury, it lay in the mouth Of
no man to say that he was guilty. But
the Court of Appeals answered that the
corporation Judge was the guardian of the
elections, and that he had the right TO
remove election officers whenever he
thought them improper officers. Read the
case for yourself. McDougall VS.. Guigon,
Judge. q Grattan 133. We have already
referred 70 this case as containing the
strongest argument that can be made
why the elections should be under the
control of the courts, and we thank the
Dispatch for giving us this opportunity
to press it upon the public again.
VIII the Dispatch please inform us
where we have lauded Judge Bond for
being a rascal or condemned Chief-Justlce
Waite for being one? We have expressly
declared that in our opinion Judge Bond
was an honest and great judge. We have
said that Judge Waite was of a socialis-
tic turn Of mind. but we never intlmated
a suspicion Of his integrity. On the con-
trary, we think he was one Of the purest
judges that ever wore the ermine We see
nothing whatever in the case OF either OF
these judges that is in opposition TO our
proposition that the judicial office would
make man an honest Official In spite OF
himself.