The Colfax chronicle., 1900-12-22
The Assessor Controversy.


The people of Grant parish, and
particularly the rank and file of the
Democratic party, who delegated to
their executive committee the duty of
naming the assessor who is to be ap-
pointed by the governor. have been
surprised to learn that the official
and public action of that committee
is aOught to be overturned and set
aside by a sneak and still hunt got
ten up since the adjournment of the
committee.
The facts in the case are these: Ow-
ing to dissatisfaction resulting from
prOmiscuous signing OF petitions for
the appointment of assessor by Popu-
lists and others, the Democratic Ex-
ecutive committee Of Grant parish.
months before their successors were
elected, formally declared that the in
coming executive committee should
recommend to the Governor, the as-
SCISSOR to be appointed for Grant par
ish. The parish Democratic conven-
tiOn which afterward met, recognized
and approved this arrangement by
specially leaving the matter to the
committee.
In May last, Mr.. John Randolph,
president, and Mr.. j. b. Lyman, Sec
retary Of the executive committee,
published formal call for the COM
mittee to assemble at Colfax ON Sat-
urday. May 10, 1900, for the purpose
Of determining the mode of selecting
delegates to the state convention at
Baton Rouge, and for the transaction
Of such other business as might come
before the committee.
1t was a matter of public and no
tOrious information that the commit
tee would on that day name the u.s.
SCISSOR. and, as a matter of fact. five
or six candidates for the assessorship
were present at the meeting Of the
committee. Six out of the seven
wards of the parish were represented
In the committee by duly accredited
delegates, only ward FIVE being unrep-
resented. Under the rules of the COM
mittee adopted at their first meeting.
the representatives OF four wards con-
stituted aquorum for the transaction
Of business. Six out of the seven
wards being represented, there was
no question IN to the authority of the
tO act In the matter, fully
II out of the IL members rsconstituting
the committee being personally pres
ent or represented by written proxy.
As matter of fact ward five was.
in the committee by Mr..
NJ. C. Nugent, who held the written
proxy for that ward, but being Il can
he declined to take any part |
or vote In the deliberations of the |
Mr.. s. X. Lee was repre-
santed in the committee, we believe,
by Mr.. E. l.. Stuckey. who held his
written proxy and voted for Mr.. Nu-
gents recommendation.
The only two names placed before
the committee were those of Mr.. Nj. |
G. Nugent and Mr.. X. w. Horn. the
other candidates finding their chances
too small. and declining to be placed |
In nomination. On the vote being |
taken Mr.. Nugent received a majority. |
Then, ON motion Of j. B. Lyman, Sec
onded. we believe, by h. F. Lewis, the |
was made unanimous.
1t now develops that since this ac-
tion by the committee, petitions have |
been circulated ON the sly in the inter
eat of Mr.. Jas. A. Harvey, and sever
al members Of the committee have |
been asked to repudiate their open |
and regular endorsement of Mr.. Nu-
gent for the appointment. Mr.. Har-
vey has been the deputy of Mr.. s. X. |
Lee, the present assessor. for the past |
four years. He has been informed as
to all the public actions Of the party |
In this matter, knew for months that !
the assessor was to be named by the |
and yet HE WAS NOT
AMONG THE CANDIDATES BEFORE THE |
when they met in public |
session to make the recommendation
to the Governor for appointment.
We are utterly surprised that Mr..
Harvey should seek the office in the
way he has. and we are still more |
surprised that Mr.. S. X. Lee and the !
other gentlemen who are urging ting
Governor to appoint Mr.. Harvey.
should engage in the attempt to an
nul the action of the committee in the |
face of all these facts, which cannot