Clarke courier. [volume] (Berryville, Va.) 1869-1997, 1907-12-04
Vote Sustained.

election of september Ii set aside,
and confirmed the result of that
, election as representing the true
will and intent of majority of the
voters at said election.
The contest last Friday was one
of the most ably conducted legal
battles ever occurring i'm Virginia,
and che attorneys for the contest
ants frankly admitted that every
legal book and decision which they
: had been able To find in the great
Washington libraries had been
consulted and copious citations
made therefore, in their fight.
Ii will be many years, probably,
before such interesting speeches,
bristling with citations and quota
tions from the most celebrated
legal volumes of this and past gen
erations, will be heard in the old
courthouse here.
The speech of Hon. Marshall
Mccormick, for the contestants,
brought forward one point which
had never. SO far as we are aware.
been presented in a similar case.
His point was that the constitution
of Virginia provides for the pas
sage of State, City, County, .Mu-
nicipal and other elections. and
that, as the legislature had passed
a local option election law saying
that the form Of the ballot should
be For licensing the sale of intox-
icating liquors. and Against
licensing the sale of Intoxicating
liquors, that such law. because of
of its enactment by the legislature
after the constitutional provision,
was mandatory, and must be obey
ed literally.
Mr.. Moore, for the contestees,
replied to that by citing later
paragraphin the constitution which
provided for Local Option, Dis
pensary and Prohibition elections,
and contended that the clause de-
pended upon by Mr.. Mccormick
had no reference to local option
elections.
The speeches of Messrs. f.. b.
Whiting and-Conrad Kownslar, for
the contestees and contestants,
respectively, were able presenta-
tions of the subjects covered, and
were gems of rhetoric and verbiage.
The four speeches consumed
practically the entire day, and
when Mr.. Moore finished his re-
marks the courtroom lights had
been lit. Judge Harrison asked
for all of the authorities depended
upon by the two sides and took
them to his room for the night,
after announcing that he would
render his decision the next morn
ing Saturday.,
When Court opened Saturday
morning at 10 O'Clock the court
room was we'll filled with spectators,
showing the wide interest taken in
the final decision of the case.
Judge HARRISON at once began his
opinion. and took up, one by one,
the specifications in the bill of
contest.
lie failed to sustain the contest
ants upon single point of their
contest, giving his reasons and
authorities for so refusing, and
dismissed the contest.
On the subject of the wording of
the tickets, Judge Harrison said
that the law was not entirely clear,
as it provided for certain words to
be used by the Court in ordering
the election; gave another form for
the ballots; and gave still another
form for the return to be made by
the election judges; and stated that
the form printed on the ballots as
used on September II was in exact
accord with the Wording provided
to be used by the Judges of election
in making their returns.
On most of The grounds OF con-
test the numbers were dismissed as
being entirely too vague to be con-
sidered, as they must be precise
and in detail as 10 the specifications.
On the ground that free lunches
were sawed for the purpose OF
bribing the voters, the Judge said
there was nothing to show that
voters we're actually bribed; and
laughingly remarked that it was
the custom, in Virginia, at least
for barbecucs and other forms oil