The West Virginian. [volume] (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1914-1974, 1922-08-09

| Es4&WASEl O1S, -. -, &fA!l5 ~ . 90
Washington I newspaper editors
paid very little attention to the
| West Virginia primary contests
| Only one OF them referred to the
political bouts prior to the decisive
day and then only brieftG He was
| the Washington News editor To
him, as regular News readers we'll
know, the Newberry case is
nightmare or. obsession, and the
! Old Guard a hydria-headed dra-
gon. He declared that he saw Il
+, splitting fire in the Repu ican seE-.
atorial fight. and he called on the
voters to nominate Senator Suth-a
| erland, who voted against seating
! the Michigan senator, if they vaiu-
ed the favorable opinion Of the
public in other states.
Following up the verdict Of the
! primary, the News editor com
mented on the results with an
editorial which he en- titled Next!
| This is it:
..Newberryism lost two ardent
supporters when the Republican
voters Of their respective states oe-
feated Senators New, Indiana and
McCumber, North Dakota, 1or- re
nomination
ne sllISI HoppOlLAAity -
! Newberryites to seek venge anc2 OH
a Republican who defied his party
bosses and voted to unseat the
Michigan senator came with the
primaries in West Virginia Tues
/ day, where Senator Sutherland r
sought renomina ton.
t.The issue was clean cut
Sutherland. who strictly observed
the state corupt practices law, Won
! by several thousand. Z
In a lengthy leader" undertak
! ing to explain THAT the Straws
Show the Washington Post.
makes its only reference to the,
West Virginia battle In west
Virginia. it said, "the Democratic
contest chiefly involved local
questions as did several OF the he-
| publican contests. but the race for
! the Republican senatorial nomlna-
ton was Of wider import The
I Harding administration was IN Is
sue in this race, and the clear-cut
victory won by Senator sutner-
| land, who based his claims to sup
port on the administrativ and
| executive record Of his party, over
oppon ents who criticised that RS
| cord is to be set down as evldenc-
| ing the controlling strength OF
proadministration sentiment in
that state.
In SO far as TIL Is comment makes
out a case for the popularity Of
president Harding with his party
/ in West Virginia, the Washington
i Post editor stands on solid ground !
but in other respects his deduc-
|tions Will cause only amusement
on the part of West Virginians
I who know Just what the correct
] situation was. In the first place,
President Harding or his admins
tration did not figure in any Re
! publican contest in the West Vir-
ginia primary save and except
! that he and it were heartily in
dorsed by all candidates and party
4 other way that he figured in it
| was created by runor circulated
in the state that he opposed the.
| nomination Of Sutherland. It Vac
1 thought by the latter to be serious
siaenough to necessitate his calling
| at the White House to lay the mat
er squareIy before President Hard
ing, and to attnd to that matter,
Senator Sutherland dels1Cj his de-
! parture from Washing ton one day
i SO as to be alberto find out. It
will be recalled that Senator Suth-
erland came from a conference
with the Presid ent and forthwith
| gave out a statement IN which he
said that he was auth orized by the
President to state that he was tn0r
taking a part in party primaries in
West Virginia or any other state.
that he hadn't done SO and didn't
| propose to do so Ia the future.
The rumor was probably based
on. the lack Of sympathy OF some
OF the Presidents reputed political
advisors among his high APRONS
ees with the effects OF Suth erland
to succeed himself in the Senate
This existed un doubtd " and can be