The Somerset herald. [volume] (Somerset, Pa.) 1870-1936, 1879-08-13

STRONG PREsuMPrivE EVIDENCE OF
GIGANTIC FRAUDS IN rILDE's
BEHALF.


1t Ia . favorite policy. with Demo-
cratic journals, to declare that Hayes
was frsudulently elected. Few Of
such journals bot AZ ~ e il AZ sn un-
challenged fact. NJ attempt, that
We remember TO hav 70 noticed. has ev-
er been made to prove it. But the
New York Times has been at the
pains to collect data, which covers
more than q page of that journal, to
prove that there IL inherent probable.
ity that the Democrats committed
frauds, in the election of 1876, where
by they changed at least City elector-
oil votes in the Northern. and twelve
10 the Southern States. In Connec-
ticut, New York, New Jersey, Louis
lana, Florida and Mississippi, the IT,
crease in the vote cast was out of all
proportion TO the increase ia popuia-
ton, and Of this increase, the RepuL-
lican party gained only in proportion
to its previous vote, while the Demo-
cratic increase was out of all proper
ton to that Of population. Care has
been taken to secure the figures of
population by following the census
reports from decade to decade. thus
getting the ratio Of increase. The
utmost pains are taken to use every
element that will give accuracy. 1t
is believed that the figures are right;
and yet the result shows that the
Democrats developed an increase of
voting strength out of all proportion
to surrounding facts, and the %conclu-
sion is thus reached that this increase
was fraudulent. The facts given fall
but little short OF demonstration.
One illustration is as follows:
Through q series of years the
maximum vote cast is IS out of every
l00-or, in exciting elections, Is out
of every 100 fail to vote. This is the
rule.
Yet in 1876, in Connecticut, 80 2
per cent. voted; in New York 95.2
per cent. in New Jersey 9S.7 per
cent. in North Carolina $50 per
cent. ; in Louisiana 80 per cent, and
in Florida 1894 per cent.
Now the singular fact is that this
extraordinary increase all went to the
Democratic party-the Republicans
receiving only their normal amount.
Is it possible to misjudge this Has
it any other legitimate conclusion
than that the operative, successful
fraud was in the interest of the Dem
ocratic party? II there is another
side to it, the Democracy should look
it up.
1t is to their interest to do so.
Their chief capital, in 1880, especial
ly if Tilden is their candidate, will
be the fraud cry but if this can be
turned on them by facts and figures
that cannot be misinterpreted, it will
ruin their case. These have been
brought out thus early, that they may
be criticised and maturely considered
If the figures are incorrect, this can
be shown.
If true, as we believe them to be,
they show that a wholesale system Of
fraud was developed to elect Tilden.
That it failed, is more q matter of
lucky chance than else. In the final
battle, in doubtful States, Republic
ans were alert, and did not allow Re-
turning Boards to be bought up or
stolen away. In a struggle involv-
ing SO much no small rascality pre-
vailed.
1t was a gigantic struggle, for a
large prize. That Tilden lost is at
tributable to the faithfulness of men,
some of whom are unrewarded. That
all that was supposed proven by the
ciper dispatches is confirmed by these
figures is beyond doubt. W. will
refer to the figures in detail to-mor-
| row.