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

kins, in officially advising Mr.. Braner
of the adoption Of the resolution declar-
Ing him the nominee he said In his letter,
''At this meeting William III. Brauer,
w. j.. Todd and II. c. Hechler all APP
peared by counsel. and the vote OF the
committee was unanimous
Mir. Todd's Letter.
This is Mr.. Todds letters
Editor of The Times-Dispatch:
Sir.--Please permit me to call your At
tention to the error into which you nave
fallen concerning the position of the lien
rico Democratic Committee in the iech-
| Ter Brauer contest, md also concerning
my positin in regard to the action OF the
State Central Committee. In the frst
place, you assume that Tho State Central
Committee has jurisdiction. 1t Is upon
this point that the whole matter turns.
If 1t had jurisdiction. then 1t could nave
reversed the action OF the County COM
nittee and DECLARED MIR. Brauer the nom
inee. II 1t did not have Jurisdiction. then
no action of the State Central Commit
teo can bind the County Committee. IN
1S0S q statute was passed authorizing inc
local committee of any party IN itenrieo
county, If 1t SO desired, to hold le-
CALLED primary election for the nominal
ton Of It's candidates, giving SAD com,
tnittee full power to adopt any rulea anu
regulations, not inconsistent with the
statute. which 1t might deem necessary.
But for that statute, the action OF the
County Committee could have been re-
viewed by the State Central Committee.
because tho former would have acted I'M
der authority vested in 1t by the latter;
but the County Committee elected, as It
had right to do, to hold the primary
under the statute. 9After having elected
to hold legalized primary. Its action
could be reviewed only by the courts OF
this land, and not by any body OF men
having no legal existence.
Acting under said statute. the county
committee adopted plan setting forth tire
rules and regulations which should govern
said primary. Under that plan. Mr.. Brnuer
AS well as every other candidate seeking
to obtain ahe Democratic nomination, en-
tered the primary, and by doing so agreed
to be governed by said rules and regua-
tons. Regulations adopted by men. em-
lowered by statute to net, become part
of the statute when said regulations carry
out the purposes OF the statute. Can 1t
be said that the State Central Committee
had the power to change the plan of the
statute law referred to? Under section
of the plan, the committee reserved the
right to withhold the certificate of NOM
iration, for frauds and Irregularities, from
the party found guilty, and award it to
the party whom it found entitled to It.
Said section was a part of the statute
governing legalized primaries in Henrico
county, because 1t was adopted pursuant
to the statute, and that section says that
tho County Committee shall award the
certificate to the person whom that COM
n,ittee decides IS entitled to 1t. This
committee, after hours Of patient inves-
tigauon. with the witnesses before them,
decided that Mr.. Braucr was guilty OF IT.
regularities under section Of said plan,
and declared that by reason of that he
was not entitled to the certificate, and
awarded the same to me.
I am sure the County Committee does
not desire to run counter to the wishes Of
the Democratic State Central Committee;
I certainly do not, and II it can be shown
that said committee has jurisdiction In
that matter, I will most assuredly bow
TO Its decision. The fact that the State
Central Committee assumed Jurisdiction.
If 1t had no right to do so. would not in
any way give it the right to act. The
County Committee acted under the law of
this State, and its action can only be re-
viewed by courts of the land. MI Brau-
er can settle this matter In a lawful way
BY applying to the courts. Certainly
every one is bound to obey the law of
the land, rather than the rules of the
political party to which he belongs. With
reference i, to the agreement before the
State Central Committee. I wish to say
that 1 in no way acquiesced In the reso-
luton adopted by said committee. decar-
ing that it had jurisdiction, but on the
contrary, after the committee took juris-
dicton, my counsel refrained from any
further appearance in the matter.
It may be of interest to state how the
State Central Committee was composed.
There are fifty members of the State Cen
trail Committee, and 1t requires twenty-siX
to make a quorum. There were present on
last Friday only fourteen members of that
committee. Fourteen were represented by
proxies, making twenty-eight in all. There
were six outsiders holding proxies, making
twenty persons present at the meeting.
II twenty men, and six Of them nom
members, can take jurisdiction by hold
Ing sufficient number of proxies, can
not two men with sufficient number
assume Jurisdiction? That these proxies
were put in the hands Of partisans of
Mr.. Brauer Is shown by the fact that
Clyde w. Saunders, a warm friend OF
Mr.. Brauer, held one or more of them.
and voted in said meeting. The last State
Convention declined to re-elect Mr.. Snun-
ders as a committeeman. do not believe
that full meeting of the State Cen
trail Committee would have taken juris-
diction in this case.
AS to the report of the probability OF
my withdrawal from the contest. VIII
say that I consider myself the regular
Democratic nominee, and will be In tho
field until sunset on the election day.
Yours respectfully.