Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1899-11-28
THE LUNENBURG DELEGATE
A Card from G. Il. Allen in Reply 10
j. w. Ellis.

Lunenburg County, Va,
November 20, 1899.
To the Editor Of the Dispatch:
There appeared in your issue OF NO
vember 10Th a card from j. w. Ellis, tho
purport Of which seemingly was 10 rebuke
your correspondent from Green Bay TOT
booking him as an Independent, elected 70
the House Of Delegates from bunenburg
county. over ID. Il. Love OemocraD. The
County Democratic Committee has been
unjustly censured by some uniformed as
to the facts. and, since the aforesaid card
has been published 1 take this opportuni-
~. in Justice to the Democratic party OF
| Iunenburg county, of which i am mem
Der to make public the action or the
County Committee relative to the much
tall1ed-of primary"
As MIR. j. W. Ellis says, a primary was
ordered by the County Committee for Oc-
tober 18th, for the purpose Of nominating
candidate for the House Of Delegates.
Mr.. Ellis failed to state in his card that,
on the same day and time another resolu-
ton was passed by this same County
Committee. the purport Of which "cs
that we. the County Democratic Com
mittee. sustain the action of the Black
stone convention" Mr.. Ellis failed 10
state in his card that the Buford and FL
lis supporters refused positively 10 stand
bv the last resolution. They were Wiling
TO support the primary resolution Dut
bolted the latter, one side claiming the
primary resolution only. BY what right,
sustained by justice. can the BuIOIu ana
Ellis faction claim the primary. when they
refused to support the latter resolution!
Can Mr.. Ellis, or any OF his friends, in
form us of any precedent. or ruling, where
ar
cation, can pass two resolutions, and one
faction SAYS one resolution is binding, Dut
the other one we will not support! rms
state of things existed, and later. and IN
due season. this same County Committee,
that Mr.. Ellis claims In his card TO be
the proper party authorities revoked
the order for the primary Oh the ground
that both the resolutions were binding, or
neither should be.
No sane man will claim that the com
mittee had no right to rescind the ofder
for the primary.
a candidate at the primary" Mir. Love
was warned by a large majority OF the
committee TO have nothing to do with
such illegal proceedings. after the Buford
and Ellis men refused 10 support both re-
solutions.
Mr.. Ellis SAYS: 81 declared l would not
run as an Independent" Then why, oh,
whyi did you 90 TO Brunswick, and as
sist in inducing the great, ehicient' ana
master independent 10 run? Why have
YOU persistently advocated and worked for
him? Did YOU or not on one occasion sug-
gest to, or try to induce. ID. X. Love, To
support Mr.. Buford. and tell him that II
he Q.Ove) would declare for Buford. that
YOU would not be a candidate, but would
support him? Did he or not positively re-
fuse to support Mr.. Buford? Have you or
not refused to stand by the action of the
Democratic, or Mr. Loves, party, which
he OR. Love- pledged to DO on two ocea-
siOns7
Did you or not openly and publicly pro-
claim for Mr.. Buford, and by so doing,
carry your influence 10 him, instead OF
Judge w. H. Mann, the Democratic nom
| inee Of this 0he Twenty eighth district
| of Virginia? Did you or not use every
honorable means on the 18th of November
last to defeat William Hodges Mann
| OemocraD, and elect T.. p. Buford Qn-
dspendenO TO the Senate of virginia.
| / must say. Mr.. Editor with all respect
! and courtesy 10 Colonel Ellis. gentle
man for whom I cherish high esteem,
that. with the aforesaid causes ebbing on
public tide, brilliantly illuminating the po-
ntlcal avenues, his rebuke for your cor
respondent from Green Bay was not APP
pncable G.. T. ALLEN.
Committeeman.