West Virginia argus. [volume] (Kingwood, W. Va.) 1877-1946, 1914-10-29
pRocnEssvEs ruHNEp oown


where ne attended session OF the
Supreme Court OF the State when the
mandamus obtained by Colonel Mcdaniel
against John w. Watson and yester u.
Dunn as Ballot Commissioners was heard.
Colonel Mcdaniel was represented by
Colonel G. William Cramer of Morgan
town and the Ring by Vester Il. Dunn
and +. T.. Parrack.
No official report OF the decision has
been made but telephone Information
leads us TO the following conclusions:
First, that the Progressive voters Of Pres
ton county shall not have a right to vote
Tor the nominees made by their party
unless they have the consent of the Ring
in making such nominations. Second,
that when an officer is ones appointed or
selected by the Progressive State Com
mittee, the same Committee has no power
to remove that officer nor to control or
direct his actions in any way. Third,
that there are three Republicans on the
Supreme bench. Fourth. that il the
Progressives will not willingly vote the
Republican ticket the Board OF Ballot
Commissioners will make them do so, or
deprive them OF an opportunity to vote
for their own candidates on their own
ticket in their own way.
The ARGUS was not particularly inter
ested in this controversy from a political
standpoint after the Board OF Ballot Com.
missioners put Junior Brown and the
Democratic ticket on the ballot, but we
have always felt that the people of Pres
ton county were fair-minded i'm political
matters and that all the people of all
parties should have an opportunity to
vote for whom they please. Two years
ago petition signed by over FOUR
HUNDRED farmers and miners i'm this
county nominated what was known as a
MINERS AND FARMERS INDEPEN-
DENT TICKET which was presented to
u different set of Ballot Commissioners
except John w. Watson who acted as
Clerk of the Circuit Court. This was
turned down on account of a technicaity
and later the Supreme Court OF the State
decided that the objection as alleged by
the Ballot Commissioners was not good
however this was controversy where
only Republicans were engaged At that
time THE ARGUS voiced the opinion that
these -Four Hundred voters were entitled
to an Independent ticket, nor have we
retracted from that position. The present
case as we see it is more serious if possible.
In the present case the Progressives have
voted TWENTY-FIVE HUNDRED times
last election for Theodore Roosevelt, and
under the authority OF their State Com
mittee held a convention in Rowlesburg,
Preston county, at which convention
they nominated a ticket. Through legal
technicalities these same voters are now
denied the right to nominate ticket
and place 1t on the official ballot. There
are number of ways that candidates
may be nominated for public Office, one
is by primary, another by convention,
another by petition. Then there are ways
provided by which these certificates of
nomination shall be presented to the
Board of Ballot Commissioners after
naming these ways the laws of the State
make the following provision:
In case it shall appear to the clerk of
the circuit court OF any county by salts
factory evidence that nominations have
been made in conformity with the pro.
Visions OF this chapter, and no certificate
thereof has been received from him. he
shall include such nominations among
the names OF candidates to be printed
upon the ballot as hereinafter provided"
Code oil West Virginia, Chap. 3, Sec, 81.
Now we do not know where the Ballot
Commissioners got the law to get over
this, but to the ordinary mind this should
be conclusive. There is no doubt in our
minds that the members of the legislature
intended under the laws that each and
every man or set of men could get on the
ballot. The ballot should not be parti-
san sheet. 1t does not belong to the Re-
publican party nor any other in fact. 1t
is paid for by the taxpayers of the county
and it BELONGS TO THE WHOLE
PEOPLE and not to the Ring or any
party OF the same, and it should not be
manipulated to any party's advantage
even with the consent OF the Republican
Supreme Court.
We want TO call upon the candidates
of the different parties for the legislature
to repeal and re-enact this law, if it is the
law. And we want the people Of this
county to put the proposition SQUARE
up to all candidates and then vote for
the ones that will repudiate this high
handed procedure that we have seen in
two years defeat the will of nearly THREE
THOUSAND people and voters of this
county, and then Mr.. Voter we want
you to VOTE for the man that stands
against this legal disiranchisement, let
him be on the Republican, Socialist,
Prohibition or whatever ticket he might
be.
TIE ARGUS stands for all that is good
in popular government, and does not
believe this law should stand. We should
be allowed TO vote by law, not prevented
from voting by law. VOTERS WILL
YOU STAND BY YOUR GUNS AND
DEMAND ITS REPEAL?
An incident in connection with this
decision that was being told on the streets
last night runs about like this It seems
that Dunn and Parrack arrived at Tun-
Melton Thursday morning and announced |
that the Supreme Court had kept the |
Progressive ticket of the ballot. This |
was about NINE O'Clock in the morn
ing. The Supreme Court a. matter Of |
fact did not meet until TEN o'clock on |
the same morning and then the Supreme |
Cnurl harlnL 49,. IL .-...-.---- A.. IN