The Washington herald., 1910-02-17
RECOUNT;
STONE HITS BACK
Continued from Page One.


Informed now that the order TO destroy
was, in fact, made. but that for some rea-
son ii has not been executed.
Whether the ballots We're destroyed
or not, however. is lmmaterial. and would
net particularly concern or effect the
point I was making. The point / was
making was this: That Gov. Hadley. pro-
Tossing to have information which would
vitlate my nomination and election 10
the Senate, had buried it in the deep
bosom of his own consciousness and kept
it a profound secret until long after the
time when Il would serve any practical
use to make it public: and in this con-
nection I mentioned the fact, incidental
ly, that even the ballots had been de-
sTOyed 1t made no possible difference
in so far as an investigation was con-
cerned whether the ballots had been de-
stroyed or not at the time Gov Hadley
made his attack The possibility of
making an investigation was long past,
and It made no difference whether the
ballots were still in the boxes or in an
ash heap
with FaIstaffian BIuster.
With a great flourish of trumpets and
Falstaffian bluster, he issues TO me a
ferocious challenge. He says that he has
telegraphed Gov. Folk asking il he will
consent to a recount and then proceeds
10 say that if both Folk and I consent
/ the recount will begin at once" This
| declaration, deliberately issued, the gov
ernor caused to be telegraphed through
out the country. hoping thereby to i'm
peach my election in the minds OF people.
But Gov Hadley. who is also an ex-
attorney general Of the State. is familiar
with the election laws Of Missouri He
knew that such a recount as he proposes
IS impossible at this time. because he
knows II would be violative Of the con-
stitutiOn and statutes Of the State /
might have answered on the moment that
/ l accepted his challenge. and thus have
made fake issue. did not care 10 play
the role OF a clustering demagogue in that
way.
Attorney Generals Opinion.
ITO ascertain whether my own view OF
/ the law was correct. telegraphed several
| eminent lawyers of Missouri 10 see what
| their opinions were. Their answers are
/ all TO the same general effect. Among
! others was a telegram l received from the
attorney general. E. ". Major which ac-
cords with the expressed opinions OF the
/ others.
Gov. Hadley knew this as we'll as Gen.
Major
why. Gov Hadley talks as II Gov.
| Folk and l should consent to open the
ballot boxes and recount the ballots that
would be all that was necessary. He
knows that TO attempt such a thing would
I be an Offense against the law OF the
State His challenge was merely a spec
tacular play 10 the galleries, hoping that
it would so divert attention from the bad
hole into which he had been put as 10 af-
ford him some chance Of escape.
Left Folk I'm Ignorance.
First, II he knew anything that would
vitiate my nomination. why did he not
lay the facts before Gov. Folk and urge
him to contest? But ne did not do that
On the contrary. he left Gov. Folk In as
dense ignorance Of his wonderful infor-
nation as he left all others. and allowed
Gov. Folk 10 express his acceptance Of
the result and TO advise the Democrats
OF the legislature 70 elect me in accord
ance with the primaries
Secondly. If he knew anything to With
ate my election, he should, as an honest
official and guardian Of the public right
have laid that information before the
legislature, one branch Of which was
Republican. and officially urged a legis-
ilative investigation before proceeding with
the election. or even afterward. But he
did nothing Of the kind; he remained
dumb as an oyster
Thirdly If he knew or believed that
frauds had been committed that would
vitiate my election why did he not refuse
to sign my commission. and certify his
reasons, through the Vice President to
the Senate of the United States, so that
the whole matter might thus have been
made the subject OF an investigation by
that body, tWO-thirds Of whom are Re
publicans. But he did nothing Of the
kind
When provoked by some criticisms
had made while speaking in that dis
trict Of certain extravagances INDUCED
IN by the governor in the use of public
funds. he made this miserable charge for
the first time"
Even If it were permissible which Il
is not, to recount the ballots at this late
day, the simplest Of men must know
that it would not be done by a mob or
by irresponsible persons. II it could be
done at all, il could be done only in some
authoritative way by some official body.
If an authoritative recount could be had.
and I could have satisfactory assurance
that during these long months the bal
lot boxes have remained intact, I would
not interpOse the slightest objection. If
it could be done in a lawful way. I
would Ike to silence this asinine and IN
timely accusation. But what is the use
Of discussing an impossibility2 It NAV
please the governor TO fume and bluster
and make pretense, but beg to be ex-
cused from that.
He charged that I had not been hon
estly elected and offered to give a "biu
Of particulars" I called for the bill Of
particulars
L have since analysed and answered
H. and have shown beyond peradventure
that the governor IN many cases mis-
stated facts and showed conclusfvely that
what he gave as his proofs were so
worthless as to be ludlcrous. From that
answer he turned in rage to issue his
challenge for a recount, a performance
whose absurdity is on a par with the
other things he has said and done In this |
behalf.