Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1868-06-11
TIN last Chronicle, ON The Wheeling

Trfk last Chronicle, on the Wheeling
township fraud, says; ts
Just please let your informant name
one, we dare him or you to name one
We will give you the price of a years
subscription TO the Gazette for every
man you can get to deny that he signed
his namelto that list, or authorized 1t to
be so signed. ]" NN tFS ~
That is Just what we have been char
ging, neighbor. You have names on
that list placed there without authority,
and now you want us to prove that they
are authorized. Is that what you mean
Ifyou have failed to smoke out those
Republicans in Wheeling township who
voted the Democratic ticket last Spring,
and expect to get the information
through us, You are mistaken. We are
not around to blow on Republicans who
vote the Democratic ticket, and the 10y
I al Leaguers can't get any comfort thro'
U.s. Gazette. lI sfsfI iJesfsal
That is about as brilliant reply as
might have been expected from that
source. We boldly and squarely charged
fraud upon certain Democratic officials
in Wheeling Township, in tampering
with the ballot box. We asserted that
the Union men of Wheeling Township
had polled votes enough TO carry the
election, and that their ballots had been
taken from the box, or, at least, were not
all counted. The Gazette denied the
charge and demanded the evidence. We
then published n card signed by one
hundred and eleven men who declared
that they were willing to swear or quail
lify that they had voted the Union tick
et ut that election. 1t was q fact not dis
puted, that, at the election in question,
but PIG votes had been counted out, and
only 98 of them for the Union ticket. 1t
was further fact not disputed or dis
putable, that If the III men whose names
were published in that list did vote for
the Union ticket, there was enough of
them to carry the election, and that 10
of them had been fraudulently disposed
Of We had right to expect when this
list was published, that the Gazette
would at once condemn what was q
clearly established fraud, and seek to
purge its party of the Infamous perpe-
traitors of 1t; but instead of doing so 1t
rushes to the rescue of the outrage and
defends the perpetrators of It. There
was no defencethat could be made, exs
cept to charge that tho list of names was
a fraud; that it contained the names OF
persons who had not signed 1t. This de-
fence If true, would have been good
one, and would have been very easily
sustained. The Gazette made the charge
and when we demanded the evidence, 1t
made the above pitiful yea, contempt
ible answer. ,ga
We charged fraud, you demand the
evidence. We produced it. In answer,
you do not deny the conclusiveness OF
our testimony, but charge us with .tory-
ing the names of the witnesses. We de-
mand the evidence upon which you base
that charge-and If 1t is true you can
very easily give it-and this you refuse
to do.
You demanded an Investigation. Why
do MT you proceed with it, If you want
one? We have time and again charged
an Infamous fraud upon the election of.
ficers of Wheeling Township. If they
are not Guitty, they have right of ac-
tion against lis for damages, in the trial
of which the truth or falsity of the
charge would be fully established. Why
do MT they proceed? But, Mr.. Gazette,
and Messrs. Trustees of Wheeling Town.
ship, we are nop trying this case at the
bar Of public opinion, q tribunal less
} likely to err, or be influenced by partisan
motives, than would be jury, portion
of whom may have been selected by the
very men who are charged with the
fraud. In this trial the evidence is con
clusively against you, and, unless you
can set that evidence aside, or destroy Its
force In some other way, than by sucl
contemplate demagogueing as is mani.
tested In the above extract the verdict
will be overwhelmingly against you.