West Virginia argus. [volume] (Kingwood, W. Va.) 1877-1946, 1914-02-19

Hing and Machine Endesvorine TO
Come 6.ck-PersonslIties Shall not
Divert the Real issue-Commend
Messrs. MstIIek and Scott as
Prestonisns


has not been left ono leg upon which lac
can stand When his allegations against
the county court were Analysed it was
found that they were based upon the
rankest kind Of partisanship. But he
reckoned without his host In the days
OF ring rule in this county he could have
gotten an audience, but it don't 90 today.
The great majority of the Prestonians
have advanced right up to the Missouri
line. Today the appeal Of the ring falls
upon deaf ears The more enlightened
element of the ring realize this
As an illustration of this. take Bro.
Reed, of the Preston Republican. No
one has presented the rings side OF the
case more forcibly and logically than
Bro. Reed. But being a man of adj
vanccd thoughts and ideas, he concluded
that TO attempt TO defend the county
ring and state machine would make him
the laughing-stock of the community.
Therefore, it makes my bosom swell with
pride TO observe that Bro. Reed devotcs
almost a column editorial i'm praise OF
the 50 a day paid to artisans. which has
been inaugurated under the Woodrow
Wilson regime. and the recommendation
OF the 81 ,000, 900 appropriation, by Post
master General Burleson, for the i'm
provement OF rural route roads, Gust
what our own commissioner. Calvin De-
Berry, has been doing) with the cherished
hope that the entire sum will be ex-
pended within the confines OF the A lie
ghenies," all Of which / most emphati-
cally second. But it pains me, and
grievouslv, too, to note that the columns
oil hi+ paper are open to the condemna-
ton OF that which he lauds and endorses.
Onr county court is condemned through
the columns of the Republican for APP
propriating money for the improvement
OF the rural route roads. Shamel There
has been but one medium of denuncia-
ton of the county court--the Preston
Republican.
Now, there appears a new Richmond
in the field, one civilian Bradley"
through the columns of the Journal. A
careful analyzation OF the articles appear
ing in the Republican, and Of this latest
efiusion in tine Journal, will lead TO the
logical conclusion that it il the coterie of
gentlemen who meet in the grocery store
who are writing under the various sobri-
quets of Glover Hay" ''Simou Ford
and William Bradley" The phrase
oloey is practically the same, the animus
is identical, and the knowledge of facts
come from the same source. This is the
same coterie of gentlemen who at one
time manipulated the politics of this
county and waxed fat at the expense of
the taxpayers. All that is necessary is TO
analyze the letters of the coterie to prove
their familiarity with the public offices of
the county and state. Their familiarity
with tile Virginia debt audit and the law
governing the audit of the county, shows
an intimate knowledge of both. Can it
be possible that they are identified with
the Virginia debt as commissioners and
that they are some of the gentlemen who
have been audited in this county and the
audit does not suit them? They sedu-
lously refrain from mentioning certain
public officials who were audited.
The animus and vindictiveness with
which they write show that they desire
to avoid the issue under discussion by
indulging in personalities to divert atten
ton from the audit of the public officials
and the county ring, but they are not
going to be allowed to substitute billings
gate for argument and presentation of
the facts. 1t is not what the coterie may
write or what may submit that is going
to decide the wisdom of the audit of this
county, but the verdict of the taxpayers
which will be rendered at the polls on
the day of election. They are the ones
who pay the fiddler, and they are the
ones who want TO know il any public
official has taken, through ignorance or
error, any money that the law does not
sanction. If they have it must be turned
back into the county treasury, which
will benefit the taxpayers.
The coterie has much to say about the
audit being worthless and costing 70
much. They are as a clam when il comes
to telling the taxpayers that Lemley and
Bearie cost the taxpayers for a partial
audit over 1925. Mr.. Steele cost us for a
complete audit Of seven men S., AS. O5.
Now, Lemley and Bearie would have cost
the taxpayers 81, $50 go, or $685.. 80 more
than the Steele audit This was quite a
snug saving for the people. And those
who believe that the auditing done by
the State Tax Commissioner office il
work performed gratuitously are laboring
under false impression. And the one
thing desire to make clear To- the tax
| payers is that had the state Tax Com
missioner had the audit made the county
would have 10 pay for il just the same.
The coterie endeavofs 70 convey the i'm
preston that il the State Tax Commits.
siOner made the audit the county would
not have to pay for IL, which is false.
The audit which Mr. Steele has made
will be reaudited," says the coterie.
which leaves no doubt that they are
speaking with authority and which il
prima iacie evidence that they are still
live coz in the state house machine and
have been duly advised, which is another
confirmation that the old ring is making
a desperate effort 70 come back aud be
restored TO power in this county. Bot
the people will see to IL that it does not
come back"
1T is charged that the county court
proceeded illegally and without the adj
/ vice Of anyone" misses the cots,rie which