Historical Newspapers of South Carolina

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

t I TOtlJME t, JfCMBBB 71. NEWBEBBY, SOUTH CAROLINA, FlilDAY, SEPTEMBER 6,1912. ~ ^ TWIC1 A itllK, mjg , ni* M?????J??????_ I No Second Prm For At i SUB-COMMITTEE TO PROBE THE CHARGES STATE COMMITTEE WILL MEET % AT CALL OF CHAIRMAN. BIease*s Attorneys File Answer to Charges of Fraud by Ira B. Joues. The State, ioth. 'J * ? > nntin fThe charges 01 irauu m I -with the recent primary election will I be rigidly probed by a special comI .thittee of seven which was appointed I by the chairman of the State execu' tive committee cf the Democratic parly and which will meet next Wednesday. The resolutions was introduced by Richard I. Manning of Sumter, and f "was generally discussed by the members of the committee. The resolution was adopted late yesterday. The com- j vipid rwo sessions and adjourn-) :viuivbw Aiv- v . ? ed last night to meet again at the call o? the chairman. IB The following is the Manning resoI lution which was adopted by the comHB mittee: B "Whereas notices of protest have H been Sled with this committee chargI ing among other things widespread frauds and irregularities, and "Whereas, under a former resolution ^ passed by this committee certain' inPP veBtigations are being made as to the nf th-p election held August IWUUUVX Vi 27, 1912, and full reports have not yet | been made as to the conduct of the ;-election held August 27, 19i2, and in J some counties the investigations have not been completed: Therefore, be it resolved, That a subcommittee of seven members of this committee be appointed by the chairman to l?ear and pass upOn all countests and all matters of every kind and description properly the subject of action by this committee as a whole, pertaining to or incident to the election held August 27, 1912, with full (power and authority to take testimony and ijiake full investigation of the conduct of said election and report the same together with all testimony and fell records back to this committee for fection at a meeting to be called by the phalrman for that purpose. "That the said subcommittee be and is hereby given power and authority to employ at the expense of this committee such assistance as may be deemed Advisable to further the said investi Ifcation and shall have full power ana [authority to summons, witnesses, require the production of records ai^ |papers and do any and all other acts necessary to the full and complete investigation of the conduct of said election, as has this committee as a whole. I "The actual necessary expenses of the saicU committee shall be borne by the tr^Asurv of this committee." IMembors of Subcommittee. The following are the members of he subcommittee as named by John br.v Evans, the chairman: W. F.^ kvenson, Chesterfield, chairman; T. k Butler, Cherokee; J. B. Park! rreeiiwood; W. B. Wilson, Jr., York; . D. Bivens, Dorchester; J. ~\I. Greer, nion, and R. M. Jefferies, Jasper. The Dassase of the Manning resolu Ition means that'the second primary! for State offices will not be held next [Tuesday. The mater of the second Irimary in the counties will be left pith the county executive committees. |he committee last night addressed a lessage to the county chairmen relues-ti'hg that the second primary be leld next Tuesday in the counties. I Attorneys representing Ira B. Jones | Festerday filed an amended, protest! 'forging lile^l voting and fraud in | I very county in the State. A resolution introduced by E. S. ilease" to provide a committee of five o assist the secretary of the committee in preparing and tabulating the, jetyrns of the primary election was bled ?by a vote of 33 to 7. The com- I lue by a vote of 24 to 16 voted down B resolution of Mr. Bl^as to have B chairman appoint three Elease nary Tuesday torney General supporters and three Jones supporters on the committee u:ider the Manning resolution. Chairman Evans in discussing this resolution said that he presumed that every man on the committee was honest and that he would make the appointments regardless of whether they were Jones or Blease supporters. Thp nrotests of W. J. Talbert and X. B. Dial, candidates for the United States senate, against the election of Senator B. R. Tillman on the grounds that he had not properly filed his expense account were read before the committee by the Leci?.t3iy A decision will be given in the future by the committee. T?i/>V>orrl T \Tannin?r following the JU^/UUiU JL. 0 , ^ c adoption of his resolution, requested that he be not appointed as a member of the committee. The request was granted. Telegram From Senator Tillman. A telegram was received during the day from Senator Tillman, in which he stated that "he had already filed his expense account with the secretary of state 011 two occasions. His expense account amounted to $250, the assessment fee. The committee at the afternoon session named D. Willis of Spartanburg as a presidential elector to take the place of T. J. Moore, who failed to qualify. Dr. J. C. Maoe was named to take the place of D. D. McCotll as an elector from the Sixth congressional district because the latter failed' to qualify. The constitution provides that no man shall be elected who holds an office of trust. Eugene S. Blease, who represented the governor on the committee from Newberry county, did not favor the resplutioir by Mr. Manning. He suggested by a resolution that a committee of five be appointed to assist the secretary in tabulating the returns, with a view to declaring the results. Jjle thought that -all the contests should be considered and passed on by the i committee during the day. His resolution was killed by a vote of 33 to 7. Another Flan. Mr. Blease next introduced a resolution providing for three Jones supporters and three Blease supporters on the committee, the seventh man to be named by the chairman. Mr. Evans said in discussing the resolution that he presumed every man on the committee to be horrest. He requested that a primary be held to show the D1 AQCA oiinrwArtaro a. nrvwmif ouyj/vi vv/i o vii ^vuiuiiticc provided the resolution was adopted, because he said that he did not know them. Several members of the committee expressed the opinion that the rsolution should be voted down, be-4 cause It was too partisan and would destroy the intent of the Manning resolution. Mr. Blease said that the Blease supporters in the State would want to know why Blease men were not appointed on the committee. The amendment was laid upon the table by a vote of 24 to 16. A telegram was received by the committee from F. S. Evans, stating tbat Wyatt Aiken, candidate for Congress bad not filprl Viix? z? ? ??o tA^gucc at' count according to law. a telegram was received from Mr. Aiken stating that he had mailed his expense account to the secretary of si re from Washington August 26 and that he held the registry receipt. The committee after hearing the argument by attorneys reversed the decision of the Dorchester county executive committee and threw out 125 votes at the Summerville box because V* ?v Of n f I r\1 A ^ ?-? a tut* oiaitr LitJivctfc wcic piatcu in ti ic county box and the county tickets in thp State box. The county committee declared J. M. Whetsell to be the nominee for treasurer of Dorchester cpunty. The protest was filed by attorneys. for 0. B. Dukes. The action means that Mr. Dukes will be declared the nominee for treasurer. The vote on the question was 19 to 17. The i committee ruled that all votes for j State offices found in county boxes must be thrown out. The question wr . argued at length before t". co umiitee. \ The committee ordered a second race in Jasper county for county superintendent of education. W. A. Preacher was ruled out by the county executive committee because he failed to file his expense account the day before the primary. It was shown by R. M. Jeffries, who represented all parties in all contests from Jasper county, that Mr. Preacher had made everv effort to file his expense acl - .v.* a. rtf_ count UUl luai LI1C UlCl JV <-n vuiu I, s V?. fice was closed. The committee was called to order at noon in the library at the State house by John Gary Evans, the chairman. The roll was called bv Christie Benet, the secretary. Many of the members who were not present were represented by proxy. Secretary Benet stated that official returns had been received from every Cr?ovfnnhnrPp | V/UH iI'LJ/ CAV/v-pi tjyaA WAI* W W* Q. The protests of X. B. Dial and W. J. Talbert against the election of Senator B. R. Tillman and the protest of Ira Jones were officially called to the attention of the committee by Chairman Evans. He called the attention of the committee to the protests now being made in' several counties of the State. The Jones Protest. The nrotest of Ira B. Jones, candi date for governor, was read before the committee. In an amended protest -the attorneys for Judge Jones protested every county in the State to which objection was made by F. H. Dominick, representing the governor. The amended protest and the protest ar alreadv announced by Judge Jones were read to the committee. The return of the governor was read by the secretary in which he denied that there was any knowledge of fraudulent votes and in which he claimed to have been honestly and fairly elected. For Committee of Seven. At this point in the meeting Richard I. Manning, member of the State executive committee from Sumter county, took the floor and introduced his resolution providing for a committee of seven to make' a thorough probe of the alleged election frauds, and if necessary to postpone the second primary until the matter was finally cleared up. Mr. Manning said that an unusual situation had been brought about and +hat it was the duty of the executive committee to probe every charge and to be prepared to write a clean nomination. said that the State executive committee was responsible for the situation for "the primary elections are conducted under conditions that are unusual to say the least." He thought that the conditions around the primary elections was loose to almost a criminal desree; He said that it was not a question of .Tones or Please, but that of a fair expression ~f the voters of th? State. He thought 't was the dutv of the executive com mittee to see that all cliarsre? of fraud were proved or disproved. H? did not believe that the committee choul^ ismore the charge? of fraud. He told of the protests from the individual Democrats, from the communities, from the counties and even from the "^pdidates. Mr. Manning: said that* Mt^e w?o. go much at stake and that it was not a question of. men, but a ""-Pt^n ^f t^e rule of the white peonie of the State. He thought it a l "ue^.tion of whether thp voters of the State were to continue under the preset primary plan or whether conditions ^"ould demand a radical rhnnee in th^ j <=vstem. He said that the voters of | Stat? exnected a second primary next Tuesday, hut that time would he r^ouirpd to make an investigation of j all of the charges and that if necessary i thp second primary might be put off ! until all charer<?s had been cleared up. >Fr. Klease's Reply. I j Eugene Blease, a brother of the srovernor and the member of the committee from Newberry county, made a reply to Mr. Manning. Mr. Blease opposed the resolution and charged that not one specific instance of fraud had been proved to the committee. Mr. Blease said that his brother did not desire a tainted nomination. Mr. Blease intimated that there might be fraud on the part of the Jones supporters. He said that he had never heard of a proceeding like that of the State Pprnocr'atic executive committee. that committee of fivp be | r^rcihted by the chairman to tabui ?ii? ??n? late the returns from the various counties. He declared that if every official contest was sustained that the governor might have a majority. Mr. ~ v, i ?? J r D lftOCA Vi n lVi&Ilillllg 1JLL1U1 IlltJU iliu Uituoc Lucib thought it inadvisable to go into the . tabulation of the returns until the charges of fraud had been investigated. Mr. Blease 'said that he did not believe that the committee had the power to put off the second primary Hp declared that thp nrotest bv. the attorneys for Judge Jones was not sworn to and that he did not understand the reason for the delay in tabulating the returns and declaring the results. Asks for Evidence. "Where is your evidence? Where is your information? Why the delay?" shouted the speaker. He asked why the chairman of the Anderson courty committee, has left the State during an important situation. He asked the members ol the committee to examine the petitions and see who is dissatisfied with the returns. Mr. Blease said that all of the irregularities charged were unsupported by evidence. He thought that the executive committee owed a duty to the people of South Carolina who voted honestly. He suggested in his fight on the resolution that a committee be appointed to report back during the day on the charges of fraud. He thought that it was entirely possible to do all of the work in one day. In reply Mr. Manning stated that it? was impossible to tabulate-all of the returns when they are not in. He reiterated that his resolution was not introduced from a partisan standpoint. He did not think that the commit+eewas dealing in technicalities, but that +ho cftnatfon should be met* in a bioad minded liberal way and that evory sVovld be used to find out if fraud had been perpetrated in the nrimarv election. "Tf ^nnriitionc an'sp that are unusual we can not be made a slave to the conditions," said Mr. Manning. "We want to know the real honest verdict of the people," he continued. Return Made by Gov. B lease. The following is the return of the governor which was filed yesterday with the committee: "To the State Executive Committee of the Democratic Party of South Carolina: "Cole. L. J?!e.vse, a candidate for the office of governor in *he primary election held on the 27th day of August, 1912, upon whom bas been served a paper purporting to be a notice of contest of Ira B. Jones, a candidate for governor at said primary election, by his attorneys, Messrs. R. W. Shand, Frank G. Tompkins and W, H. Townsend, in reply thereto says: "He admits what is stated in paragraphs one and two of said paper, which in substance is that the said Ira p>. Jones is a resident and qualified voter of the State of South Carolina i n r fVift In Af coir* Qto f n o n/1 fVi a ' 11 ' v ' i ?v ci ^ KJ i. o a i L cc*-c^ ciiiu, tut constitution and rules of the Demort?~tic r artv in said State, and that ! o " a? a candidate for the office of governor at said primary election along with the respondent aud John T. Duncan. "He denies the statements made in the third paragraph of said paper called 'Notice of Contest,' and avers that if any frauds were committed and illegal practices indulged in, they were committed and practiced by the supporters and sympathizers of the said Tones, and resulted in the increase in the vote for him. and in no way affected the vote of the qualified voters in said counties which respondent received, and do not in any way affect the return made by the managers of election and certified to by the executive fftrmnittoo iri coir? rvonriHPc- 3S having been cast for him, which said number of votes so cast and received by this respondent, were all votes of .duly qualified voters und^r the laws of the State and the constitution and rules of the Democratic party of the State, and was the free and fair expression of the will of the majority of the voters in said election in said counties, and represents the expres sion of tne will or me majuruy 01 me Democratic voters, duly qualified and entitled to vote who participated in said election. Rielit of Jurisdiction. "Th-? saii Cole. L. Blease, replying to the said notice, submits that the said Jones is not entitled to call into question or to deny the result of the election in said counties, nor has the State executive committee jurisdiction to hear and determine "any question contained in and submitted to them by said paper or notice of contest, for the reason that it does not appear by any allegation or statement contained therein that there was any notice of contest served upon this respondent before the executive committees of the several counties named in said paper, or grounds of objection or protest, nor does it alppear that said executive committees have first heard and determined the same or that there is any appeal from the determination of saM executive committees to the State executive committee. That in and by the sixth article of the constitution of the Democratic party, adopted May 15, 19i2, it is prescribed that the State executive committee shall meet on the Friday after each primary or such other time as may be designated by the chairman to canvass the vote and declare the result as to all State officers, congressmen, solicitors and United States senators. All contests for all nominations, including county officers, at primary elections shall be heard first by the*county executive committee of the i rm an ilo rl f ? n<3 CUUIll.J' 111 YV 11IV/11 ouv^u 111V,6U1U1U1VU may have occurred, and may he rev viewed by the State executive committee, whose action shall be final. "That in and by section seven, of the rules governing the membership, etc., and the conduct of primary elections in the Democratic party in South Carolina, adopted May 15, i912, it is provided as follows: 'The State executive committee shall hear and decide protests and contests for United States senators, State officers, congressmen an<3 solicitors, and three days shall be allowed for the filing of the same after the decision of countv pvppntive committees.' Rules Complied With. "It is respectfully submitted that It is manifest from these provisions of the constitution and rules of the party that there must be- contests for the nojrination of governor at the primary election made and heard first by the county executive committees of the county in which such irregularities are claimed to have occurred pnd that thereafter within three days of the decision of the said county executive committees, protest against their decision must be made to- the State executive committee, who shall review and determine the same, and. whose action thereon shall be final. "The said notice of contest and allegations and grounds therein contained, failing to show that the constitution of the party has been com plied ,witb, it is respectfully submitted that this executive committee has no jurisdiction, to interfere with the result of the election as declared by the county executive committees, in the counties named in said notice of contest. "This respondent further replying to the said notice, submits that the grounds therein stated are defective, insufficient and do not warrant any interference by the committee with the result of the election held in said counties; that the said grounds are too general and indefinite, and do not comply with the requirements of reasonable and proper notice, required in filing contests against any election held under the primary election laws of the State and this respondent demands and requires if he is to answer rho that thpv m?v hp made more definite and particular, and comply with the reasonable requirements under the law to put this respondent upon notice as to what he is to meet or the issue that he has to join in. "With regard to the grounds stated in said notice, this respondent says: (1) As to (a) this respondent denies the same, but assuming what is therein contained to be true says that this ground does not declare nor set out how many voters were allowed to vote who were not of the age of 2i years and not entitled on account ? thereof to vote at said election, nor at what precincts in said counties the same were allowed to vote. It does not show whether the number so votir>? had voted for this respondent or for said Jones,,and ifa what respect the -1 election was affected thereby, or that such, illegal votes could not be purged from the returns and a proper ascertainment made of the legal votes cast in said counties. Grounds Insufficient "(2) As to (b) this respondent denies the same, but assuming it to be true, he submits that the same is innn/1 10 nAt ennnArtoH Ktr Qnv 0UUIV1&UV) auu JUW wv? MJT . W**J definite allegation as to the number of ballots unlawfully counted and returned in said counties, at what precincts they were cast, or for whom they were cast, or whether it was doubtful as to whom the illegal ballots were counted \for, nor does it aver that the said ballots so counted and returned could have been.taken or purged from the count in said election in said counties, and a true ascertainment of the legal vote made in 6aid election or that the number of said ballots would in any way affect the result of the election in said counties. "(3) As to (c), this respondent submits that th* same is insufficient and does not afford any ground to vitiate the said election. It is not stated how many persons had their names upon more than one club roll and voted at mqre than one Democratic club/ or that the srrae persons -pould not frort * the said c.nb roll's te rscertained '' the managers rf th" ol^ction or tin county executive c^m-n'ttee and the alleged illegal vote purged from the count, nor doe? :t a'1eg?d tha* the said votes were not cast in favor of the . contestants but in favor of this respondent. "(4) As to (d) this respondent submits that the same is indefinite, lacking in any precision of statement which would affect t$e election as declared by the. executive committees of the s^id respective counties, or that it would in any way affect the result of said election, or that the same could not by proper investigation of the executive committees if called in a* orderly way to their attention, be purged and a \ true ascertainment . 'r, made of said election. f- . \ "(5) As to (e), the same is also indefinite and insufficient for the same reasons assigned above. "(6) And so as, to (f), (g) and (h). "(7) As to (j) even if the matters alleged are true, this respondent sub-. mits that the action of the count of executive committees of the several counties -complained of, if the matter was submitted to the>n or was not submitted to them, *was conclusive as to the facts and that the same would show such irregularities as did not affect the merits or good faith of the election held and should not deprive the full qualified voters of the State of their franchise or from having their votes counted for the candidate of their choice; and that the same^ objections are true as to the allegations contained in ground (k). ' "(8) As to (1), the ground stated is indefinite and insufficient It does iiot state at what precincts, or put this respondent on notice with regard thereto, and while respondent denies the statement therein contained, he alleges that even if they were true, it is only an irregularity not affecting the result of the election or the good faith in which it was held, and that the people so voting ought not to be i deDrived of their franchise and of having their votes counted for .the candidate of their choice. It is not alleged that any voter by the premature closing of the polls was deprived of any vote or that any illegal vote was received by the premature opening of the polls. , "(9) As to (in), which alleges that more votes were counted for the office of governor than there were vo? ers participating in said election, is a statement too general and can not raise any iss^ue under any contests without more particularity or specification which this respondent can ad UIXU I U^UJ "(10) As to (n), this is a mere general assertion, or expression of opinion, without any particulars, and can not raise any issue, for there is not statement of fact from which this committee can reach a conclusion that there were any fraudulent and illegal votes cast in the said election, if it is not' alleged that such fraudulent and illegal votes, if any there were, were (CONTINUED ON PAGE 5).