The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1911-09-27

s~tratghtout. the evidence does not dis
cioso. Certain It Ia, both factions
Y boon Hu.lty of 'sulking In their
tents and Of openly boiling. IL has
oeen testified that each faction would
,a.her vote for the devil than the can
didates OF the opposing fnction..' and
THIS seems to be entirely true.
Connection Not Proven.
Thsre ie no direct and positive evil
uence that the contestees, A. C.. Crom-
we'll. sheriff: r. C. Marshall. attorney
Tor the Commonwealth. and 3. Q. Fem
parties to this alliance. The evidence
against them Is the merest hearsay.
and the testimony of their political
enemies as to common repute and an
eral rumor. Their is no evidence that
these men ever voted tho Republican
ticket On the contrary, the evidence
Is conclusive (see Maurice Longs tes-
timony) that they have religiously
voted tho Democratic ticket in all cleo
lions These men took tho stand
and positively denied that they had
ever voted the Republican ticket. or
that were parties to any fusion aili-
ance with the Republican,.
The "Straightouts' do not charge
these men with actively advocating
the election OF the Republican candi-
dates for clerk. treasurer and commits
sioner OF revenue. The charges against
them Is that they put forward straw
candidates" in tho primary, secured their
nominations and then acquiesced in
the wholesale desertion OF said IAN
didates by the very persons who voted
for theni in the primary. 1t is quite
evident from the testimony that the
straw candidates" do not expect, and
IN a number of cases do not seek. to be
elected In the general election. I do
not think the evidence In this case
warrants your committee In finding
that Messre, Cromwell. Marshall and
Fentress. bring out and put in the
field these straw candidates. but |
am OF the opinion that the evidence
shows that these straw candidates"
are induced to run in tho Democratic
primary by tho Republican
of the offices.
There has been in this case a great
mass of testimony to establish the
existence of numberless Irregularities,
charges and countercharges. There is
no charge of actual fra I'D In the pri-
mary, and we are safe in saying that
1t was the fairest election held In that
county for years. BY process of elimi-
nation. we could doubtless arrive at
ana decide which of said candidates
received the creates number of strict
~ legal votes in the primary of June
IS. 1911. but l have deemed this course
Il Itl SHdl no one SnOuld
be permitted to be the Democratic
standard-benrer who is not q BONA Nde
c:ididate seeking the deteat Of his
Republican opponsnt. Therefore we
need not go into q discussion and de-
cision of tho various and numerous
teslnical vio4itions of the registra-
ton and election lava.
The evidence In this case clearly
shows that J. E. Hall. candidate for
treasurer: w. L Wilson. candidate for
clerk; w. l.. Evans, candidate for
commissioners of revenue for District
No. /. and S. W. Wilson. candidate Tor
supervisor for Washington District.
In the primary of June 2s, 1911, were
never bona fide candidates. but waro
put forward In the interests of Re-
publican candidates for the respective
offices. To my mind, this fact Ia oon-
elusive OF the case. I hold that they
should not be given the certificate of
nomination.. but the positions be de-
clored vacant. and / recommend that
a primary be ordered and held under
tho supervision of the State chairman
to fill the vacancies In which said
primary said straw candidates. be de-
clared ineligible 10 run for ONCE.
There being no question as to the
bona tides of any OF the other candi-
dates, and the evidence clearly howinp
That they received u majority of the
votes cast in the primary of June IS.
1911. / recommend that certificates OF
nomination be awarded ZACH of said
candidates SO receiving a ma Iority of
votes as appears from the face Of the
returns.
County Committee.
This is the hardest problem I have
hnd to deal with. anu nave tried to
reach 4 conclusion consistent with tho
evidence that would be beneficial 10
tile party. and to some extent end the
unfortunate fact!onal warfare that has
been continually waged in this county
The evidence In this Gaze shows. that
the county committee of Norfolk coun-
ty. az constituted on the 2sth Of June.
1911, was controlled by influences
which we might term "~fusionism."
hurtful TO the best interests of the
Democratic party, and II the said coun-
" committee had not gone out OF Of
flee by operation of law. and a new
committee elected at the primary held
september Z. 1911. I would be in favor
OF ordering the reorganization of the
said county committee under the
strictest regulations.
But since a new committee has al-
ready been elected. as provided for nv
the party laws. l do not see that we
nave any authority in these proceed-
ings to set aside said last election.
especially is this true since the right
OF the said committee SO elected at tho
primary held September 7, 1911. is be-
Ing contested in other proceedings now
pending before the State Central Com
mittee.
Respectfully submitted.