Semi-weekly interior journal. [volume] (Stanford, Ky.) 1881-1905, 1899-08-25

edge could be had as to what was the
Republican majority In the Eleventh
congressional district for a week after
the election. TAe reports as to what
that majority was were changed every
day, and the Republican majority grew
with every change. IL Is reasonably
certain that II the returns Of the cleo
ton In 1896 from the other parts OF
the state had not yet reached Frank
fort the returns from the Eleventh
congressional district would still be
held back. In 1885, In the Eleventh
congressional district, the requirement
Of the law that the election officers
should be divided among the political
parties contesting in the election was
wholly disregarded The records or
the Bell county court show this re-
marksble fact concerning the election
OF 1896. One Of the precinct election
officers appointed by the county judge
Of Bell county for one of the precincts
of the town Of Middlesboro was Hon.
Daniel G.. Colson. then the Republican
member of congress for that district
and a candidate for reelection in that
election. Is II any wonder that ma
jority OF 10000 was turned out for Nc
Kinley in that district? The wonder
is that the majority was not $4,000.
A Remedy.
"In only one way could indefinite
repetition of these frauds be prevent
ed. That way was by changing the
appointing power so as to render II
certain that at every voting precinct
in the commonwealth the Democratic
party would be represented by two
real Democrats. as well as the Repub-
lican party by two Republicans; and
this the new law does. lApplause.l
ssManu xvprp ut-
tered and published about this new
law. II was asserted that no penalty
for offenses committed by election Of
ficers was provided by the new law,
and consequently there was no law
providing punishment for such o.
| lenses But in the suit to test the val
idity of the Jaw the appellate court ad-
! judged. as the advocates OF the law
/ had contended. that the penalties pro-
vided by the original secret ballot cleo
| tion law remained in force and were
applicable 20 every wrong done after
the enactment of the new law. II was
| claimed that because the new stat
ute did not provide for appeals to the
! courts from decisions of election con-
| test boards in election contests. there
| fore that right was destroyed. But the
/ court of appeals decided, as the DEM
ocrats contended. that the right Of ap-
peal to the courts remained UNAFFECTED
in every case in which there was such
right before the new law was enacted
THE Republican platform declares
that the law commits broad power to
irresponsible commissioners not cho-
sen by or accountable to the people
for their acts To whom is county
Judge in any of the mountain counties
having large Republican majorities re-
sponsible? And what would such a
Judge care for criticism because he had
not, in appointing election officers, d.
vided them among the old political
parties? Under the old law the action
of the county Judge In appointing cleo
ton officers could not be reviewed, nor
could he be removed from office nor be
in any wise punished for disregarding
the law governing the appointment OF
election officers. There can scarcely be
imagined a more irresponsible power
than that conferred by the old law
upon the county judge.
But the new law empowers the
state commissioners to remove from
office at any time any county commits
sioner, so that whenever any county
commissioner violates the law there
is an immediate remedy by bringing
the matter TO the attention OF the state
board.
1T was said this law was without
precedent. but in Ohio the Republican
party has for years had in operation a
law which vests in one man, the secre-
tary of state. the power to appoint
county election commissioners for all
counties in the state save those con-
tanning the large Republican cities,
and in those excepted counties, which
usually go Republican even when the
state goes Democratic, the power to APP
point the election commissioners Is
vested in the mayors. The Republican
press of Ohio, Of course, continues 10
denounce the Infamous Kentucky
election law.
In Virginia, the home of Jeffer-
son, the father of the Democratic par
ty. the general assembly at every ses-
sion, by Joint resolution, appoints q
board of three election commissioners
for every county in the comT onwealth
who in turn appoint the registration
and election officers. Mahoneism has
given the people of Virginia a prope;
appreciation of the Importance of this
subject, and they have therefore placed
ii upon the same plane with the high
est function of government-the exer'
else of the sovereign legislative power
I'm Tennessee, the home of Jackson
than whom there was no greater Dem
nOT tuS SONSihoi
nually appoints three election com
missioners for each county, who II
turn appoint the election officers. Thu
people Of Tennessee have had a Longer
experience with Republican frauds
under d secret ballot system than have
tne people of Kentucky. and that ex
perience has taught them what Is nee
essary to prevent those frauds.
Phase of the Opposition.
81 have confidence not only in the
wisdom, but in the integrity OF JohI
w. Daniel and compeers of Virginia
and Isham G.. Harris, Benton MeMil
Lin, Robert l.. Taylor. William b. Bat
and other Democrats Of Tennessee
Their brand Of Democracy is gooC
enough for me. even II II does not sui
the tastes of Mr.. Henry Wattersor
aud Colonel w. c. =. Breckenridge
and believe that these Tennesseeanl
aad Virginians have at least as muci
honesty as w. Godfrey Hunter. w S
Taylor and other Republican part!
|. leaders of Kentucky. lApplause.l
The character OF the opposition q
this law is the best evidence OF Ia
necessity and wisdom. Every corrup
and malign influence in the common
wealth or out of II that concerns itsel
with our elections opposed the enact
ment OF this law, denounees Il now