The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1902-11-11
TUESDAY. NOVEMBER u, 1902
Tne5cos.EsT IN the NINTH.


with those OF lis democratic cohseiipo.
ralaes that are protesting against az
,,,,.aIr count in the interest OF Rhea IA
the Ninth District.
B,, i, i. moved tc remark that 1ne
LAW is The law and that eject ons shoutu
be held and ballots marked IN accolo-
ance Herewith. II seems 70 De 1orso.l.'eat'
that democrats arc not me oiils 80 80
capable OF crooked methods IN an eiec-
ton. When did our es'eefneo ieio1.
citizens of the Republican persuasion
An the Ninth Congressional Dlstflct
rnrouf wings7 When did they cease o
ernploy money where il would DO Soon
ana ia ,,se int,midation where they were
in the majority?
lei us have fairness In elections BY.
nj, means. but let us not have any
stopping over or any sicklE sent mes'ta.-
tty on the par. Of the supposed Dem
cratic newspapers.
Now. what about the situation in the
Ninth. anyway? Smp,y that ceiecu.e
ballots have been thrown cut. Wouio
our esteemed and somewhat over-gencr-
ous contemporaries. The Richmond INES
and the Richmond News. have Colonei
SIemp seated through the instrumental
itv OF defective or fraudulent baltots.
is not Mr.. Rhca entitled to MS rights
under the law? Did any Democrat ever
& catch a RepubllCRn3 luIU7iiss aijN'SE q
in Congress IL he could establish iesa1
right TO it?-Norfolk virginian-Pilot.
So far as our contemporaries quest CT
refers to The Times. II is not pertinent.
We have never irtimated that Jucge
Rhea should be masnanimous enough 10
give up his scat In Congress TO a Repuo-
lican, If he is fairly entitled TO II Nor
have we even by implication approved
any corrupt practices on the part OF
Republicans in the Ninth District. we.
said distinctly that If Judge Rhca had
fairly beaten his opponent he should re-
ceive the certificate.
But we did not pass Judgment upon a
case reported. II was given out that
The vote OF certain precinct had been
thrown out on the ground that the re-
turns were nnsealed. that they were re-
oeived by mail and that they were re-
ceirea a day late We cited the law to
show that the commissioners could not
throw these returns out for the reason
urged. and we were gratified to sec later:
that the attornev-gcneral cited the same
law and gave these identical instructions
to the commissioners. The law is very
plain The cormisso ners cannot so be-
hnjd the returns. If there are Irregular
tiles ii is the duty of the commissioners
to summon the judges and clerks for
that precinct and make such corrections
pr are necessary. ii is absurd to say
that the vote Of a whole precinct shou' d
be thrown out simply because the
strict letter OF the law is not complied
with In transmitting the returns to the
clerk II 1t can be shown that the re-
turns were tan1pered with en- route. that
would be a matter for investigation and
for the courts. But under the law the
commissioners have no right to throw
the returns out.
That is all that The Times said. We
understood from the newspaper reports
that the Democrats were claiming Judge
Rhca's election upon mere technically
which would not stand in law. and we
said that they could not afford as q mat
& ter OF morals or as a matter OF policy
20 send Judge Rhea to Congress upon
my such pTetext.
We return 10 the original proposition:
If Judge Rhea received majority of
The votes cast in the election Of Novem-
bar 4.h. he should be given the GER
eificate OF election. If Colonel s,emp re-
ceived majority of the votes lie should
be given the certificate. But neither
should be put in upon a fiimsy techni-
rality when the other received clear
majority of the votes cast. II that be
Sentjmeofa1i+,. ~, rla,r1 ,,,;,t,,