Highland recorder. (Monterey, Highland County, Va.) 1877-1972, 1896-12-04
The FEOod-YOst Contest.


test the New York Tribune has thi
: to say:
The refusal Of Mr.. II. d. FlooC
to accept certificate of election t.
congress from the 10th district OF
Virginia is singular and interest.
ing incident in politics, Mr.. Flood
was the democratic candidate at
the recent election, and Mr., J. Yost
was his republican opponent The
Iatter's name was vari0usly printed
on the ballots, and the election
board, haylng considered the facts
and the law, determined that. tho
on the face of the returns he had a
majority Of 147, The certificate
should be awarded to Mr., Flood, in
asmuch as the exclusion of ballots
on which MIR. Yost's name was er-
roneously printed left him without
a plurality. Mr.. Flood asserts in
cidentally his belief that he HIM
self received u majority Of the votes
legally cast in the district. even as
suming that the misprinted bal
lots should be counted for his op-
ponent; but in deciding the ques- |
ton which the formal awarding of |
the certificate to him raises he TO-
nores his unestabIished charges of
fraud, and declines to accept an
election on a technicality.
Various complications may result
from this decision, the most proba-
bic perhaps being that thes seat
will be given to Mr.. Yost by the
House after an investigation. Mr..
Flood will almost certainly not op-
pose that course, for he expresses
.he wish that the election board
could legally give Mr.. Yost the GER
;ifcate. Whether his supporters
1t the recent election share his SEN
lments or would prefer to incur
he trouble and expense of a spe- J
ial election has not been clearly a
Indicated. The situation is pecui- n
~, and involves some curious cues b
ions in ethics. Mr.. Flood thinks t.
hat the board was legally bound y
} award him the certificate. and he y
lust think, consequently, that he b
ould have been legally warrant W
l in accepting il, Moreover, it is cc
robable that he has considered al
neither he might not fairly offset m
IS belief that he was the victim of b,
CELEBRATE fraud against his disin- 3;
lnatlon to be the beneficiary Of ci
accident in the printing of the
illots. Bat his conclusion is that &C
cannot accept a reversal Of ne
ima-facie majority on mere in
chAicallty. In his mind it is ap- at
rentIy not SO much a question Of an
'rals as of gentleminIy conduct; vi.
ough in fact moral conduct and
ntlemanly conduct are essential
the same, He realizes, to put
case in another way, that he
uld be uncomfortable if he took CA !
seat from the candidate to n "a
ON it would have been given Iu {
.ept for mishap, and, not wish ~ ns
: to be uncomfortable, he de- III
les it.
There may be other elements in {
case With which we are not fa-
lar, but. the first inference is S,r'
It Mr.. Flood chooses to behave SUI S..,'
IN affair of politics as he would ~ -;
ave ID a private matter. In US US
mess transaction With a neigh U0l
he would not accept an adyan-
e arising out of some accidental
arturo from the stipulations,
he viii not do SO where a seat To ]
congress IS at stake. We do a.
say Shat man Of honor could " "
have taken an opposite course, y
we venture to congratulate fixed
Flood upon the courage which cent
'led him to crafty credita- c 20 IA
personal instinct. the Fl