The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1883-05-16
BALDWIN INTERVIEWED.
He Stops Over Badly and "AttemPts
Misleau,"

He Stops Over Badly and "AttemPts to
Misleau,"
We always knew George f. Baldwin
Esq, WAS jealous attorney, working
hard for a client whO1 pays well. But,
in his zeal for Mckinley he slOps over
in the interview business.
The Buckeye State article had to be
met after fashion, and Judge Amber,
Day & Baldwin were called upon to
meet here with Mckinley, and fix up
something. IL was all arranged and
put in shape and sent to the Cleveland
Leader, appearing in the issue of May
10th. The Repository also published It,.
The trumpery of the whole thing will
be seen by a careful reading of BAId-
wins talk" which we give below. He
was disinclined to talk on the subject,
"but on seeing the article in the Buckeye
State" the learned man Opened his
mouth and taught them, saying"
81 consider it wrong to mislead the
"publicr Very wrong" ,"tMr. Baldwin.
Then he says. "Rankin's testimony
"Only cOrrObOrated the existence of the
corruption fund and its wrongful use"
The wrongful use" was to keep the
lOeked-Out pOtters and their families
from starvingl And Mr.. Rankin's test
imony" developed the $50D furnished
BOnsaIl, and $50 given by McGregor for
a special purpose. Divide $500 among
700 lOcked-Out pOtters, and it would be
II cents apiecel A terrible "cOrrup-
tion fund.-" Mr.. Baldwin! This shows
how Baldwin stopped over.
But read this pretended interview
Geo. f. Baldwin Esq, of this city,
counsel for Mckinley, was also ap-
preached on the subject. MIR. Baldwin
was diainclined to talk on the subject,
| from professional considerations. But
! upon being shown the article in the
Buckeye State relative to the result, he
said:
81 consider it wrong for any paper,
Republican or otherwise, to attempt to
mislead the public on matter so i'm
pOrtant, and in which it is so clearly in
the wrong. / am satisfied from a care
full examination of the testimony in the
case that, giving Wallace the benefit of
all the doubtful votes about which test
imOny has been taken, McKinley's ma
mOny by any fair consideration in any
any case before jury, would establish
his election by from forty to fifty ma
jOrity. am satisfied that. with this tes-
timOny considered by even Democratic
House of Representatives, McKinley's
claim to his seat will be established
without question. l do not believe
any Democratic House will, in the face
of the evidence brought out, peFpetrate
what would certainly be an outrage, ,un-
seat Mckinley. Wallace's counsel will
be compelled to admit that the contest
has signally failed to show that the Re-
pubIicans resOrted to any fraud in any
manner in McKinley's behalf. But on
the contrary the testimony has estab-
lished the fact that Mckinley Is the able
upright and honorable representative
his friends have always claimed him to
be. Instead of rebutting the testimony
of the Wallace frauds at East Liverpool,
Rankin's testimony only cOrrobOrated
the existence of the corruption fund and
its wrongful use. Rankin's statements
were 80 conflicting that he not only fail
ed in suppTessing, but showed the un
doubted existence of the frauds, as
shown to have been perpetrated by him
in the testimony taken at East Liver
pool. The testimony at East Liverpool
further showed, in addition to 21 fraud
ulent votes proved to have been cast for
Wallace, over 20 votes were cast by per-
sons who did not then, nor had ever,
lived in the township. These pretended
votes were cast by Democrats, and Wal
lace's counsel failed to show anything
in rebuttal of these frauds. In my judg-
ment, Democratic House of Represen-
tatiVes can never approve or cOunte-
nance these frauds, as they would have
to give Wallace the seat"
1t will now be in order to consider Mr..
Baldwin's delicate professional con-
sideratiOns"
This whole piece of business is an ex-
piring effort of three learned attorneys
to bolster up a lost cause" "PrOfes-
sional considerations" brought them to-
gether. Professional considerations"
got up and furnished all this interview
tWaddle.
According to Mr.. Baldwin, McKinley's
majority is anywhere from % to sol He
does not cOndescend to make a tabular
statement to show what he claims for
Mckinley and allows Wallace. He just
Jumps the thing and claims for MeKin-
ley as if he determined to count him in
any way. In this case tits undoubtedly
the best, and indeed, the only way.
As "tO 81 fraudulent votes cast at
East Liverpool for Wallace, 1t would
look better If Mr.. Baldwin would give us
little proof in this connection. His
slipshOd statements and opinions will
not bear scrutiny nor analysis, as we
have shown; but his most ridiculous
claim is that "over 20 votes were cast by
persons who did not then, nor ever
'had lived in the township"
Now, how many "Over 20'' Mr.. Bald
win sayeth not; and this again shows
his slippery, loose way. The judges Of
election were Republican. Challengers
were around the polls in numbers to
prevent voting against their side. But
from what Mr.. Baldwin says, it would
seem, his claim is that, the 20 votes,
were names of men that no one now