The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1900-05-24

their oaths Of Office In order TO secure a party
triumph at the expense Of representative govern.
ment. Tie defeated candidates for governor and
lieutenant governor then made final appeal to
the legislature chosen Nov. by the same bal
lots, under the same law, before the same OFF,
GERS by which and through which the same voters
Nov. 7 selected W. s. Taylor governor Of Ken
lucky This legislature had the right to hear
this appeal and the right to confirm the choice
OF the people by rectify1ng any error committed
by correcting any count, by remedying any
wrong by which the candidate rejected by the
people had been given the certificate. The law
and the constitution clearly set forth the means
and the methods by which such contest is to
be determined. II seeks to eliminate all partisan
influences. 1t puts the members on honor, as
well as on oath, faithfully to declare, faithfully
to establish, the will OF the people as the law
OF the land.
In the course Of these proceedings, all the de-
cencies OF the occasion were violated. The plain
est directions Of the law were treated with con.
tempt The plainest mandates Of the law were
not fulfilled. The rules OF evidence were scorned.
Inc issues did not accord with the law and the
evidence. The petition stands as an Indictment
OF the Democratic party, which countenanced and
demanded it. In any court, where one lawyer
could have been heard, it would have been
thrown out on demurrer. Not an allegation 1t
legation was sustained. Not before the French
revolutionary tribunal would an aristocrat have
been condemned on such evidence, and the trial
OF Dreyfus, by this comparison, becomes an ex.
ample Of dignity, justice and truth. The report
which followed this failure was never acted or; ;
was never submitted to the general assembly OF
Kentucky. 1t was never put in form for consid-
eration II was reported for hurried action but
as it stood discredited every name signed to it,
and in time will lead to their humiliation. The
general assembly never considered that report
Ii cannot elect governor. 1t cannot, by this
process, and a majority vote, impeach the gov.
ernor. II has but one question to decide on
oath, on honor loyalty to the state: "Who
was elected governor Of Kentucky, Nov. z, 1892
That question the general assembly never an
swered. All the legislative fummery Of its rump
proceedings was beneath contempt. All the pre-.
tense OF action impeached the participants. 1t
was an effort to embody lie in law. II failed.
Nineteen senators and ffty.one representative
not one less-could declare what all know to be
untrue-that General Taylor was not elected
that Senator Goebel was elected, and from that
decision, duly reached and duly recorded, there
could be no appeal; but it would be lie, never
theless. That action was never taken. In the
meantime let us all bear in mind that the people
chose W. 5. Taylor governor Nov. 7, 1890. That
verdict has been contravened, not legally, but by
fraud. trickery, tyranny Usurpativn is accom-
plished, and the courts, acknowledging the out
rage, say it is not within their province to pre-
vent. But what the people did in November,
$780, they can and will do again in November,
1900 elect William Sylvester Taylor governor Of
Kentucky. And he will serve. Now, let the
Republicans Of Kentucky do their duty. Let
those Democrats who repudate this outrage
against popular suffrage do their duty. Renomi-
nate and re.elect William Sylvester Taylor gov
ernor Of Kentucky, and in that act, so far as is
within their power redeem their state from the
depth Of shame into which Goebelsm and the
| mad faction behind it has sunk its good name.