The Fairmont West Virginian. (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1904-1914, 1908-12-10
.INR. JACOBS
ANSWERS
TRADE OF
THE TIMES
Editorial
Was False and
Malicious
woRTH1NGToN. W. Va.

| EultOI west Nrgl1lan.
My attention has been called TO an
editorial in yesterdays Times entitled
IAN Unsavory Action"
AS the West virginian properly
states "the tirade was malicious, falls,
and absolutely inconsistent Though.
out and the aim of the attack Is ap.
parent to everybody.
It Is a fact that Sanford K. Jacobs
has for 10! these many years. about
25 years we believe, been on the elec.
tiOn board. either as clerk or c3mmis-
stOner, and his w,rfI has always been
found accurate, and we have no recol.
lection OF any trouble, with one excep-
tion. In 1892, B. D. Fleming receive d
majority of about 10 votes in Ma
rlon county for the Office of cOmmis.
sNner of the County Court and the
Democratic organ then thought the
! majority was so small that 1t might
be overcome by recount and Mr..
Hartley. the defeated candidate on the
nmocli'tic ticket. demanded re-
count. Sanford K. Jacobs was select
ed as the Republican clerk during tha
recount. The recount started with
Huntington district. There were sew.
eral ballots In this district that nai
not been counted by tha commission
ers on account Of technicalities, anil
these were passed over until the court
decided on precedent for counting
such ballots. The precedent estao.
llsled was as fair as could be asked.
TIE least mark on any ticket was tax.
on as an indication that 1t was the In.
tent OF the voter to vote that ticket.
The count progressed, and at threa
or four precincts. always Democratic
ones, Mr.. FlemiRg's name was scratch.
ed and Mr.. Hartley's written under Il,
always in the same handwriting. This
looked strange, so many scratchers
wrote the same hand writing. How
ever. when West Monongah was
reached, where Sanford K. Jacobs nal
served as poll clerk. the same four
scrntchers in the same handwriting
bobbed up. and similar gain over the
original count. With all this trict;ery,
Mr.. Fleming was but two votes be.
ihlnd Mr.. Hartley. but there remained
those Warrington district ballots to
be counted according to the establish
ed precedent. and when Franklin Ar
nett demanded that they be counted,
Mr.. F. T. Martin was called in and
argued against counting tnem and tie
Democratic County Court refused to
go back and count them. If these bal.
lots had been counted Mr.. Fleming's
majority would have been nearly as
large as It was on the first count.
This may be ancient history, but it
shows the Democratic method of dis
franchising voters for the last 90
years they were In power.
All the principal statements in the
editorial are absolutely false, and the
falseinood is apparent to all VINO are
acquainted with the meth:d Of con.
duct at Worthington and as far as the
statements made in regard to what
occurred in the election room I am
nerfectly willing to leave It to Chas.
0. Messenger and L. H. Davis. Demo-
cratic challenger and poll clerk, re-
spec+ively.
Idid not know. and am willing TO be
qualified to It. tnat any such ballots
were voted here. and did not know It
rntil they were discovered at the re-
c.Hlnt. 1t is positively untrue that I
ever tcld anybody that the Republicans
would be the gafners in the recount
on account Of these ballots. did tell
~ +, Davis that there would be A.
change on the legislative candidates
on account Of Judge Mason's ruling
in the Ice case but did not know
which party wOnld benefit BY It. I
was in the COurt.nL use on Monday anil
Tuesday simply as spectator as I
presume were also a host Of Demo.
Gratis saw there. l did not go be-
mind the railing until after the first
Of the ballots had been found. AS the
cunt proceeded l noticed the Demo.
cratic attorneys were excepting to
some ball.ts, and as an election Off.
GER I desired TO see what their obtec.
tons were and took my station be.
side Democrat and watched the
count. And when the second ballot
was found heard some one remark
tnat the poll clerks name was missing
and | walked over to see II 1t was
mine or MIR. Davis "simply this AMI
nothing more"
The next falsehood Of any import.
Once is the statement that 'fhc
Stnightway went to the attorneys
present and made clean breast Of
knowing that these ballots were hand,
ed to two Democrats for voting" 4
defy the author OF that EDITORIAL TO
produce any attorney, Democrat or Re.
publican, or anybody else that will
testify that made any such statement.
| called no voter back and had tie
Democratic clerk sign the ballot be.
fore the voter went into the booth.
1t Is true the Democratic clerk gave
a N:ter ballot which he had not
signed, and after the voter had come
out OF the booth and delivered his
ballot to the commissioner and passed
out of the room the omission was dis.
covered and Mr.. T. F. sturm, the Re.
publican commissioner, asked Mr.. Da-
Wis to sign IN but my imnresslnn is