Bradford reporter. [volume] (Towanda, Pa.) 1844-1884, 1864-12-29
MIR. WARDS ADDRESS.

orr excuse for this-up to the present
oversight.
The first thought that came to us after
reading this production, was that Of regret
for It's author, extreme regret for one we
have known and respected for so mauy
years and this because it must bring him
modification, and be a positive disadvan-
tage. 1t is indeed surprising that man
Of SO much political experience, so much
intelligence, SO much personal pride and
responsibility, should put his name to such
a document.
Immediately after the election, but be-
fore all the returns were III, Mr.. WARD tele-
graphed to New York that this State had
given democratic majority of 10000.
Afterwards this turned out to be about 40
900 from the mark. Can it be possible that
Mr. WARD now charges fraud upon the Re-
publicans in order to mitigate the effect of
this blundcr? Or is it done to cover up
frauds on the democratic side ? The read
er will discover before we close this article,
that we strongly suspect the latter to be
the controlling motive, though the former
may have had some influence i'll the same
this address is, its false nsinuations 1t
is ever considered unmanly, and uncandid
to make charges against another by inuen-
does, and here we have an abundance Of
them. If Mr. W. expects any political, or
any personal advantage from this deviation
from the path Of fairness, his many years of
human experience have thus far profited
him little But we will refer more partic-
ularly to some Of these tergiversations here
after, and will now only ask the chairman
of State Democratic committee why he did
not say out plainly, that negroes voted
with the Republicans? This would have
had the merit Of being courageous, ,as tits, he
has the credit Of coming the falshood, with
out this redeemimg quality. How strange
political infatuatiOn will blind men to the
truth, and right And how cnragcd an
honorable minded man would be, could he,
with disinterested, and unprejudiced vision,
behold the grovclling attitude to which par
tizan blindness leads But enough of this
Now we assert positively that no negroes
voted III the state, or in the army, and that
no other illegal votes were cast, on thciRe-
publican side and this we will proceed to
demonstrate. In the first place, the Repub-
licans had no need Of such aid to carry the
election. 1t was manifest months before
that Mr. Lincoln would be reelected, and it
was equally certain that this state would go
for him. Candid, intelligent democrats ad-
mitted this. So what need of fictitious bal
lots Mr. Ward is as unfortunate in his
selection of a location upon which to charge
fraud, as he has been in his manner Of max
ing these charges. Of all places, a dis
Greet democrat, would have avoided refer
ring to Philadelphia, where the democratic
party made itself notorious, i'll 1886, by the
boldness, and extent of the frauds it per
pertrated. If the democratic chairman has
forgotten these, the country has not and
TO rake up to remembrance 50 disgracetul a
passage i'll the history Of that party, was
not polite, especially 50, that he seems to
have no evidence of false voting except the
large vote cast in Philadelphia For he
asks, who believes she ever had 99,S00
votcsI' Let us examine this. At the last
census Philadelphia had a population of
565, ,329. Her present vote therefore, is
less than one to every .fre inhabitants
Montgomery, an adjoining, and democrat
habitants. On this she now polls vote of
l4,8l5, making one vote to every touF in
habitants. From this it is plain that Phila-
delphia gave Al ,5S2 less votes than Mont
gomery, i'll proportion to her population
+ Or, in another form, if Philadelphia had
given as many votes i'll proportion to her
population as Montgomery gave at the last
election, she would have given I5I 1872, III
stead of $4,000. If we go to Bucks and
Berks counties, two other democratic cOun-
ties, this same disparity is found in favor
of Philadelphia both casting a vote to
every tou1' inhabitants. And with these
facts staring him in the face, how can Mr..
Ward charge fraud upon Philadelphia But
this is not all In comparing the popula-
tion and votes, of the counties of Chester
and Montgomery, a new phase is given to
this question. From this comparison fraud
looks out very strong on the other side
Chester with population Of 74,578, gave,
at the last election, IA, 433 votes, while
Montgomery, with population of 70,50O,
1888 less than Chester. cast II ,Sl5 votes,
372 more than Chester. The latter should
! have 7S6 more than the former showing a
fraud Of l,l5S votes in Montgomery coun-
/ ty. Lancaster with a population of 49,
/ 3l4, gave y 926 votes, and Bcrks, with a
( population of 93,Sl8, gives 1896 votes.
The former should have 4, 499 more votes
than the latter, and has only $3.50 more,
showing a disparity in favor of democratic
/ Berks of $40 votes Bradford, our own
county, where Mr. Ward resides, and where
/ he well knows, no frauds are committed on
! the rpnuhlican side at any election ,r;,,os