Mineral Point weekly tribune. (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1859-1868, 1863-09-16
From she Wisconsin State Journal.
A Baseless Charge of Fraud.v

We think 1t is time that the cry of " fraud"
with regard 20 the nominations Of the Union
Convention, particularly that for Governor.
whether raised by atrabiliar American editors
to point their denunciations of what they
claim TO be the all powerful Madison RE-
gency," or by those Germans who have LET
their feelings of nationality ri: eayay with
their reason, or by Copperhead editors Who
are to be expected to lie and to secure belief
for their lies if they can-should be stopped.
being as it is utterly without foundation, most
unjust to the worthy nominee for Governor,
and a SANDER on the Union Convention.
Mr. LEWIS was nominated for Governor by
twenty-three majority on a ballot which no
one will pretend was unfair, and it would
make no difference if there had been forty
fraudulent ballots previously, as long as the
nomination did not rest on any of them. On
the second ballot, according to the count OF
the Secretaries, there were three or four ex-
ira votes cast. The Secretaries may have
erred in keeping the tally II was maintained
by some that they did. The vote for Cox.
SALoNoN remained the same as it was on the
first ballot but that does not prove ANYTHING
as was claimed by some, inasnuch as II was
known there were changes from lSALoNoN to
LEWIS, as there were probably also in the OPP
posite direction. Two of the extra votes we
heard accounted for the same evening as
having been given in entire innocence-the
one by a SALoMoS man, who was preoccupied
in conversation and voted a second time with
out thinking of it till afterwards-the other
by LEWIS man, who cast the vote of his col
league supposng him absent, though he suisse
quently voted There was no fraud about this on
either side but if tile friends of Mr.. LEWIS had
insisted that he be declared the nominee be
cause he had one majority on this ballot.
there would have been some ground for com
plant Such however, was not the case.
There was no charge of fraud, or suspicion of
fraud expressed, at the time The result of the
second ballot was announced. The secretaries
were not even asked to count the ballots to
ascertain whether or not they corresponded
with their tallies. The charge of fraud was
an after-thought. 1t was raised first by Dem
ocrats. The only circumstance which gave
the slightest color of plausibility to it was the
correspondence of the vote for Governor SAL
ONION, with his vote on the previous ballot
This was purely accidental, since it is certain
that some delegates who voted for SALoNoN
on the first ballot, voted for LEWIS on
the second, and others who had voted foE
LEWIS, changed to SALONoN. Fhe names OF
several who thus changed their votes have
been given TO US. These changes wholly re-
flute all presumption of fraud founded on the
identity of the vote in numbers cast for Gov.
:. on the first ana second ballots. & Ga. s.
The Convention adjourned for supper, q
number of the delegates having voted and
left for their hotels before the result of the
ballot was announced. During the intermis-
sion of the adjournment the friends Of the
two candidates were equal busy The
friends of Judge LEWIS believed that their
candidate would poll a larger vote in the State
than his opponent. That was their argument.
In general as far as we can learn, they spoke
of Gov. SALoMoN with the highest respect
and promptly conceded his efficient and faith
full services as the Executive of the State.
After hearing the arguments of both sides,
it seems that some who had previously voted
for Gov. SALoMoNs nomination, became per
suaded that under all the circumstances Judge
LEWIS was the stronger candidate Of the two,
and equally entitled to their respect and con
fidence. He was accordingly nominated, and,
as fairly nominated as any man that was ever
presented as a candidate by any convention
in the State of Wisconsin.