The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1899-02-07
IGNORING ONE SIDE.
Patriotic Duties of Journals to Pro
test Regarding Legislative Seats il

Patriotic Duties of Journals to Pro.
test Regarding Legislative Seats in
Dispute. ~
In commenting on an editorial COM
ment in the West Virginia Bar with
reference to the. Kidd-Morris contest,
the Parkersburg State Journal quotes
the Bar us follows:
Unless the OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES are un-
trustworthy and misleading, the un-
seating Of. Mr.. Kidd by the state SEN
ate was a deliberate and defiant dlsre-
gard of all the forms of law, without
any pretense of Justification other than
to secure political partisan advan-
tage. 80 nd
This journal has nothing to do with
factionaf contests between political par
ties This journal does not know any
political party In this connection, but 1t
does have to do, as standing for the SUI
premacy OF law and the maintenance Of
popular government, with this Disgrace
full and indefensible exhibition of law
lessness and anarchy in the legislative
body Of our state. And we maintain
1t TO be the duty Of every patriotic jour-
nal Of every political party to cry out
and make solemn protest-to denounce
and disavow any part In or palliation
for this deliberate and open assault up
on republican government"
The Journals comment on the above
Is as follows:
All of this may be very good. as far
as 1t goes, but it does not go far enough.
The Republicans had the legislature by
a majority as the returns of commits
sioners of election in all the counties
showed. The Democrats appealed one
case (Via VS.. Logan to the supreme
court, after he had been awarded GER
tificate of election, and then refused
to let the case be heard until long after
the legislature shall have adjourned.
Was not this L disregard of all the
forms of law without any preteXt Of JUS
tiiication other than TO secure political
advantage? Why dodge the Via case?
Then there is the Brohard case. from
Taylor county, where the Republican
candidate had 81 majority, and where.
after the ballots had been returned to
the court house, they were feloniously
marked and changed. so that even the
most partisan of partisans must hang
his head in shame; where some of the
feloniously marked ballots yere changed
as to the candidate for legislature with
Il blue. indelible pencil,and the rest OF
the ballot marked in ink, and the COM
missoners Of election testified that no
tickets whatever were voted or counted
at the precinct marked other than in
Ink. The supreme court passing on
n mandamus to compel certificate to
be issued to the Democratic side re-
fused the same, and declared that the
Republican was ENTITLED TO THE
CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION. Has
the Bar read that decision? Does it
think that the linscating of Brohard
was q righteous act, or one that was n
deliberate and defiant disregard Of all
the forms of law without any pretense
of justification other than to secure Il
political partisan advantage" Why
not say something about the action of
the Democrats. or Is the Bar partisan
organ?
Asst Mr'Kidd's case, 1t Is not yet de-
cided. He was suspended, and so was
Mr.. Morris until a hearing on the mer-
its of the case could be had February
Z. We have no fears but that justice
will be done Mr.. Kidd: but how about
Brohard and Via? As they are Republic
cans. justice is not to be expected for
them. Why is the Bar silent as to
them?