The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1898-12-14

Remarkable Election Case.
A recent supreme court decision has
brought about unique II not serious
situation in Tucker county, brief men
ton of which appeared in the IntellI-
gencer's dispatches yesterday. The un-
usual complication Is due to the fact
that the case had been pending for two
years and involved the position Of the
clerk OF the county, who has been hold
Ing the office for two Of the six years Of
the term.
The complication arises out Of the fact
that at the time the clerk. who is a
Democrat, was declared elected by six
teen majority. the Republican candidate
demanded recount of the votes. Be-
ing arbitrarily refused by the county
commissioners. the circuit court issued
mandamus compelling the commits
sloners to grant the demand; the mat
ter was appealed to the supreme court
by the county commissioners, and after
two years, the clerk, whose'seat was be-
ing contested retaining the Office In the
meantime. the supreme court, last Sat
urday, sustained the mandamus and or
dered the recount.
For one year the clerk whose position
was involved had possession of the ball
lots and, notwithstanding the man
damus case was till pending In the SUI
preme court, undecided, he burned them.
The law provides that county clerk
may burn the ballots after keeping them
a year, IF ALL CONTESTS ARE SET
tiled. In this case one contest was not
settled. and 1t was a contest disputing
the legality OF this same clerks election.
The situation is, that, despite the de-
cree OF the supreme court of the state.
there can be no recount. because the
person who is most concerned violated
the law and burned the ballots.
The question now is. what !s to be
done about the matter? 1t is a question
which may come at any time in any
county, and seems TO point to a neces-
slty for some law providing for such
case. That the law is SO construed that
ballots, pending a demand for re-
count. and while the matter is going
through the various courts, shall remain
In the hands of one OF the parties TO the
contest, is certainly remarkable state
OF affairs. A very important point in
connection with this incident is, what is
to be done with the clerk who destroyed
the ballots before the law was complied
with. and all contests growing GU; of the
election were settled-pariIcularly con-
test of which he was an interested
party?
Should such thing occur in which
Republican clerk had been guilty of such
an act, whether intentionally or not, we
might expect to see howl raised by
the Democratic press all over. the state,
and be ragaled BY brilliant editorials
from the chief In this city upon
the revolutionary outrage which was
designed to Undermine the rights of the
people" 1t would serve as splendid
text for the denunclatlon of Republican
"rascalIty."
An expression OF opinion of this very
remarkable case by the Register. how
ever, will be In the nature of an excuse
for tine offending clerk. and the whole
trouble viii be fixed upon the Republic
can who demanded the recount. Tha:
Will be in line with the Registers course
in all election matters at present, In
which II holds that It is revolution and
thIevery" for Republican candidate for
the legislature to ask for a recount or
to contest the legality OF his opponents
election, but pure unadulterEted "patriot-
ism for a Democratic candidate TO do
precisely the same thing.
What OF this Tucker county case, and
how Is the law to be vlndIcated? How
is the mandate OF the highest court in
the state to be obeyed? What Is to be
done about the clerk who tried to make
his position sure by destroying the ball
lots pending the contest? What of the
Democratic county court which left the
ballots lr his charge? A prosecution
may follow that may make an example
of all hands. In the meantlmeSth COM
ing legislature, which will have several
reforms in our election law proposed to
1t, should provide against the possibility
of such an occurrence in any county in
the future.