Mexico weekly ledger. (Mexico, Mo.) 1855-1956, 1897-11-18

FUSION BEING INVESTIGATED.
During the past few days the st.
! Louis papers have contained extended
sensational articles in reference to
some of the fusion said to have taken
place during the last campaign. Hon.
8. B. Cook, Chairman of the Demo-
cratic State Central Committee, who
40 strongly advocates fusion for the
nsxt election in Missouri is said to
have superintended the "manipula-
tion" and to have handled the money.
Mr.. Cook, in his paper and in public
interviews, denies that anything i'm
proper was done, so do Messrs.
Bland and North and all other parties
concerned except J. II. Pratt, Secre-
tsry of the judicial Committee and
one of the gentlemen concerned, who
seems to have gotten mad and talked
too much. Judge Bland does not
sneak OF him in very complimentary
terms and Mr.. Cook calls him "po-
IiticsI dead beat" The st. Louis Re-
public editorially, under the headline
Of aGrave Interest,"" says:
A grave question has been present
Cd by the open charge that the with
drawal OF Judge North from the cam
psign OF 1896 was effected by bar
Rain In violation of the corrupt prac-
ices act.
30 far, the recital rests principally
upon statements of j. Fl. Pratt, who
vas Secretary of the Democratic
Judicial Committee. Judge Bland
positively denies that he had any
knowledge of any bargain; that Judge
North called on him and talked only
Of Willingness to withdraw in order
70 insure the defeat of Republican.
II from Mr.. Pratt, or from any other
source, evidence can be obtained
which will show that money or prom
lee Of an appointment was given to
Judge North in return for his with
drsWal, let it be submitted in distinct
terms. The charges involve two
Judges of the st. Louis Court of APP
peals and the Chairmen of two State
committees. The matter is one of the
most serious importance to the public,
q well as the good names of these
gentlemen. The charges should be
proven, or, in the failure of proof,
should be withdrawn as openly as
they were made.
: II is not clear that the corrupt prac-
tees act was violated, even If money
was paid or an appointment promised
10 secure the retirement of a candi-
date. There is a difference between
usng means directly to promote the
election of a candidate and taking
measures to consolidate vote by the
retirement of an opposition candidate.
But some lawyers hold the latter to
be within the statute.
In any case, there is moral princi-
pie within which such an arrangement
comes. Especially is such compact
within the principle when the judici-
ary is affected. Public opinion is set
tied and strong in favor of an inflexibly
high standard in all things pertaining
10 the bench, and public opinion would
rightfnlly consider that an offense had
beeu committed by negotiation of
the nature here alleged, whether or
nota statute wereviolated.
Judge Bland, Judge Bond and the
charges have entered emphatic de-
mails and have described the manner
In which Judge North'g withdrawal
came about. Now let the other side
present Its proofs. 1t can be assured
that the Democrats of Missouri will
not permit partisanship to stand in the
way Of vigorous condemnation, if the
proceedlngs of the judiciary campaign
aze proved to have been tainted with
corrupt bargains, That the election
and the business of legislative body
are surrounded with improper solici-
tations is bad enough; the people de-
mand that the administration of JUS
! tice be above suspicion.
The st. Louis Post Dispatch under
the headline, "Bring Out the TRUTH
sditoriaIly says:
1t has been charged that an anti
election deal was entered into in behalf
OF Judge Bland of the Court of Ap-
peals, by which Judge Bland in con.
liberation of the payment of 1000 te
the Populist State Committee and
promise of an appointment, secured
the withdra wal in his favor of j. w
North, the Populist candidate for the
Court OF Appeals. The charge is sup
plemented by letters which were pub
lshed in yesterdays Post Dispatch.
II the charge is true, the corrup
practices act has been violated and Z
gross stain has been placed upon th'
bench of Missouri. The law is cleal
4 TO the offense and its punishment
h prohibitions with regard to the us,
! u money, influence or promises Il
secure election are comprehensive
IL provisions for securing evidence
for the prosecution and punishment
Of offenders are plain and effective
Hvery dollar of expenditure by can
didAtes or committees must be &C
counted for and the purpose fo'
which it is expended set down.
II Judge Bland or any agent or com
mittee acting for him paid any none.
10 J. w. North or to an agent or com
mittee for his withdrawal, the fac
should appear in the sworn statement
of Judge Bland and the treasurer o
The Democratic Committee. IT l
does not appear in the statement
hey are liable to prosecution. II th'
money was paid to the Populists o
payments or promises made to Mr.
II <s--s>t SA16O hAiu WV
teemen and all who participated il
sne deal must be prosecuted. Judg'
nAnd 10 liable to be ousted from offic'
the candidate securing the mex
unest number OF votes.
Ine law Is so clear and the matte
/. q % much Importance that imme
\ uate steps should be taken to ascer
~ the truth. Neither Judge Blanc
sof me bench can rest under tn
apatation Of an illegal and corrup
satgain. Judge Bland should not onl,
N ett his innocence, but seek vindi
Alon In court. If the men who ar
5 ING the charges are acting in goo
lt4 tney will press them to q prope
yeno!usi0n In the courts. The matte
.ouid be taken out of the sphere o
ponucai scandal and of partisan news
81 HPsf Vial and the truth or falsity o
enarges settled in court.
\ 1Hk masses Of the party, no matte
snsehsr the party be Republican
49,