The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1916-11-05

8; in Santa Rosa, 8; in Suwannee, z; ir
Volusia, g.
Wood gained in Duval, II; in Hamilton
10; in Holmes, go; in Jackson, II; in Leon
4 in Nassau, 5; in Okaloosa, 3; in Putnam.
4; in st. Lucie, 10; in Santa Rosa, %; in
Suwanee, 4; in Sumter, l.
Hudson gained in Duval, 4; in Bradford
!; in Hamilton, 10; in Holmes, 5; in Jack
son, s. in Leon, II; in Nassau, I: in Okla
loosa, s. in Putnam, 6 in ST. Johns, 8; in
St. Lucie, IL; in Santa Rosa, s.; in Suwanee.
II; in Volusia, z; in Madison, 26.
Cats gained in Duval, 4: in Hamilton
3; IN Leon, 3; in ST. Luce, 10; in Dade, 13.
The difference between the original
count and the recount is due almost en-
tirely 70 the second choice vote. Had YOU
examined the tally sheets as I have done,
you would see how easily such errors can
be detected. In some cases, the second
vote was not counted at all; in some cases,
Knott's, Farris', Hudsons and Woods sec
ond choice was Jumped under Cats name
because it was the first on the list. alpha.
betically arranged; in some cases they were
the errors due to natural confusion in using
the complicated form of an involved ac-
counting system.
Even if Cats had been personally will
ing for recount, the different canvassing
boards could not have ordered it. They
are an executive, not a judicial, body. It
was their business to make totals, from the
respective returns made them, and not to
decide whether or not any of the previous
steps had been wrongly taken. They did
their duty and did not have the right to
do it over again-unless ordered by com
petent authority.
This competent authority is the supreme
court, tribunal established to determine
all dlsputes-a body which can reverse the
very laws of the state legislature, if they
are found to be unconstitutional Just as
the supreme court of the United States
can repeal the laws passed by our national
Congress.
The Supreme Court no more made Knott
the nominee than the inspectors made
Cats the nominee. Mr. Knott went be-
tore the Supreme Court and said: have
evidence indicating that certain errors have
been made. This evidence is so-and-so and
such-aild-such. [ pray your honorable
body to examine into its legality.
The court did examine it and after one
of the most exhaustive studies in the his
tory OF the state, decided that the evidence
was sufficient to warrant a~recount in GER
tain precincts, in order that the truth might
| be ascertained.
If the court had said, Yes, your case IS
good; therefore, we will award you the
votes you claim and instruct the secretary
of state to issue certificate of nomination
MIR. Knott might be called court-made
candidate. But what the court said was
Your evidence looks good, but prove your
case
The only way to prove it was to recount
the votes.
| have entered thus fully into the ques-
ton because | believe there are number
like you in West Florida, sincere seekers
after the truth; and ! realize that you
would not have appealed to me but for your
confidence in my disinterested motives in
the first place
If you don't come clean for Mr. Knott
now, surely it is my fault for not present
ing his case adequately and not the fault
of his cause, which is above suspicion
There never was loser who did not
| have an alibi-and the closer the decision:
the louder the cry of foul. Mr.. Cats,
though in many respects remarkable man.
is not as great as the Democratic party.
Nor is any other man in the state. Your
oath and white supremacy require you to
stand by the Democratic party and sup.
port its nominee-W " Knott