The Lake County star. [volume] (Chase, Mich.) 1873-current, 1883-03-29

"DID YOU ever get hold Of n calf by
the narrative AMI have il run it's tongue
,dit and blat. This instance seems to
apply to Bro. Radcliile's case eXactly.'
= Eciipsc.
True! That Is the most frank con-
fcssion we ever heard you make. We
knew we had you i'm corner, and that
you were "battng" most pitifuily; but
in the hardness of our heart, we were
enjoying your antics, and never paused
to consider which part Of you was being
twisted most; you seemed to be in pain
all over. But if you choose to have IL
according To your statement which we
have quoted ut the head of this item
we are willing. You, of course, know
best the location of your own maladies,
or ought to. Now, in regard to your
statement that when the time came for
voting on the question of county seat
removal, "there was fraud and corrup-
tion practiced on every hand right there
in that town." we challenge you to
prove il. The matter of the arrange
mcnt of the ballot box is no proof of
the justness of your position In the
wholesale insinuatiOD against the peo-
pie of Baldwin. The people of Bald
win are OF trial in this controversy!
Not the editor of the STAR, "Board of
Canvassers" (whatever you may mean
by that) nor any one elsei Evidence
against individuals cannot he admitted
IN against the people as whole, as n
number Of them opposed the choosing
of the individuals us officers, and never
were i'm any manner Responsible for the
acts of those officers; nor for their be-
ing in official positions. Stick to your
case-"Baldwin stole the county seat!"
or else Withdraw your indictment, and
place 1t OH individuals, and let them
answer you.
In regard to this sentence; at was
nlso known that there were only about
10 legal voters i'm the town, hut when
it came to counting the votes it was
found that over 200 votes had been cast
and only six Of them voting against it."
The statement that only six voted
against removal is false; as u greater
number was pollcd against removal.
Only six votes were polled In Chnse in
favor of removal. The statement that
there were only 60 legal voters in this
township is also, false. fyour aim Is
to take the increase of vote here that
Spring as basis for argument to prove
fraudulent voting, then your argument
may be applied against Chase just as
much as against Baldwin. AS proof of
this, you may find in the official rec
ords of the county that In the Fall of
1874 Pleasant Plains (Baldwip) pollcd
12S votes: Chase, 03. In the Spring OF
1875, when the people moved the coun-
ty seat to Baldwin, Pleasant Plains
polled 200 votes; Chase, 14I. Now, IL
this increase of 81 votes in Chase was
that of permanent residents (the ap.
parent "lcgap' standard of such philos-
opbers as yourself) where were they In
the FALL of 1876, a year and a bali later,
when Pleasant Plains polled 1863 votes,
Chase, 1876? All the vote for Regents,
&C., In 1877, Pleasant Plains, 20; Chase,
Az Don't you believe that there was
a special temporary increase in the vote
In Chase, in 1882 II, according to your
own reasoning, the increase was COM
posed Of fraudulent voters, wouldn't 1t
be better for you to charge both town.
ships alike, or else shut UP entirely?
Your statement about the bogus MEM
bers of the "Board of Canvassers;n
don't you mean Tariff CommissIon?)
is off the same piece with that of the
"60 legal voters;'' as also, the claim
that your "facts''(?) were furnished by