The commercial. (Union City, Tenn.) 190?-193?, 1906-09-21
CONFECTIONERY VS.. EVANS.

record and consistent achievements to the
approval Of the people
coNTEsT-TURNEY VS.. EVANS.
But Mr.. Evans says, and his friends claim,
that he was once elected Governor of Ten
nessee. | deny it, and the decision of the
Legislature, the tribunal having jurisdic-
ton to determine the question: has decided
the controversy against him. AS the claim
has been 50 frequently made, and may be
believed by some | shall now state few
facts relating to that election, all of which
is fully shown in the printed proceedings
Of the contest for Governor
First-Ihe election took place under the
old law, before the law now on the statute
books giving the Governor power to APP
point commissioners of election was passed,
and in Republican counties the majority of
the election officers were Republican.
Second-In the contest before the Leg
islature, charges of fraud and Irregular
ties were made against the Republicans,
and were fully proven by the testimony.
Third-In many counties in East Ten
nessee, and in other Republican counties
of the State giving Mr.. Evans large ma
jorities, no attention whatever was paid to
the law requiring the payment of poll taxes,
and thousands of illegal votes were re-
ceived and counted for Mr.. Evans.
Fourth-It was a part of deliberate
plan to Systematically violate the election
laws of Tennessee, by the Republicans,
and to give Mr.. Evans majority of the
votes on the face Of the returns.
Fifth--On the face of the returns, Evans
received To5,Io4 Turney, Io4,356, and
Minis, 23,o88, giving Evans an apparent
plurality over Turney of 748 votes, but a.
$40 less than majority of the combined |
votes of Turney and Minis
Sixth-When purged of fraud the cor
rect number of legal votes cast was found
to be-for Turney, 94,62o; for Evans, 92,-
eco, giving Turney plurality of 1854.
When the political history of that time
is viewed, one is not surprised at the |
frauds so openly committed, for the Re
publican platform, the Republican candi-
date for Governor, Republican newspapers
and speakers all over the State were de
nouncing in bitterest terms the poll tax
law, claiming that it was unconstitutional.
and that the judges of election could de-
eide for themselves whether the tax had
been paid, without legal evidence Of pay
ment, as prescribed by law,
All of this was in the face of decision
of the Supreme Court of the State, which
had upheld the election laws of Tennessee,
ia the case Of Cooke VS.. the State, 8 Pickle
4o7. There being no way 10 escapeI this
slefisiel Nj naalis, ln'Ais lsefet and Eager Is
PARTISAN! hjp. attacked and derided it as
we'll as the court Itself, m more than one
public utterance. He is reported by the
Knoxville Journal and Tribune to have said
n Knoxville, on Oct. 80, 1894, referring
D the above decision: I'VE have an opin- 5
on from our Supreme Court which not a
awyer in this house has any respect for" (.
n his speech in Memphis, delivered Oct. ..
10, 1894, which was published and sent
broadcast over the State, Mr.. Evans said: ,
The decision was one which brought re- :
roach upon the honored reputation of the !,
Supreme Court of the State. There was
time when no attorney considered his I
library complete without full file of Ten
lessee reports. That time, | regret to say,
las passed"
A recital of these facts, which Mr.. Ev
MS dare not deny in an open discussion
,efore the people, does not pile fagots at :
lis feet nor put the crown of martyrdom y
N his head, but they do convict him of =
eckless assertion and bitterest partisan :
hip The State of Tennessee and the
Democratic party have not wronged MIR. :
Evans, but he has wronged both. =
When a member Of the Fifty-hrst Con- : :
ress, Mr.. Evans did not hesitate to vote :,
) tinseat Southern Democrats and seat Re- :
ubicans. no matter what the face of the =
eturns showed, and he cannot be heard to = /,
omplain that Democratic Legislature saw u
t to purge the returns in the contest of
raud and to declare Turney the legally ;.
lected Governor of Tennessee. d
In the contested election cases of Akin =
ON VS. Pendleton, Clayton vs. Breckin- =
ldge. Langston VS.. Venable, McDuffy VS.. !
'urpin, Mudd VS.. Compton, Smith VS.. 3
ackson, Waddill VS.. Wise, Mr. Evans vot- ~
d to unseat all of the Democrats who S
,ere elected on the face of the returns and | - !,
, seat all of the Republicans. In the case ~ y,
{ Langston VS.. Venable, arising in Vir- =
mia. Venables majority was o4I on the p
ace of the returns, but Mr.. Evans voted "
, seat Langston, who was negro, and ~
-lio was seated by Republican house. 81 :
In the case of McDuffy VS., Turpin, from II
labama, Turpin, the Democrat, on the 10 ?
ICE of the returns, had majority of I3,, if
"a. vet Mr.. Evans voted to seat McDuf- o'
I, and he was seated by Republican 81
ouse. :.
With this record, how can any Democrat 81
Tennessee waste any misplaced sympa- -
" on the Republican candidate for Gov - -
nor? 81
~. t..,:.o.e of NJ Exare enaaL rs hin, Sp