Middletown transcript., 1897-08-21
rHE Law AND THE coNsrITU-

partisan ends, or course, putting HE
plea on the basis of economy. That is as
false as anything that ever appeared in
the Every Evening" which is saying
q great deal. While the Every Eve
ming" is partisan it has not the respect
of Democrats in the State. There is not
o Democratic paper in the State which
has not shown up its inconsiste ncies.
While pretending to favor law and or
der it oyer-steps itself this time and its
stupidity aud partisanship can be read
by all men.
The occasion for this extreme parti-
sanship is as follows: There are thir-
teen hundreds in Sussex county. each
with q member Of the Levy Court
elected from within its borders. In
1894 there were eight cand didates FOR
the Levy ICourt elected upon the Re-
publican ticket for four years among
them Mr.. John W. Green of Seaford
hundred. In 1896 the five members OF
the Levy Court elected were Demo-
Gratis, the court thus standing eight
Republicans and five Democrats. 1t
seems that Levy Courtman Green is q
miller and was engaged in the milling
business up to Jan. LIST last, residing
in Sea ford, Seaford hundred. he sold
out the milling business or the mill
was sold and Mr.. Green must look for
other occupation. He having some
land In North West Fork hundred
went there with his family to s'crop
it" The question is, Did Mr.. Green
lose his residence in Seaford hundredP
The Democrats contend that he did
and has, and certain partisans made
affidavit to that effect to Governor
Tunnel whereupon the Governor COM
missioned Mr.. Joseph w. Handy a
Democrat and a former member Of the
Levy Court, as Mr.. Green's successor.
The Democratic Clerk Of the Peace
placed Mr.. Handy's name on the roll
as a member of the court. The MEM
bers of the Levy Court refused to rec
ognize Mr.. Handy as member when
they met, or the majority did, and by
vote Mr.. Green's name was restored
to the rolls.
It is a simple question Of residence
and as every experienced voter 10 this
State knows under the law the inten-
tion Of the person whose place Of domi-
cile is in dispute should decide the
question. Too often partisan major
ity, at elections, have fixed that intent
as they had the numbers to do 1t with
out regard to the mans rights. Time
and time again have men with their
families cropped it" in some other
hundred, in another county, out OF
the State, and for months, and have
returned to their "old home" to vote,
having that vote accepted and thus
legally fixing the residence.
The above facts are all known to
"Every Evening" as fully as they are
known to the writer nor will that pa
per deny one Of them, specifying the
denial. General denials are too often
made but to deceive. But the 'sEvery
Evening" to outpartisan the worst
partisans sets itself up as judge and
jury, denounces the Levy Court and
Republican papers generally when the
fact is they have said little Of the mat
ter. Hear 1t:
The Republican papers Of the State, al
most with one accord, are up in arms in
defence of the laWless action of the Sussex
county Levy Court in retaining disquali-
fed member in his seat after his disqualif-
cation has become apparent. They have
cooked up pretext for justification.
OF the two Democratic papers pub
lished in Georgetown, where all the
facts are known, the .'Sussex Journap'
satisfies itself with a brief statement
and the opinion "n0 more than we ex-
pected, !" adding "the Democrats will
appeal the case to the Superior Court. !"
The Democrat says .'it is claimed
that he (Mr. Green) has removed him
self and family into another hundred
and is no longer a resident Of Seaford. -
Mark the word "cLAI,lED." It adds
that "the Republican majority Of the
Levy Court acted In violation Of law,
citing the law:
Section three of chapter of the Revised
Statutes reads as follows:
4" No person shall be Commissioner for
hundred unless he reside and is free
holder therein. If a Commissioner remove
from hundred, or cease to be q freehol-
der therein, his Office shall thereupon be-
come vacant"
The law is plain. Did Mr.. Green
"remove" from the hundred so as to
lose his residence 2 Under the former
membership Of the Courts the "Every
Evening" would have said, "Let the
Courts decide" Knowing that no
political question has within the last
quarter Of century been decided in
Delaware other than against Republi-
cans and favorable to Democrats. We
believe this is strictly the truth or we
should not state it. and IL not true we
should appreciate correction not an
'sEvery Evening" denial in general
terms, no one credits such, but citing
date and case. Why did not the "Eyery
Evening" follow its former course and
appeal to the Courts ? Certainly it
does not fear the honesty Of the Court
IS at present constituted.
1t takes another course. however, q
lawless and unconstitutional course.
It says:
Some Of these same Republican papers
are also suffering spasms Of indignation at
'Every Evenings" suggestion that the next
Legislature should end the whole contro-
yersy BY abolishing the Levy Court and