Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-02-16
SATURDAY. FEBRUARY l6, 1895
The Times. Answer No Answer

The Illness Answer No Answer.
1t takes one column and half Of the
Timcs's editorial space in its yesterdays
issue 10 cloak the fact that II is unwilling
20 admit that Tucker. Mckinney. Otey.
and others can honestly hold their seats
as the beneficiaries Of that masterpiece
of trickery"-the alienation Of ballots
In that long and remarkable production
the Times discusses many questions. but
never THE question whether. as honest
men. Otey, McKenney. Tucker. and the
others can conscientiously consent to be-
come beneficiaries of a scheme which the
Times has characterized as a master
piece of trickery' which reflects "undyng
infamy upon It's manipulators."
Every thoughtful reader Of the Times
knows that while the Times made pa
rade yesterday Of answering our ques-
lions, IL steered clear off from that one
which is the paramount issue in this dis
cussion. No one is deceived by the
Times's legal argument. which admits
that under the law Tucker. ct al. may
hold their seats in spite of the condition
of affairs which the Times has hitherto
set forth. and il will be observed that
that argument reverses the ancient maxim
and proceeds upon the theory that the re-
ceiver Of stolen goods is not as bad as the
thief, But wen consent 10 no such side
tracking; we shall try to hold the Times
squareIy TO the issue-viz., whether Otey'
AcKenney. and Tucker. as honest men.
can conscientiously hold the seats for
which they have certificates Of election
Yost. Thorp, and Hoge in their notices
Of contest pronounce the alienation or
names a fraud. and here comes the Times
and eagerly backs them up; backs up
these Republican claimants for Demo
Gratis seats with a wealth Of Vehemence
and energy Of denunciation which our po-
ltical enemies have never INDUCED in.
It was left for the Times. which claims
q be Democratic paper. to say that the
eentiemen-there were hundreds of them
who were engaged in the alienation Of
names were men deserving "undying in
fanny What an exalted opinion the
Times has Of its party associates; of our
candidates for Congress: Of the members
of our electoral boards. and of our cleo
ton officers. from the highest to the lowest.
Such things as the Times has said against
our party have not been as extensively
said by Yos,, Borland. Thorp. or Hoge
Nor will such ammunition as the Times
has furnished TO our enemies be found in
any Of the dispositions taken by Yost, Bor-
land. Thorp. or Hoge.
And yet the Times has "the face" to
warn the Dispatch that If the Dispatch
doesn't mind the Dispatch Will injure its
friends by pursuing this discussion.
Amazing solicitude for our party! Would
TO heaven that the Times had had such
solicitude for us in the campaign Of 1898,
when it was swapping editorials with the
Virginia Sun and when 1t was studiously
avoiding mentioning in its editorial coll
umns the name of Colonel OFerrall.
our nominee for Governor. Would that 1t
had had such solicitude for our party in
the last campaign. when 1t proceeded to
turn upon and damn the Walton law.
law which IL had claimed as Times vic
tory and upon the passage Of which II
congratulated" yes, actually "congratu-
lated" the people Of Virginia II the Times
had had any solicitude for the safety Of
the Democratic party 1t would not have
worked as hard as It did TO arouse pre-
JUDGE against the special constables: il
would not have declared land that too.
OF it's own legislative child that the Wal
ton law was conceived in fraud" nor
supplied from its editorial columns shot
and shell for the Republicans and Prohi-
Gxa Cts
all OF the last campaign.
No: the Times has done it's worst; II Is
impossible that 1t can harm our party
as much in the future as II has done in
the past because II Will never recover
that public confidence which it has lost.
Now, az TO the intimation Of the Times
that the Dispatch has misrepresented the
purport OF the Attorney-Generars opinion:
Any child can see that this is an attempt
on the part of the Times TO befog this
controversy Every careful reader OF our
articles is bound TO confess that all we
have ever said as TO the opinion OF the
Attorney General is that 1t gives TO the
electoral boards fun discretion as to the
order and arrangement OF candi-
dates names on the ballot. Under
this opinion we insist that the
electoral boards had the right 10 adopt
the alienation system Moreover. some
OF the very best lawyers In this Common
wealth have examined the question mi
nutely, and declare that the cleo
toral boards did no wrong whatso-
ever In adopting the alienation system.
But suppose-and now see the absurdity
Of the Times's positlon-that the Dispatch
has within the past two weeks misrepre-
scented the purport OF the opinion OF the
Attorney General given last fall. what
bearing has that on the conduct OF the
election OF last November: what light does
that throw upon the masterpiece Of
trickery"-in short. how does II help the
Times 20 extricate itself from it's unhappy
position? Remember that the electoral
boards when they acted upon the ques-
ton OF arranging the names on the bal
lets, had before them the opinion Of
Attorney-General Scott. and were In no
wise dependent upon what any news
paper or any other person might have
said was the purport OF the opinion OF the
attorney General.
And now we ask. how can the Times
selieye itself OF the odium Of denouncing |
Democrats without inQuiring as TO the !
legality Of their position or the integrity |
Of their purposes? How. we ask?
-
The Jury System.
In his opinion In the case OF John |