The Grenada gazette., 1889-01-17

honest connparisGs OF my vote with that Of
Col. Manning in 1852, and not to misead why
did you not take my vote against you In lss4,
which was the first election held after that Of
lSs2?
You and Manning were opposing eandiiates
In lSSe, and you and | were opposing candi-
dates IN 1884! A glance at the figures will
readily show why you had no use'for them
lss" dlssi
Chalmers .....,. a,.29 Chalmers. -. .... 10, ,St3
Cartcr........... E9 Johnson .,...,.. 8O
Scattcrlng......
Total ........ lS6Os Total ......... q, ,0e.5
Here it appears that polied 6l23 voteI more
than Col. Manning out of an tHcrease of Til7.
and that you ebtalned only llni out of that
number Yet it suils your idea of logic to
exhibit the "grOssness of the fraud" by which
! was elected, to rass this by and say tbu,
Manning. about the result of the struggle
with whom you feel so unrcmlttingIy happy,
was more popular than you IS Shown Ivy the
fact that his majority in lSS2 over me VI TIP
pah ard Union, The two Democratic Counties
OF tho District, was lse1. While yours in 1876
was only 572l." (which latter however ls not
correctly
The T1th is, as slown by the detaiis Of the
above votes, which you ar careful TO with.
mold, thHt in lSS, Col Manning only Received
in these two counties ? 10 votes, md In lsSt
received in them :0}:, and that my majority
over Won then was 2V3l,
This ia the running behind Manning that
exhibits 10 your mind the ''grossncss of the
fraud by which have been counted in this
tcrn''
again, in fur her exposition of this great
fraud of 1855, you say; ".And yet while you
ran behind Manning IN these two counties
which have s;i white majority, in he other
seven 20Hn'ics, with cOlorcd majority cf
2t5S Where nv majority over Manning was
s3T, your pretended majority over me is
846a.'
Here, then, we have you, on the
"oLD CAtpErBAGGER PLAN"
rcsOrtins to c3lor, as shown by the census"
to give you a snat in CONGRESS to which you
were never e,ectad
lfcn let us look at this from your own
Census standpoint. and behold the result
Tippth and Union, according to your table of
voting population submitted herewith, have
ilJ6 white voters and 1864 colored Now in my
lsSi race with you poll d % > votes in these
counties, and in your successful race with
Manning you poed only $40. Now while
-'h'hih- III LOG was l. VI ONtI S'u
my majority Owe your vote of 1SS2 In the
canvass of 1854, the next succeeding, wa
2i-4; hut is to say, in round numbers, on
your census" ths Ory, that three. .TOurths of
the whites turned out and voted for m, and
only One-baIf the negroes turned out and
voted for you. And yet as Col. Manning only
received $40 OF the white votes out OF the
l7.HiS allowed him under your census plan
| of pSrnrtniDipp the rpIitipS pf nd
determining fraud in elections, and you re-
Cc!vcd 9,:9 out of the l7,2}4 colorcd voters
allowed yoursef, the result seems to have
been such thing of joy to you that even
to this day You prononnc it "the faircst &C
ton that has been held in that District since
1873 and far in every county except De-
Soto"
Your 1905 colored supporters who did not
get to the polls on that happy day seem not to
have attracted your attention! Hut let us
explore your method further. You say: THE
other seven counties, which have CoiOrcd
majority of :45', where my majority over
Manning was 2j76, your pretended majority
over me is bi69.'
In the first place it will be noticed that &C.
cOrdiEg to your own census table that three
''of the other seven counties which have col.
{,
and that there are in the seven counties E'.s02
white voters! And that while my ''preteadcd
majority over you is 6iGa," yet my entire poll
in these seven coun les fails short of my "ccn-
sus" allowance granted by you, @5l votes.
According to your own census method OF
asccrtaining who your supporters are the
following results are obtained:
IN 1882 your vote was. s.........s........... 9,I,29
Your census" supporters who failed TO
Fote were. -. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS, l,'Ol
In lS4 your vote was. s....................l TO- s:s
Your dclauting census supporters
were ..,.... ........... .................. b,1lu
In 1856 your vote was ........... ......, 4,7yl
Your defaultng census" friends were I,I3
in lSsS yCur vote was 80. ..... ... e.. q. 5,Sl7
Your defau.tny census" friends were l,5lT
In le& the Democratic vote vas. -. $40
Leaving whites al home. ................. 1853
I his was the year of "h essed memory"
In 1854 the emOc attic vote was s.......... 4.s12
Leaving whites n t voting ....,...... 3Oif
In 1885 the Democratic vote was . ... 1858
Leaving whites not voting ........... :. I,0lU
In 1873 the Democratic vote was ....... 1898
Leaving whites not voting .-.... 90. .... 30lO
And these are the figures by which the
"grossncss of the fraud by which u you have
been counted in is clearly seen,
That head must be ''fearf,iiIy and wonder
fully made which, in scanning these figures
can find that in 1882 the election was the
rairest held since 1873 and that it was fair
except In DeSoto," when Tto5 colorrd voters
and JlGa white voters remained away from the
polls OF their own free will and choice, and,
at the same time, can find that in lS4. in isS8,
and in 1855. those same co!orei voters who did
not turn out and vote tor YOU. as shown hy
the figures appcrtaining to your votes in
those years did so, because they were
"lntimidated," or
'SuppreSsed' or
"Iisfranchisea'
by my friends and that in consequence you
were elected to Congress in 1884 and in 1886
and In 1883, as you were in lSs!!
To the mind not
siAPEN'iocs
to tho truth the teaching of the foregoing
tlEureS cannot be mistaken. and will venture