The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1905-12-07
THE JOURNAL AND THE ELECTION
PRINTING.

PRINTING.
THE REPUBLICAN is not an advo-
cate of the present election law. nor
does it want its readers to have the
opinion that it espouses that law in
any particular, but since it is the law
governing elections in Garrett county
the people are compelled to abide by
it and there is nothing left but to en-
force its workings.
The law plainly lays down how the
elections are to be conducted what
publications are to be made and the
rate publishers are to charge for the
same; it regulates the size of the Off
cial ballots and requires that said
ballots be published in csimile form
in the newspapers selected by the law,
giving publishers Tor the Board of
Election Supervisors no choice in the
matter. The law, was enacted by a
Democratic Legislature and hence
that party is wholly responsible.
This statement places the matter
before our readers as it exists and is
made in order that all may see our po-
sition.
Last weeks Journal contained an
editorial relative to this matter The
editor thereof virtually admits that
he w1lfuliy lied in the issue OF Nov
ember 10Th, wherein he made the
statement without any frils and in
language that could not be mistaken
that: I'VE have it from member of
the Board of Election Supervisors
that the past election cost about three
dollars per vote" This statement was
taken up by a correspondent and an
swered through these columns in our
issue OF November 23rd showing that
the Journal willfully lied about the
matter; that no one connected with
the Supervisors Board had conyersed
with the Journal upon the subject
and that the assertion that the cleo
ton cost three dollars per vote" was
so apparent misstatement and ride
ulous upon its face that it was treated
with ridicule and only as another of
the Journals maudlin utterances.
In last weeks Journal, the editor
having evidently recovered from his
usual attack of quinsv or govt or
something else, tries to smooth the
matter oyer by admitting the lie and
stating that his information cameron
a gentleman who had talked the mat
ter over with member of the Board.
If the Journal lied, and it surely did
in its issue of NoY. 10th, when it said
that the information came direct to it
from one of the Supervisors, there is
surely room to doubt the statement
last week when it says I'VE made the
statement on the authority of a gen
tleman in conversation with q mem
Der of the Board
If we remember correctly the jour-
nal made a statement a year or two
ago concerning a public official upon
the authority.Of some one, but that
did not deter an action against the
journal by the official sandered and
verdict against the editor of that
paper was recovered in open court
for libel.
The journal tries to pose before
the tax payers as Il purely philan-
thropic institution, and that the ed
itor is working for glory, honor and
Of
other editors in Garrett county are
spongers, grafters, rascals and would
rob dead man. To this proposition
we take exceptions so f1ras this paper
is concerned. Unlike the Journal
we are not here for glory nor are we
IN business purely or our health's
sake, but to make respectable Iiv-
ing for our family and to conduct our
business honorably and ourselves as a
man who does not neglect his duties
or indulge in the cup that cheers"
as some of our newspaper friends in
this and other sections are prone to
occasionally do.
The charges made for publishing
the official ballot, ordered to be pub
lished in these columns by the Super
visors, were strictly in accord with
the law and at the same rate as
charged by the Journal when it ad-
vertises the sale of widows home
or an old mans farm at mortgagee's
sale-no more, no less, and we opine
that if the Journal were selected I'M