The new dominion. [volume] (Morgantown, W. Va.) 1876-1904, 1897-01-30
4 SHAMELESS PROCEEDING
The Republican Senate Perpe-
trates an Ine1cusable Out
rage.
Senator Shaffer Turned Out OF the Seat
to Which His Constituents Elected
Him fairly aud Honestly.


Him fairly aud Honestly.
CHARLESTON, w. Va, January 81.
The larger part of the time of the
Senate to-day was consumed with
the Getzendanner- Shaffer contest.
The debate was opened by Mr..
Farr, who undertook to show that
the nomination and election of Mr..
Shaffer was irregular, and therefore,
that he should be unseated. He
made the best plea probably that
could be made in a weak case.
The real interest in the debate
was manifested when Senator Young,
on the Republican side, began his
speech in defense of Shaffer. Sena-
tor Young said in substance that be
was constrained to differ from the
opinion of the members on his side
of the chamber. 1t was a matter of
conscience with him and his con-
science revolted against the perpe-
tration of such wrong as the un-
seating of a member who had been
fairly and honestly elected. He did
not oppose the unseating of Shaffer
from any love he had for the Demo
cratic pssty. He was opposed to
every principle of that party, but he
was forced to take this course
through his sense Of justice and
right. He said that Mr.. Farr had
charged that the failure of the con-
testee to answer the notice of con
test should be taken as confession
of the allegations contained in the
notice. Such charge, said Senator
Young, was unwarranted, and he
read numerous authorities to sup
port his assertion. The charge that
the votes cast for Shaffer should not
be counted, because of important ir-
Irregularities in placing his name on
the ticket of the National Democrat
ic party, was without authority to
support it, nor was there any proof
or evidence that any voter was mis-
led in casting his vote for Senator by
Skaters name being on the ticket
of the Gold Democrats. No voter
had ever made such a claim. On the
other hand there was every reason
to suppose that those who voted for
Shaffer knew what they were doing.
After careful examination of the
facts as well as of the law bearing
on the case, he could not cast his
vote to deprive any citizen or num-
Der of citizens of this State of their
right of suffrage, as, in his judgment
the unseating of Shaffer would do.
Mr.. Shaffer spoke in his own be-
half He recited the salient facts
connected with his nomination and
election. He protested that the yo-
tiers who voted for him were not
misled or deceived. They were his
personal friends. The certificates of
his nomination were regular because
they were in accordance with law.
The votes cast for him were lawful
votes, and there had never been any
contention that they were not law
full. Mr.. Getzendanner had not
dared to contest the case at home,
where the facts involved could be
obtained, but waited to present the
case in Republican Senate, who
had no opportunity of knowing the
facts and who were away from the
sources of evidence. He anticipated
the result. He would be deprived
of his seat in order to promote the
schemes of one who sought higher
honors, but he would go home to his
constituents conscious of his honest
election and proud of the honors
which the voters of the Thirteenth
Senatorial district had conferred up
on him.
Mr.. Shaffer spoke for thirty min
utes and made a fine impression,
many Republicans here to-day are
outspoken in their condemnation of
the outrage perpetrated against the
people of the Thirteenth district.
AT the close of the debate Getzen-
danner was seated by strict party
vote but one honest man man being
found whose conscience would not
permit him to lend himself to a
scheme of brazen robbery for the
aggrandizment of a political boss
who aspires to represent the state in
the United States Senate. With that
exception the Republicans voted
solidly for seating Getzendanner,
the Democrats against it, He was
accordingly awarded the seat and
was sworn into an Office he does not
have the slightest shadow of a right
to hold