People's voice. [volume] (Wellington, Sumner County, Kansas) 1890-1917, 1896-10-29

1
a loss 10 know why they refuse, IN.
less it is through desire to gain an
unfair advantage. The men named
by Mayor Savage are all good men;
certainly nothing can be said against
their qualifications. The objection
is therefore political.
We learn upon inquiry that Coun-
ty Clerk Sadler has been advising
township trustees that they should
under the law appoint two Republi-
can judges and one Popuhst. We
do not know when the county clerk
was commissioned legal adviser for
township trustees, Eor where he gets
his law to require the appointment
Of two Republican judges in each
precinct. Sec. l9 of the ballot law
says, with reference to the appoint
ment Of judges and clerks:
1t shall be the duty OF the mayor OF
every city, by and with the consent OF
the council thereof. land township
trustees) at least five days before the
day of any election to designate and
appoint FIVE persons in each voting
precinct in such city Tor tow nship),
three TO be appointed and to act as
judges and two as clerks Of election.
and all, to be duly qualified electors
of the precinct for which appointed.
One of said judges and one of said
clerks to be appointed by said mayor
and trustee, as aforesaid shall be
taken from the political party that
pOlled the largest number of votes ut
the last preceding general election in
said precinct, and one OF said judges
and one Of said clerks, from the politi.
cal party that polled the next largest
number of votes at the last CEREAL
election aforesaid, and the remaining
Judge from the political party that
pOlled the next largest vote at the
last general election aforesaid"
In 1895 there were only two tick
cts out in this county. The Demo.
Gratis made no nominations. The
law says that "when two or more
parties holding political views dia-
metrically opposed to each other,
unite and vote the same ticket, they
shall be deemed and held to consti-
tute one party under the provisions
of this act" Mr.. Sadler, and we
presume all Republicans who are
trying to work this scheme, say that
where there are only two parties the
dominant party should be given the
third judge-that this is the plain
inference Of the law.
From the concerted action that is
being taken in this matter it looks
very much as if sinister designs on
the suffrage Of the people were in
tended. 1t is at least a game Of
freeze.out on the Democrats.
There is no inference in the law
that the dominant party shall have
the third judge in such contingency
not particle. When the mayor
or trustee appoints one judge each
from the Republican and Populist
parties, his duty as defined by law is
ended and he is then entitled to his
discretion. His natural inclination
/
would be 10 recognize the Demo-
Gratis, who, although they had no
ticket in the field last year, are a
distinct party and clearly entitled
to the discretion. Republicans seem
to have well>organized scheme on
foot to deprive the Democrats OF
any representation whatever on the
election board in order to "hog
the ring" themselves.
There are in the county twenty
Populist and ten Republican trustees.
The VOICE would advise all Populis,
trustees to throw County Clerk Sad.
ler's advice to the wind, and if Re.
publicans are to act ugly here in
town give them but one judge in the
townships.
Mayor Savage has been very lib
eral toward the Republicans in Vel
lington; nearly all Of his appointees
are Republicans. Now they want tc
cheat the Democrats out Of an cleo.
ton judge altogether, and take two
themselves. Suppose the Populists
and Democrats are combined thi:
year; is that any reason why the
| Republicans should have two judge:
. while the combined opposition ha:
but one?
If the Republicans can do without