The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1912-10-05


oead or moved away or never existed
out the names were placed on the
club roll for the very purpose Of
using them in that way.
Third. people not entitled to vote
voting. good many instances 90
TINS were shown by the affidavits sub-
mitted. These consisted of n,i,
men not in the State long enoupb
men who now live in Georgia and
negroes.
we desire to call attention to the
TWO last classes. Non-residents SEEM
ed to have voted freely at Bath in
Aiken county, and, in some instances
are found elsewhere.
Negroes were allowed to vote in
violation Of the rules in a good MANY
counties; and if this is not STONED
we may as well abandon the primary
and allow everybody to run in the
general election, as the negro man
VIII have voice anyhow.
Fourth. Managers at Bath in Aiken
county were not sworn. nor did thew
swear the voters at Cold Spring or
Antreville in Abbeville county
on August 27. The votes cast in those
precincts are embraced in those
classed below as questioned.
There were a good many votes for
State officers put in county boxes and
counted by the managers. This NAV
have been honest, but it is easy for
one interested in a State officer to
vote for such officers in both boxes
and get counted twice. All instances
OF this are classed below as questioned
votes. See exhibit "a"
The said list contains all the votes
questioned by any statement reach
ing us. Many Of them are explained
and many are mere Implications of
names by the fact that more than one
person of the same name voted in the
same county. There is no proof before
us to the candidate for whom the
irregular votes were cast.
AS to fraud. Fraud may have ex-
listed. The opportunity to submit il
from the fact that no Identification is
necessary, either to be enrolled or TO
vote, no proof except the assertion of
the alleged voter that he is qualified
TO enroll, is required, and no state
ment of his place of residence or
occupation is required to be stated
with his enrolment, and nothing but
the statement of the name that is on
the club roll is required when he pre-
sents himself to the managers to vote.
all open the door to the grossest
fraud. The fact, also, that il is all
most impossible to detect it when
once committed is an invitation to go
into ii and win and then be secure
from detection.
Take the present case; a great hue
and cary of fraud was raised and a
committee appointed to investigate
the whole State and produce results.
They must do it at once, and ap-
parent delay was severely criticised.
while all the while in those counties
where most fraud was committed the
committee had good subcommittee
at work skillfully and diligently en-
deavoring to detect the fraud. What
was the result? In Greenville in one
hundred and twenty-eight (12S) votes
were found cast by somebody under
names of people who have not been
found after diligent search Probably
fraudulent; but who did it? The poll
list shows the names used: but who
are they? You are against a stone
wall; you can not lay your hands on
one of the men; and the fact that
your rules invite such ard that your
committee is without power and that
the cry can skiilfuiiy be turned on
the committee. all make it easy for
the fraud to be committed and i'm
possible to be detected.
The Greenvillc Case.
The fact, also, that to bring the
work down TO that point in Greenville
with the force there used in only one
box in two weeks shows that the cost
Of investigating fully would be pro-
hibitive and the time required would
be such as to make il impossible. We,
therefore, as TO that, report that in
the time we have had and the help
that the public and such OF the coun-
ty committees as responded at all
nave rendered, We have no proof
which IN our Judgment would reverse
the face of the returns as published
ana which are now in the hands OF