The Progressive West Virginian. [volume] (Williamson, W. Va.) 1911-1913, 1912-09-19
REPUBLICANS JOIN DEMOCRATS
IN SAYING CANDIDATES
CONDUCT
RAISED STRONG PRESUMPTION
THAT ELECTION WAS NOT
TO BE FAIR OR
HONEST.

DR.. HI. D. Hatfield, Stand-Pat can
didate for Governor Of West Virginia,
was severely criticised by the com.
mittee on elections of the House of
Representatives, and the honesty of
his political conduct was questioned,
in a 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. Hatfields actions in con-
neetion 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
Guiding Mcdowell county, the home
of DR.. Hatfield 1t is the announced
intention of DR.. Hatfield to have that
county increase its 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 strong presumption
that the conduct of the election was
to be neither fair nor honest cannot
he stated, but ii 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 If 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 Wiley-Hughes case, which is as
follows:
The 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:
AGcording 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 OF West Virginia on the Sth
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 the United States,
the acontestee received on the face OF
the tfeturns 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 contestee, and large number
of witnesses were called and exam
hn nf a
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.
1.-THE Fifth Congressional District is
composed of twelve counties, and nc
question has been made with refer
ence to the returns form any but
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 postmaster 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
in the case with the exception of the
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
Mingo county was eliminated as a
factor in this case by the admission
of counsel for the contestee that frauc
was committed in that county in the
interest of the contestee, and that II
was so fragrant and outrageous that
the returns from the nine precincts
where the frauds were perpetrateo
ought to be excluded In counting the
vote for the contestant and contestee
But the fraud and corruption was Of
such a serious character that the com
Z mittee deems it it's duty to refer to
the conditions In the nine precincts
as disclosed by the testimony and ad
missions of counsel.
"Mingo county with population OF
about 10000 had something over 5000