Pomeroy weekly telegraph. [volume] (Pomeroy, Meigs County, Ohio) 1860-1866, 1860-10-19
JOSEPH NJ. RoOI
Tab VOTE OF mEIGs coUNrY,

THE VOTE OF MEIGS COUNTY.
I Wa published, in our last issue, the
official vote of Meigs County, as drawn
off by friend, in haste, and had no
time to examine it before handing it to
the, printer. We see that the vote Of
the g Union" party was wholly omitted.
This was an oversight; aud fer the pur-
pose of enabling every one to take in all
the elements in calculating the result of
the Presidential election, We now supply
the omission. For Attorney General,
E. i. Hutchinson, the Bell candidate,
received 66 votes; and W. L. Dougherty,
for Member of the Board of Public
Works, received the same, &C. The
County ticket twas very nearly the same,
falling few votes below the State ticket.
Sixty-six, then, is the vote given by the
Bell party at the late election in, this
county, The vote, to be sure, is small
one; but if those who gave it honestly
believe, as we suppose they do, that they
are maintaining an important principle,
they ought not to be discouraged. We
have voted in a less minority than that
in Meigs County, and would do so again,
if convinced we were right, and could
get no more to go with us. We think
= our Bell friends all wrong; but that is a
difference of opinion. While they think
they are right, We honor them for stand
ing by their eolors. 1t would give us
great pleasure, however, to know that
they could see as we do in the pending
struggle; and vote for Honest Old
Abe" True, we don't particularly need
their votes, but would like to have them
unite with US in the grand gathering
which will meet soon after the election,
to celebrate the victory.
So far as we know, nearly all of these
voters cast their votes for Mr. Horton
This was compliment to the ability and
! worth Of our candidate, as we'll as an
exhibition of independence in the voters.
For it is not to be denied that the Bell
party, in other sections of the State,
generally voted SO as to tell with most
effect against the Republican Congres-
sional candidates and through whose
votes the Republicans lost, and failed to
elect several members in Districts in
which they had right to expect, and
would have realized different results,
but for the action of the friends of Bell.
We think that in this the party made a
mistake which they will regret hereafter
A fair test of the strength of parties
in this county will be seen in the vote
for Attorney General, which stands
James Murray, Rep, 27s9; D. w. stam-
baugh, Dem, 1903; f. E. Hutchinson,
Union, &c. 1t Will be seen that the Re-
publican majority over the Democratic
party is 1856, and over the Democrats
and Bell men united, 1920. 1t will be
seen, further, that the majority for
Judge Brinkerhoff is only 979. The
Union vote was. concentrated on Smith,
the Democratic candidate, whose name
was on both tickets. Taking the &c
American votes from Smiths vote and
it leaves Brinkerhof s majority 1916
falling A. behind his ticket in the
county. Forty-one persons, therefore,
who voted the Republican ticket,
scratched the name of Brinkerhoff, or
half that number-say 20-voted for
Smith. This, considering the efforts
made to excite prejudice against him,
is not a paying operation. The very
large majority with which Judge Brin-
kerhsf is elected shows that the people
<snnot be induced to sacrifice an able,
upright, honest, judicial officer, by rea-
son. of any amount of misrepresentation.
We acknowledge that the election of
Judge Briakerhef gives US peculiar
pleasure, under the circumstances. All
parties combined against him, and in
every Democratic paper of both factions,
as well as the Bell organs, systematic
attack was made upon hina, as unjust, in
4 our opinion, as it was disoreditable to
>uany engaged in it. The people, how
ever, have indorsed him by the emphatic
majority Of 21 900 over all fusions, cen-
binations and Misrepresentation. And
he aeiH stay in 7orsed!
For Congress, Mr. Horizons majority,
as will be seen, runs up to the unprece-
dentod number of 1908. This is 222
ahead ef the Republican ticket. Taking
from this number the American, or
Union vote, which We believe Mr.: Hor-
ton received, or at least large portion
of it, and it will appear that for at least
156 of this majority Mr.. Horton is in
debted to his Democratic fellow citizens
Mr.. Martins vote falls 70 behind his
ticket. As each Democrat who voted
for the Democratic ticket, with Mr.
Horton for Congress, instead of Martin
counts two by way of change, these 79
Democrats voting for Horton make up
15s of his vote beyond the State ticket