The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1899-09-19

the keynote of the campaign beng
sounded in speech by Senator Till
! man in the Wilmington district, as al
legged, it was sounded in the ninth dis
trict by caves, who denounced fusion
with the Populists and the Republicans
who favored it, ex-chairman of the State
/ Republican executive committee, and
Roberts, former chairman of the Repub-
| lican Congressional committee of the
ninth district, who refused to support
contestant, and did all in his power by
| speeches and otherwise to compass Mr..
| Pearson's defeat"
| THE FRANKLIN LYNCHING.
! As a typical instance of the sort of
evidence offered by contestant and the
fate with which it has met. the lynching
of Mitchell Mosely, of which much is
attempted to be made may be offered.
Contestee says:
Contestant, under the heading, "Sa-
| lient Features of the Case uses the
| following language: "A campaign of re-
| lentless rancor and terrorism based on
race hatred, eliminated in the lynching
| of negro on the night before election
and contestant charges in his notice of
! contest that the supporters of contestee
/ used the incident and exhibited the
corpse as a political argument, in such
manner as to spread horror and dismay
throughout the community
1T will appear from the evidence that
one Mitchell Moseley, a negro, who had
recently come into the State of North
Caroline from the State of Georgia, on
Sunday night preceding the election,
made two dastardly assaults with intent
to commit rape, the persons assaulted
being white women of the highest char
acter, and in this attempt had twice
committed burglary in the first degree, a
capital offence in North Carolina. This
effort was first made at the house of
one of the leading white Republicans in
the county, while he was away from
home, leaving an unprotected wife; and
the next assault was upon the home of
clergyman of Franklin, who at the time
was in pursuit of his sacred calling in
another part of the town, and a fieHd
ish attack was made upon the wife OF
this clergyman. The evidence shows that
this negro was caught and publicly exc
cuted by an outraged community, with
out distinction of party or color, and
that the incident had no political sigli-
ficance whatever This will appear be-
yond doubt from the testimony taken in
this case:''
WHAT THE EVIDENCE SHOWS.
The evidence for Mr.. Crawford as set
forth in his brief clearly shows:
Il. That there was no serious opposi-
ton to the nomination of the contestant
in his party, both among the leaders
and among the rank and file.
- That the opposition of some Of the
leaders was only suppressed by the be-
stowment upon them of Federal patron
age.
-. That the opposition to the contest
ant among many of the leaders of prom
inence in the party continued to exist
throughout the campaign and up to the
election.
H. That he was not warmth or cor
daily supported by the Republicans of
the district, but that there was great dis
satisfaction existing on account of his
distribution of the Federal patronage
and neglect of his official duties, and
his failure to correspond with his con-
stituents. 5000 r
80 That it appears from the testimony
that the election throughout the district
was quiet, peaceable and orderly.
&C. That there was no intimidation
anywhere in the district.
z. That the occurrences mentioned in
contestants notice of contest. as to seri-
Gus political disturbances, We're simply
personal encounters, which had no politi-
cal effect or influence upon the election.
IS That the lynching Of the negr,
Moseley at Franklin in no way influ-
enced or affected the election"
1t was also brought out that Mr.. Pear
son has gone to another district, has
taken testimony, and embodied it in his
brief, attempting to show that it APP
plies to the ninth district.
MR.. PEARSON SCORED.
In summing up his case Mr.. Craw
ford scores Mr.. Pearson numerically.
Taking up Parsons charges seriatim,
he says:
BRIBERY"
"The immaculate conscience of the
contestant is greatly shocked because he
thinks that in Mitchell county some
money was expended for campaign pur-
poses. 1t is true that nothing OF this
kind is alleged in his notice of contest,
therefore the evidence cannot be heard by
the committee; but objections of that
kind are treated with scant patience by
the contestant, and he insists that the
committee shall reject % votes from
Mitchell county because Spencer Hughes
(page 317) saw an unnamed man vote
for contestee, who afterwards said, "A
dollar is better made than lost and be-
cause Mr.. Slagle testified that I might
say that some voted for pay on both
Sides; because Mr.. Upton said in regard
to certain men who were employed to
work for the Democratic ticket, that
certain of them were told that if they did
vote the Democratic ticket they should
receive pay for their days work This
is indefinite and uncertain. Tt nowhere
appears that the men did not intend to
vote for Crawford in any event.
So PER HEAD.
"For systematic, unblushing and con-
fessed bribery, the contestant is respect
fully referred to the evidence of G. r.
Moore, clerk Of the United States Court,
and secretary of the Congressional COM
mittee page 99). A short while before
| the election he received from the bank
| $3.50 i'm one and two dollar bills and