dissenting:
I join Justice McHugh in dissent. To read the election statutes and to read the record compels a conclusion different from that of the majority. I pray scholars of History, Political Science, and Good Law review the record appended to my dissent in the official reports.1 Can it be found that the law has been faithfully applied or: Is the law in West Virginia as it was when Theodore White wrote?2
[I]f one were to choose those states whose politics ... are the most squalid, corrupt and despicable, then one would add West Virginia to the Jukes family of American politics. West Virginia politics rise from hunger, and they are sordid politics. Politics in West Virginia involves money — hot money, under-the-table money, open money_ The local bosses, ... [and] the statewide candidates, ... make cross-alliances ... and money is spent lavishly — and—legal-M?] • • •3 (emphasis added)
As the majority, “who you know are honourable men,”4 arrogate political might over legal right — we are left with the nagging question: Are they truly “familiars” of “Jack”? 5
[HJonour ... ?
Can honour set ... a leg?
No.
Or an arm?
No.
Or take away the grief of a wound? No.
Honour hath no skill in surgery then? No.
What is honour?
A word.
What is that word, honour?
Air, A trim reckoning!—
Who hath it?
He that died o’Wednesday.
Doth he feel it?
No.
Doth he hear it?
No.
Is it insensible then?
Yea, to the dead.
*107But will it not live with the living?
No.
Why?
Detraction will not suffer it.—
Therefore, I’ll none of it.
Honour is a mere scutcheon,
and so ends my catechism.6
And Mine.