The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1903-10-03

G5As 9 s99 ! ,4z!zzz.zz5s
present the case, and would thereafter de.
eide whether to hear the contstee's coun-
sci or not. This was accepted, and Mr.
Perkins was selected to make the state
ment of the contestants claims He did
so very clearly and briefly. The basis OF
the claim OF Mr.. Garth to the nomination
was the contention that Mr.. McGee. the
nominee, had before the election agreed
in the event of his election. to name
a third candidate his deputy II the said
candidate would retire and leave the con-
test one between Messrs. MCGEE ana
Garth. This counsel contended was
violation of the statute, which torplds
farming out an office. Other grounds were
presented, but this was the chief claim.
Without hearing Mr. McGee's counsel
at all, the committee decided without Of.
vision after hearing the statement OF
MA Garth's counsel that his petition 10:
a rehearing was without merit and adopt
ed Mr.. Parker's motion to deny the petl-
ton. Mr.. Parker spoke briefly in support
of his motion denying tho contention
that the promise of Mr.. Garth to MS
third competitor was a farming of the
| office within the meaning of the law. me
COMMITTEES agreed with him and so de-
cided.
1t being then 2:3O . NJ, the com.
mittec on Mr.. Parker's motion adjourned
until o'clock .s
THE BRAUER CASE.
When the committee rcconvened at 4
o'clock the appeal of Mr.. William h.
Brauer from the decision of tho Henr!co
County Democratic Committees action
refusing the certificate of nomination as
treasurer of Henrico county, was read.
Colonel Joseph Button offered this res
! olution: Resolved, That the committee
proceed to take up this case and reVle"
| the action of the County Committee IN
| declining to declare Mr.. Brauer the nom
inee' It was adopted.
| Judge A. D. Watkins then offered the
! following: Resolved That 1t Is the sense
Of this committee that 1t has Jurisdiction
| III the case under consideration"
| Before action on the Watkins resolution
Mir. II. NJ. Tyler moved to grant each
| side fifteen minutes for argument on the
question of Jurisdiction.
This was adopted. and the doors were
opened and Messrs. Wyndham r. Mere
dith and William II. Sands. counsel for
Mr.. Brauer; Messrs. D. c. O'Flaherty
and Mr.. ]. Fulton, counsel for Mr., Hech-
| Ter, and Mr.. ST. John Coalter. who APP
peared in the interest of Mr.. Todd, were
| all ushered in
MATTER OF JURISDICTION.
| In the premature and informal discus
| sion which ensued Immediately upon the
statement of the line Of procedure as for
uulated. the counsel for Mr.. Hechlei
strenuously contended that the State Gen.
| trail Committee had no jurisdiction In tho
| case.
When the procedure became regular
MI Meredith was recognized to state the
contention of, the appellant as to juris-
diction. Mr.. Meredith vigorously com
bstted the contention that the legalized
primary in Henrico would or could op-
| crate 10 make the County Democratic
| Committee the final arbiter in all matters
| 0: appeals.
Thereupon Mr. oFlaherty. for the ap-
| pellees. presented their contention. He
read the Henrico legalized primary stat
ute and the plan of primary adopted by
the County Democratic Committee. with
the rules and regulations by them made
for the government Of the primary. He
contended that the State Committee had
no right to entertain an appeal from the
County Committee in the Henrico case
for the reason that the primary was not
held under the party plan, which required
viva voce voting. but under special,
statute made for this county by the Gen
eIal Assembly. Ha
Mr.. Fulton followed In behalf OF Mr.
Todd Mr.. Coalter having yielded to him
for the purpose
cation created the County Committed
he said but the Legislature clothed the
J County Committee with authority ant
power, and the State Committee canno
violate that law without slapping all Law
in the face"
BRAUER WILL ABIDE ACTION.
Mr.. Meredith thereupon closed the dis
cusson as To the issue of Jurisdiction O
the State Committee.
MIR. Brauer is Democrat" said Mr.
Meredith. land If the State Central Com
mittec falls to declare him the NOMINEE
he does not propose to go to the courts
} or TO contest the matter further, but I,
I abide Its action. That Is our position. |
!, rs matter of Democratic party policy
nothing more nor less"
The committee then went into executiy
r session 10 decide thte question of 1urIs
, d!ctlon.
d Mr.. George w. Jones offered a resolu
tlon that 1t Is the sense of this committe
: that It has jurisdiction Mr. Clyde "
n Saunders seconded this.
Mr.. Barksdale. of Halifax: II this com
y nittee decides this case and any of tn
g parties refuse to abide the decision tbe
r thereby place themselves beyond tn,
II party pale. and arc no longer Demo
Gratis.
Mr. Parker commended that the court
d have nothing TO do with the matter c
e who is the nominee of tho Democrat
t. party, localized primary. or no primar,
% The courts may enforce the pcnaltif
prescribed In The law but further tina
= that they have nothing to do with II
decision as to who is the nominee.
Judge Watkins made the point that II
committee having notified both sides tn;