The Hartford herald. [volume] (Hartford, Ky.) 1875-1926, 1911-09-06

own courthouse officials and ash
: him to estimate the fioaters in Ohio
county, and let other editors whose
righteous Indignation has been
aroused by Judge O'Rear's charge
do so, and you will probably be
found on the side of the Judge. who
is painting the. State of Kentucky,
scars and all, and when he gets
through, we shall all admit the cry
ing need OF a Corrupt Practice
Act to punish the venal and pro-
tect the weak among us, who are
such an important element in ev-
cry election in every county in our
State, / dare sayi Respt.,
c. E. WOODS,
Ex-Mayor, Democrat"
And so on-noaters. fioaters,
world without end. Just think of
it, One hundred and fifty thous-
and of them-as Mr.. Woods esti-
mates-scattered throughout the
various precincts of old Kentucky.
He raises Judge O'Rear's estimate
over 100 per cent. Fifteen hun
bred in his own county of Madison!
Who would have thought it? Mr..
Woods is so sure of it that he in.
vites us to write to any official of
Madison county for verification of
figures given by me-" Well take
Mr.. Woods word for tin his
home county, anyhow-and then we
want to ask him a question or two.
In adopting the ideas of his lead
er-Judge O'Rear-we suppose he
also adopts the Judges policy along
other lines. Judge O'Rear has re-
peatedly averred that it is both un-
fair and unjust to make a public
charge against anything or any
body without following it up with
proof. Both Judge O'Rear and Mr..
Woods make the specific charge that
there are many thousands OF voters
in Kentucky who regularly sell their
votes. Mr.. Woods estimates that
there are ! 500 in his own county of
Madison. Surely OUT. of this mnlti- ]
tude of "foaters" the crime OF sell
ing their votes should be easily fix
ed upon at least a few thousand. II
is a matter too important and too
disgraceful to allow TO stand as ii
is. Happily, the law takes cogni-
zance of this sort of "doings" and
provides a severe penalty for same,
both for the man who Sells and the
man who buys. Isn't 1T high time
that something were done in the
premises? Can't this nefarious
practice be stopped? The following
is the law on the subject, taken
from Kentucky Statutes:
Section 1886. Bribery-Receiv- |
ing Bride. Any person guilty of |
receiving a bride for his vote at an
election, or for services or influence
in procuring a vote or votes at an |
election, shall be fined from fifty to |
five hundred dollars, and be exclud- !
ed from Office and suffrage"
Section 1887. Bribery-Bribing
Another. Whoever shall bride an
other shall, on conviction, be fined |
from fifty to one hundred dollars, or
imprisoned from ten to ninety days,
or both so fined and imprisoned, and |
be excluded from Office and suf- |
frage."
With such certainty of numbers
and defniteness of locality, why |
cannot Judge O'Rear, with the able
assistance of Mr.. Woods, corner up
a few thousand and enrich the |
States Golfers with fines, at the |
same time DISTINGUISHING an army
Of constituencies voters who are not |
worthy of the name? Why not |
make proof a vindication of the d.
rect charges made?
We repeat-as in a former issue +
we are skeptical in regard to
the immensely of the charge made. /
We are not yet ready to accept the |
figures without large measure of
substantiation in material proof. We
invite Mr.. Woods to the task of |
verifying his allegations with def
mite proof, in which laudable am
bition he should be ably assisted by
his county officials, whom he cites
to us as having knowledge of
same.
In any event, in anything he may
say or do, The Herald offers Mr..
Woods space in its columns, rather
than that he should imperil his ,
honorable record by appearing as a
bolter, Haunting his defiance from
The stronghold OF Democracy's worst
enemy-a Republican camp.
The last issue of the Hartford
Republican contains a two-column