San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1894-11-09
He Is KICKING
About the Election-what Will the
People Do About 1t.

/ To the Daily LIGHT
The judges, inspectors or man.
ayers OF the late election in BeXar,
were all appointed by a county
officer who was himself candidate
on the Big 6 ticket, and was also
hand and glove with the Big 6. lie
was therefore an interested party ;
he had a direct personal interest in
the success of the ticket on which
he was running, and according to
the intent aud spirit OF the law was
disabled from acting. Was he gov
erned by that interest in his selec.
ton and appointment of the judges
Of election in the various precincts
in the county? II he did not
have an eye to his personal interest
in the election, and to the sue
cess OF the Big 6 ticket, with
which he was identified, it is
most singular and unac-
couptable circumstance, that those
culled out and appointed by him,
were pronounced, blantant and ac-
tive partizans OF himself and the
Big 6 ticket. 1t Is An old and true
saying that "action speak louder
than words" But what advantage
could accrue to the Big 6 ticket
from their having the election
officers in all the precincts, chosen
from their most pronounced and
devoted partizans? The judges
have many points and questions to
decide and the Big ticket may be
said to have had an assured cer-
tainty, that all such points and
questions would be promptly decd
ed in its favor. More over, the
judges can work and cannive at
many violations of the election law,
where they will aid the
ticket espoused by them. TO
Illustrate my meaning, the
LIGHT of the 9TH stated that at
the polls at Mutualista Hall and
several other precincts, the judges
allowed outside parties to furnish
voters with tickets already scratch
ed and prepared and to make out
their ballots from these prepared
tickets handed to them on the out.
side by the candidates and their
strikers. This sort Of thing was a
plain violation Of the Australian
ballot law OF Texas.
Again, the LIGHT stated, that at
several polling places, the judges
allowed persons, acting in the in
terest of the Big Six ticket, and
having no right to be inside the
room for polling votes, to remain
inside, TO go into the booth make
out tickets for the voters, hand
the ballots to The voters, and see
they handed the identical tickets
to the judges Of election. These
men were in no sense free agents,
but veritable poems. No doubt, |
they had sold their vote to the |
Big Six and the man who
fixed their tickets was dele
gated to see they delivered
the goods, according to the
terms of the contract. 1t is unnec.
essary to say this sort of proceed
ing was directly and plainly con.
trary both to the letter and spirit
Of the Australian ballot law of
Texas.
Every one knows that such
things could not have been done,
had the opponents Of the Big Six
ticket, had representative among
the judges of the election. These
things show the unfair
ness injustice and illegal.
ity Of selecting and ap-
pointing none but the partizans
and henchmen OF the Big 6 judges,
DR. inspectors Of the election. |
am decidedly Of the opinion,
hat these plain violations
Dr the law, with the conni-
vance, consent and knowledge Of
the managers or judges, would
throw out the entire vote polled at
such precincts. The most unques-
should be thrown out and
not counted. My further opinion is
that ample grounds exist for the
granting of writ OF injunction
the officers, whose duty
1t is to canvass the votes and de-
clare the result, from counting the
ballots from said precincts. The
illegal doings at such precincts,
also, constitute good grounds for
the election, though the |
by injunction would be
preferable on the score or expedi-
tioness and effectiveness.
Enpassant, let me ask why it is
that the returns from Precinct
are always the last to be made to
the proper officer? Why are they