Martinsburg statesman-democrat. [volume] (Martinsburg, W. Va.) 1906-1921, 1908-10-09

written by the hand Of a prophet who
foresaw the political exigency which
resulted in his selection by the Elkins
committee as a gubernatorial candl-
date. Mr.. Glasscock, be 1t known, was,
prior to the Charleston convention,
and ND until he succeeded Mr.. Swisher
on the Elkins ticket, an ardent sup
porter of his predecessor under the
crown of thorns. In an article writ
ten by Hon George c. Baker, of Nor
gantown, a Republican Of statewide
prominence, and one of the strongest
supports of the sainted Dawson tax
laws. published in the Morgantown
Chronicle, one of the strongest Repub-
lican papers in the state, Mr.. Glass
cocks connection with the nomination
of Swisher, his relations with Elkins
and his mania for office are clearly
set forth. This article was published
Sunday, March %, when the Scherr-
Swisher embodiment was in its infancy.
Mr.. Baker would naturally have be-
lieved that these things would satisfy
Mr.. Glasscock, and could not believe
that he would be willing to give them
up for chance on the governorship.
He could not have written this article
with the purpose of its being used
against Elkins and Glasscock as a
campaign document. Neither could
he, had he been gifted with prophetic
vision, have written better or more
powerful one for the advantage of the
Democratic party. That Mr. Bakers
charge that Glasscock Is Elkins' sal
aried attorney, everybody knows, since
it is a matter of official record in a
81 hot hn woo IN
supporter of Swisher for the nomina-
tion for governor is shown in the ut
terances of his paper, the Morgantown
Post, and in his action in going to the
state convention at Charleston, and
though not delegate. attempting to
cast the vote of MoDongalia county
for Swisher, piece of usurpation
which was not tolerated by the con-
vention, reckless and rotten as the
actions of that tribunal were. Mr..
Bakers article giving the true inward
ness of the -Swisher-Glasscock
alliance. follows:
Next to the freedom of our persons,
is the freedom of speech in this land
and the right to be heard in our public
papers when great interests of our
state are involved. Therefore, I take
II, tnat We people OF west virginia
have the right to express ourselves
upon the position which Collector of
Internal Revenue Glasscock has taken
with reference to the Morgantown
Post. in not permitting our citizens to
be heard therein, as In the days of
yore. when Henry Morgan, the friend
of the people, was the editor of that
paper, and when more recently Robert
Green so ably welded the pen Before
Mr.. Glasscock became the owner of
that paper, it was an open forum for
all the people to be heard on all sub
jects, so long as they were decently
discussed and not libelous The pub
lie is already acquainted with the way
in which Mr. Green was treated when,
on account of his paper being an open
sheet for the free discussion for or
against the candidacy of Charles w
Swlsher, and on account of Mr.. Green's
editorials thereto, he was summarily
removed from his position as editor
and manager of that paper, although
he owned therein, within a few, very
few. shares as MANY as Mr. Glasscock
The Internal Revenue Collector,
holding as he does the position as one
of the members of the state executive
committee, is certainly subject to just