Daily Republican., 1882-08-21
FIFTH EDITION
THE DEMOCRATIC

Delegates 10 she Demo. c.iOn' 10,
TonV3n'ton-A %O'n General Srs'ls S,s s''',
met at their respective nCSt no,1 the ShA
on Saturday Afternoon ~ .ppTSlllng plaCss
ticket that had been naunsS nau ratified 6s
them by the leaders OF itbpOsu tbp a out fa
some Of the wards of this ii. party Ii
tably the Second, Third. FIX, @ most 10,
Ninth and Tenth quite Ne'.n, a ,SeVe,R
tickets, but in the other waSS1p opposition
tie interest was manifestad us y Verylit
been understood beforebSnd y hsviup
to be delegates. The foIIoS, WnO were
delegates elected with tba bTmtn wi! 3 areth
First Ward-DelegateNO Oss SDCs.Nt caat;
Gay GaynSr, "S,NSI without opposition. 5l M ~,
Second Ward-Da,eoo..
Plunkett, SO; Charles BaSISs-patiA
Alternate-Harvey G. Ksmh,uuH %T,uH y
James J. Monaghan, 70 A'lpOS' y
Third Ward-Deleoats- -p..
Ford, 293; Louis Hamersr % ],
nate-Francis M. Jones, 3s2. 2'' Alta.
Monaghan, 80. -''' faRick
Fourth Ward-DeleUato =,
Toner, So; John Otto, o Alt0a AleUaa
William b. Hyland, So. '0rnas-
Fifth Ward-Delegate-u
per, 100; William G. Whitelsy,. ~ ~
Alternate-Charles j. Kyle ISSh ISs Ia
Sixth Ward-DelegGte~
vandegrift, and alternate Thom.s S y
Osle, without opposition, u'% D.
Seventh Ward-Delegate-
"A: Brady, 81; John X. Bradto,5I %.I'sS y
A Alternate-Thomss c Doud, Il. !u GuH y
II. Murphey, SO. U'O'@
Eighth Ward - Delepats- n,,
McCloskey, without opposition, OSSns THS
ternate chosen. "0a
Ninth Ward-Delegate-,To,r n
Sorley, 9S; William Il. pattSr,"D A. T.
Alternate-William r. Todd M oS "a
position. NOVF
Tenth Neutrality-suspicious., T..
strong, 80; Thomas Ford, 6S ti, He
nate-David z. Haines, 14S aug
Eleventh Ward-Robert COttiU,A..
without opposition. No altsrpss \
sen.
In the county outside of Wnmhu.
which elected some 40 deleVsta Sss.
WIS no excitement of any kind tIsN' '
generally understood that wbOTr 1's
elected would respect the cSdN \
Sussex County, There is a mSvsr,S,
In tie county delegates In csSs SOIs,
cannot agree upon a candidatetp to ,nISs
the name of Senator j. WilkimCN,S
upon the Convention for The pouISa
tiop.
In Kent county the Saulsburr vI,,
of the party had things pretty nuS
their own way, and elected delegatMh
the main opposed 10 Stocklsy, SmS
Murderkill and Milford broke Snv
from the solid Salisbury phSlsn1 aDi
elected Stock.sy delegates IINA
Creek elected delegates favorable to
Moore for Governor and Lore for Con,
Rress. DIR. Ridgeley, a delegate from
Dover, Is for Srockley, and 90 10 HrI
rington of Mispillion. II looks MI
stockley had II delegates, MsOrs nd
80 in all events for anybody but StNt
ley.
In Sussex county the election nssA
of designating choice, has raiSoi con-
fusion worse COMPOUNDED, and all that
is known is that Mr.. StoCkley hS come
out of the contest with 10 sure delegates
There were four candidates ID view
when the election was held all have
a number of delegates, but none have
auy thing like 81, the majority Of the
county. In Cedar Creek StOCklsy dele.
gates we're elected, utthe PayDRr men
will contest. Broadkiln 10 reported
to give a solid delegation for Payntsr,
Indian River compliments Psyntg
Frame with her delegates. LeWeS and
RehOboth goes for Stockley; BaldmOn
Hundred for Ebe Tunnel; DagsbOr
divided between Paynter and Stock
ley; Little Greek and Broad Creet
are for Moore; Seaford no choice North
West Fork, any body but StOckleyi
Nanticoke goes StoCkley, Moore ana
Paynter, one each and one undecided
ana Georgetown whtre there was .
spirited contest and negroes voted, gave
Stockley all her delegates, GunboF-
ouRh is said to have gone for Psynter
This mixed up condition of affalrs
makes the result very uncertain WIN
majority of delegates in Sussex opposed
to Mr.. Stockley &sArst choice ous
upon whom they may concentrate asa
second choice.