Maryland independent. [volume] (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1874-current, 1891-10-30
For Sheriff.
JOHN II. CIAPPELEAR.
For Smr,yor.
SAMUEL II. NEAVE.
StilI sIandering Their Homes.

sum oidHutfine nCIf ilOncs.
The Democrats in their desperation
because of the certain defeat that stares
them 10 the flce, and Which will over
wbelm them on the day Of he election
and which not even a Ray or Poe
can save them, still continue to slapde,
their homes by their fal,e malicious an
incendary talk about negro dcmina
tion"in,this county. And our neighbor
the Times, whose editor in the recen
DemoeratiOCoR Convention 50 bitterly Tough
the nomination of'those whom lie assert
cd were not true Democrats, but insinau
ted we're tainted with the terrible thius
called Republicauism, now throws 10 it
Nat and with the louIest Of them yells
out against the terrible curse Of "hegr"
domination" AMI reIueian'ly. We have
no doubt. ass peuoerass to vote for the
pseudo Democratic nominees. But, our
neighbor goes further. he not ouly comes
To the support Of those he denounced il
the convent on, but. as if wishing % maxi
up for the ndiScrret lan-uaEe used
therein. he uses ittls biz % an i'm
history in recent Issue Of t e T'nrs t'
arouse the waning spirits OF bis disheart
oued friends. who were 81 badly hanl
capped by his speech in convention, and
tells his readers about the petition signed
by Republicans asking thai election su
pervisors be appointed to witness thu
election, held last fall Now our neigh
Dor very naughtlly says. that tho'e VII"
signed that petition ''madc the notoriou,
ly false aud absolutely groundless state
ment that fair election could not be ha
in Charles county" Let Us see how
felse and groundless was this charge, AMI
see further who has done more to dis
grace Charles county and To bring its fair
name into disrepute because of crooked
election methods, the Democrats or Re-
publcans. or whether or not the i67Tub:
licals had not every reason to believe
from the past, and from public declara-
ton of prominent Democrats hat crook
ed methods would b3.attempted az the
election in question. In doing SO it will
be necessary for US 10 follow the example
of our neighbor AMI also qnote "an-
Client history" Previous to 1885. from
1873, the Republicans were in complete
control of the election machinery of
Charles county, and no single individual,
that we have ever heard of, questioned
1the perfect fairness and honesty of the
election officers. Nor at any time was il
Esver asserted tha' bribery or any unfair
neans was used BY Republicans te IN
duce persons to vote the Republican tick
at. But, on the eve of the election Of 1885,
that hungering and thirst after Office
peculiarly characteristic Of Democrats.
took possession of the leaders of that par
ty, and schcL.e Of wholesale bribery
aud corruption was connected and pu,
into effect, and to the lasting disgrac. of
Charles county. aud to the still further
degradation of the Democrats party. the
whole Democratic ticket was elected by
the wholesale bribery OF colofed voters
Again. when the present bastard"
election and registry alton law was up for
discussion two years ago in the State
s. mate, and the defective re,tures, by
which fraud and bribery could be perpe-
trated, were pointed out BY Republicans
who favored honest and affective registrl-
ton and election laws. Mr. Pos. then
Senator, now candidate for Attorney
General Of the State, said in substance
that the Democrats were not caring about
defective features, bu; we're only cxer
cised about rcdeeming Southern Mary
land from, wha, be was led 10 bell, We pre-
vailed in this section by the enemies Of
home. namely negro DO niuation"
Does the 7iaies cot believe that after
the wholesale bribery Of 1885, that Re- /
p.b'ieaus were justified in their belief