The Calhoun chronicle. [volume] (Grantsville, W. Va.) 1883-1984, 1912-09-24
SAYS AS SENATOR HE SERVED
THE SPECIAL INTERESTS
RATHER THAN THE
PEOPLE.
OF CANDIDATE FOR
GOVERNOR SAYS HE is NOT
PROGRESSIVE.
OPPOSITION OF SENATOR GRIMES
~ LEAD OF TICKET is MAT
TER OF PRINCIPLE.

Hon. w c. Grimes. of Marshall
county Is state senator from the
Second district. He is a Republican
and was recognized as one Of the
forceful men upon the Republican
size of that body He has served
with Dr. Hatfield for four years in
the Senate. He knows what manner
OF man the doctor proved himself
while a servant of the people. In an
article published in the Charleston
Mail and in other Republican news
papers over the state Senator Grimes
wrote:
have been asked why I can not
support the candidacy of DIR. III ID.
liatiield, one OF the fifteen Republi-
can senators at the last session of the
legislature and with whom | served
/ shall give very briefly few of my
reasons, and ] want it thoroughly un-
derstood that it is not because of any
personal feeling that exists on my
part. We differed on public ques-
| tons. That is my reason for oppos-
ing him. | feel that / would not be
true to myself and the people of this
state If | were to remain silent on
the many things of which can
speak with authority.
Opposed to Primary Law.
DR.. Hatfield always and persistent-
ly opposed a direct primary election
law. In 1909 he introduced in the
legislature Of this state a kind OF
primary bill favored by the bosses
and machine leaders Of the state
This bill provided for the election OF
delegates to a state convention from
the magisterial districts. 1t also pro-
Vided if any persons were challenged
at the polls, and there was nothing
to prevent any person from being
4 challenged, he must take an oath to
vote the straight Republican ticket;
! the voters name was written on the
| back of the ballot and after the gen.
! eral election the ballot on which the
name had been written could be ex-
amined and If the voter had not vot-
| ed the straight ticket, then he was
guilty of perjury.
| can conceive OF nothing that
would so destroy independence in
| voting, give the bosses more power
and so degrade the ballot. The bosses
| under such law could challenge any
voter, and they would do it if he
dared exercise any independence, and
thus have him sworn to support them
| in the general election. The Offering
| of such a bill was an insult to the
manhood Of the voters of West Vir-
| ginia.
Or. Hatfield in the Senate.
| In the session of 1912 Senator
French and myself both introduced
primary bills in the senate. Both
these bills were referred to the com
mittee on judiciary. Senator French
and myself were both members OF
this committee and were appointed
as a subcommittee to agree on a
| bill This we did and the bill we
agreed upon was reported back to
the committee and recommended by
! the committee as a whole back to
! the Senate with the recommends
ton that il do pass. In the mean
time the House passed House bill
No. 80, bill very similar TO the
senate bill which had been recon-
mended favorably by the committee
on judiciary. Senator Smith, or
| Roane county, one day moved to take
lup the bill out of its order, which mo-
I ton prevailed l. myself then made
| a motion to dispense with reference
| to a committee, as a committee OF
| the senate had already considered
| similar bill. DR.. Hatfield, who was
| president of the senate, opposed the
| bill and arbitrarily refused to put
| the motion, saying IL was an impor-
| tant bill and should go to a commit
| tee. and referred it to the committee
on privileges and elections. This was
not the proper committee to which to
Irefer It, but il should have gone to
the judiciary committee, the same
committee that had considered the
two senate bills.
Refused TO Call Committee.
| Dr. Hatfield, however knew TINS
committee favored a primary law,
and therefore he didn't want it TO act
upon this matter; and he also knew
the chairman Of the committee on
privileges and elections was a close
friend OF his and also opposed to
Iproper primary, and could easily pre-
vent action on the bill by refusing to
call the committee on elections to-
gcther. This was done. although
number OF the committee tried 20
Have meeting The bill was killed
lin committee.
! Dr. Hatfield also thought the peo-
lple incapable of deciding the liquor
luuestiCn for themselves, and to keep
Them from doing it, twice voted
against submitting the prohibition
amendment He also wrOngfully and
unfairly used his power as president
lof the senate To- help the liquor peo-
lplo at Point Pleasant defeat local
Temperance measure.
haven't time to 20 into more de-
tails but will say that Dr. Hatfield
was generally with the special IN
itercsts as against the people. If the
lpeople want n governor who iavOrs
lihcao things T have not % word 10 say,
HUT I believe that they are entitled TO
know before voting.