The Fairmont West Virginian. (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1904-1914, 1910-03-21
!. . a = q. ~ Z 49, q J. 9 3 a
s.4.SMARTrPoLiTiCS"

Y Some time ago this paper had an
editorial on he above subject In.
which difference was made 10 the fol-
lies OF the epublican tactics and the
wisdom o. the Democratic plans IN
der the lead ership this year The re-,
suit OF Saturday g election speaks for
itself on that score. Fairmont is
Scieariy q Republican city hy three or
four hundred ma ority, but in satur-i
days election the Democrats landed a
mayor and three out of five council
4 men. Az least. RI johnson of the First
\ ward IS so satisfactory to the Demo
Gratis and the big bosses put SO much
money IN for him that ne can safely
;sbe counted as q credit to their side.
4 An analysis shows that the Democrat
sic bosses were playing politics charm
Singly lille pretending to work. for, the
whiskey interests only 1T is worthy Of
note that while license; carried by 1856,
Stlle LIQUOR crowd allowed the Repuh-
Slican candidate for mayor, whom they
sclalnled to support, to be defeated by
IA votes. "a blind man could feel
cherry there with his cane. Any.
Z one It'll a half:rational mind can see
that the interests which carried
license by 155 could have elected the
i cand date for mayor they claimed to
be for; ~ they had played square. Ed
\ Reed was the victim OF intrigue and
treachery: there is no doubt In the
world about 1t. He. was traded or in
the: First and Second and allowed to
he slaug htered without mercy in. the
Fourth and Fifth Why was the fight
made so strong.tin the First ward ?
Because Robinson had voted for
brewery license and was considered
sattsfac tory to the liquor syndicate
head led Bby the big Democratic bosses.
Why was Reed Numerically pounded
5ing the Second n Because the Democrats
ftcandt te4 there was In danger II the
Repnbllcans should show any signs OF
getting together The money was on
hand In the Second to save the day
for license and the Democratic can.
sdidates for council. The, Republican
sscand ldate for mayor. whom the syndi-
cate recessed Ito be for, didn't get a
look In. 4 an Y.
81 What was the situation in the
Fifth a. democratic candidate for
council was thought to have chance
for election. and that looked like a
good }hel dto turn over$to the tender
6Inlercies OF the Democratic candidate
for mayor. SO that ward was practi.
5cally without money with which to
buy votes It led the city on the anti.
license vote, wing As on the dry side
iyofE the ledger: ( q
What a bout the Fourth ward? This
WAS the home ward of the Republican
Scand hate for mayor and considered
! wet by from q s ]; to 100 votes. And
there Is no doubt I that the majority
an favor OF license and for Mr.. ogden
could have been run to the hundreL
mark easily, but the Democratic syn.
$dtcate d idn't operate there, and us a.
+ result ogden came out with only %
s'mnatorlty license was only 81 in the
lead and the Democratic candidate for.
mayor carried the ward by IS. K In the
Third ward no politics was played for
the Democrats had no chance to win
but the license 5propo sltlon was boost.
ed strongly 50 that possible dry ma
3sSiori les elsewh ere mig ht be overcome.
4 The Republicans know who took the
credit for lend ership In this campaign:
y .et the own cast go To them for com:
Y. fort mud cor sDlat ion. MI, hi;