The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1916-05-25
CITY COMMITTEE
EXPLAINS POSITION
sets Out the law and the Facts RE-
lattve TO tho jefferson Ward
situation.
1T MADE NO NOMINATION
Merely Declared Five living Men Who
Had Reviewed Highest Number of
Votes the Candidates OF the
Party.

Explaining their position with refer
ence TO the fight for the city Council
now being waRed in Jefferson Ward
the following paper was last nigh
Committee;
TO THE VOTERS OF JEFFERSON
WARD:
The city Democratic Committee
earnestly requests every voter in JEFF
ferson Ward to carefully read this
paper:
Az there appears to be some mis-
apprehension upon the part of some
Of the voters Of jefferson Ward in re-
gard 10 the action of the City Demo
cratic Committee in declaring Mr.
John r. Grimes one of the five can
ddates nominated in the Democratic
primary held on Tuesday. April 4, II
seems necessary 10 state the facts In
regard thereto. in order that no Demo-
crat may through lack OF knowledge
Of the facts. be led 10 cast his vote
in opposition To the regularly nomi-
mated Democratic candidates
Quotes Primary Law.
The primary election law OF the
state provides that the results OF the
Judges OF election to the board of
election com missioncrs, to whom the
official returns. ballots etc, are de-
livered the day after the election
While the city committee, out OF Its
own treasury and for the satisfaction
OF tho public. arranges to have the
results of the election forwarded TO
them on the night OF the election,
these returns are In no sense Official.
The board Of election commissioners,
after meeting and canVaHsing the re-
turns, .certifies the results to the chair
man Of the city committee This Ger
ttfcate was received by the chairman
on Monday. April 10. and the COM
mittee was Immediately called for a
meeting on Wednesday. April 2 Al
hts meeting certificate of the
board Of election commissioners was
road. and the five candidates then
living were declared the nominees or
the Democratic party for the council
men In Jefferson Ward at the ensuing
general election. Mr.. George II. Lums"
den. one OF the successful candidates,
having died prior to the receipt or the
ofncial returns from the board Of cleo
tion commissioners-na on Satur-
day April &,
Made No Nomination.
The committee made no nomina .
tiuus whatsoever, but declared the i've
men then living. who had received the
highest votes in the primary, the
nominees OF the party. and in dong
TIT confirmed ilR- VIII efthe r1aa tnr=
ity If those voting In the primary. The
committee did not sit in judgment as
10 the qualification or fitness or any
uf the unsuccessful candidates who
ran in the primary and In no sense
titA undertake ta-fnake any -SeleC-
tion from their number. Mr., John X
Grimes had been chosen by the voters
Of Jefferson Ward as the sixth man in
a field Of ten candidates and one of
the successful candidates having died
prior TO the official declaration of the
result of the election, he necessarily
became one oftthe five upon whom the
choice Of the voters of Jefferson Ward
rested This being so, he is AS nuFh
the nominee OF the party IN its primary
election. held for the purpose OF max
ing nominations In order to present a
united front to opposing candidates IN
a general election, as are Messrs, Niiis
Powers sullivan and letter. Iii,
claim upon the loyalty and support
If every voter who participated IT
The primary is just as strong.
Even IL the death Of Mr., George II
Ilmsdep had occurred subsequent &c
his having been declared by the com
mittee as one of the nominees the
committee would have had the un
doubted right, and It would have beer
It's duty. under the election laws oi
the state To have named the cau1i'
date for the vacancy created thereby
The election laws also provide tina
1 in case Of tie vote. the choice OF 8
candidate shall be determined ny lot
t.g.tV1 Il "a
choice as the result Of the ELECTION
/ the selection of the NTH nominee
would he made-not from among thf
/ feld of defeated candidates in the
/ primary. not yet by naming an entire
Nv new man hut as between the two
next successful candidates
Would be An Absurdity.
If the claim is made that, rather
than, select the next successful canal
date She voters he given in another
primary an opportunity to express
their preference, while not probable
II is possible that some such occur
renee AS tie vote or the death ot a
successful candidate might again give
rise to a cry for another election, and
so on ad IN finitum ad absurdum.
In all fairness. even were It posi-
BILE and thought advisabls to hold
another primary II should without
doubt be strictly limited TO those who
filed their names as candidates in the
first primary. No one who was not q
candidate in the first primary should
be allowed the unfair advantage that
would accrue to his candidacy in
subsequent primary. where the num-
her OF candidates would be smaller
and probably weaker.
II might, with Just as much reason
be said that the voters of Jefferson
Ward were not allowed by tho COM
mittee an opportunity to select their
aldermen, because Messrs. Adams and
Nielsen were nominated by the COM
mittee (this being true In their case.
and their names never appearing on
the primary ballol. and hence II is
the privilege Of any one who chooses
to oppose these gentlemen by Offering
himself as the champion OF the people
TO assert their rights and rebuke tbs
committee for it's high-handed pro-
cedute. On this theory the voters
of Jefferson Ward have. II might be
said, better reason to support new
candidate against Messrs, Adams ana
Nielsen. then they have to support en-
! opposition candidate against any OF
the Democratic rominees for the
Council
There must be organization and
unity amongst Democrats TO achieve
party success, and every loyal Demo
crat should see to II that their nomi-
nees are given the united and hearty
IL . TIA