Virginia free press. (Charlestown, Va. [W. Va.]) 1832-1916, 1912-09-19
REPUBLICANS JOIN. DEMOCRATS
IN SAYING CANDIDATES
CONDUCT
RAISED STRONG PRESUMPTION
THAT ELECTION. WAS NOT :
TO BE FAIR OR
HONEST.

mittee or elections of the House of
Representatives, and the honesty of
his political conduct was questioned,
in report made unanimously by
Democrats and Republicans alike In
the contested election case of Rankin
Wiley against James A. Hughes.
Six Democrats and three Republicans
compose the committee which heard
the testimony in the contested cleo
ton case and reported upon it, stat
ing that Dr. Hatfield,s actions in con
nection with the last election in Nc
Dowell county raises a strong pre-
sumption that the conduct of the cleo
ton was to be neither fair nor hon
est"
The majorities which have been
given to the Stand-Pat tickets in West
Virginia for many years have come
principally from the tier of counties
in the southern part of the state, in
GLIDING Mcdowell county, the home
Of Dr. Hatfield. 1t is the announced
intention of DR.. Hatfield to have that
county increase it's Republican vote
this year. Whether he Is to again
employ the methods which provoked
the criticism of Congress and caused
the assertion that DR.. Hatfield's con-
duct raises a strong presumption
that the conduct of the election was
to be neither fair nor honest" cannot
be stated but it is known that
methods have been used which were
open to question in the elections of
many years past and it is to be pre-
sumed that II the Republican vote OBJ
tanned in that way is to be increased
it will have to be done by repetition
of the same old methods
Criticism is Official.
The criticism of the political
methods Of Dr. Hatfield and his as
sociates in political work in the
southern part of the state, as ex-.
pressed by the Democrats and Repub-
licans of the elections committee,
alike, is contained in the official re-
port of the committee to Congress in
the eyHughes case, which is as
follows
aThe Committee on Elections No.
/, to which was referred the con-
tested-election case in which Rankin
Wiley is. the contestant and James A.
Hughes is the contestee, respectfully
submits to, the House of Representa-
tives the following report: IL
According to the returns duly GER
titled by the proper officer Of the
State of, West Virginia at the cleo
ton held, in the Fifth Congressional
District at West Virginia on the 9Th
day of November, 1910, in which Ran
kin Wiley, contestant, was the candi-
date of the Democratic party and
James A. Hughes, contestee, was can
didate of the Republican party for the
office of Representative in the Sixty
second Congress of tho United States,
the contestee received on the face OF
the returns a plurality of 2,942 votes.
The contestant Rankin Wiley, in due
time served upon the contestee,
James A. Hughes, a notice of intention
to contest the election, containing
charges of fraud, corruption, and in
timidation of voters, and containing
also an allegation that the said James
A. Hughes, the contestee, Is not a
citizen Of the United States.
ITO this notice the said James A
Hughes, contestee, filed an exception
and also an answer charging certain
irregularities which the contestee
claims resulted favorably to the can
didacy of the contestant in certain
counties of the congressional district.
The issue was Joined upon the answer
of the contested, and large number
of witnesses were called and exam
ined on the part of both the con-
testant and the contestee. The case
was fully argued by counsel for both
sides, and it has been very carefully
considered by the committee
Negroes Voted by Postmaster.
.The Fifth Congressional District is
composed of twelve counties, and no
question has been made with refer
Mingo and Mcdowell counties. The
contestant specifically charges illegal
and fraudulent voting and irregular
ity in the: conduct of the election in
those counties,. and in support OF
these charges, particularly with ref
-eernce to nine precincts In Mingo
county, he shows that negro floaters
were voted by and under the direc-
tion of the posthaster Of the town OF
Williamson, Greenway Hatfield, and
other Republican officials. The coun-
sci for contestant and contestee in
their briefs and by oral agreement
eliminated practically every question
4 III int CASE Will llO O<ANOPtAoAA VI
charges of, fraud in the nine precincts
in Mingo county and in Mcdowell
county, and the question of the citi-
zenship Of the .contestee. before the
case was argued before the commit
tee.
During the. course Of the argument
Minuo county was eliminated as
factor In this case by the admission
of counsel for the contestee that fraud
was comn,ittAed IN that county in the
Interest OF the contestee, and that 1t
was so fragrant and outrageous that
the returns from the nine precincts
where the frauds were perpetrated
OUGHT to be excluded In counting the
vote for the contestant and contestee.
But the fraud and corruption was Of
sucF 4 asflous character that the COM
rnittee deems It lts duty to refer to
the conditions ii, the nine precincts
AZ dlscloSed BY the testimony and adj
missions OF counsel.
aMinxo county with a population of
about 10000 mad something over 5000
registered voters. and it has a con-
siderable: shifting negro population.
The testimony dlseloses that at the
precinct " MateSVan there was total