The pioneer express. [volume] (Pembina, Dakota [N.D.]) 1883-1928, 1894-05-04


WARDWELL 4 THOMPSON.
FRIDAY, MAY 4, 1894.
TERMS, $500 PER ANNUM
"oDlous COMPARISONS"
Under this heading the Times do IS
a lot of figuring last week. 1t figures
out in detail, what We stated last
week, that the first district increased
Its vote for burke 10 per cent, and
changed a minority of Il3 to a major.
ty of 81. Mr.. Hagcr makes the arcu.
mcnt that us this increase came from
other places than Pcnbina, Ncche
and st. Joseph "whicl, MIR. LaMourt
claims to own" that Mr.. LaMourt
isn't a republican, at least in the alb
scncc OF any expressed conclusion ",
suppose that is what the Times want
inferred. The reason we gave tn,
figures was to prove That the rcpubli
cans of the first district under th,
leadership of Mr.. LaMourc had dom
what the second district failed to ii
under the leadership of Mr.. Hagcr
and what almost every other lcgisla
tive district in the state failed to do
namely, increased its republican vot,
for Burke. That the gains i'm thi
district came from democratic towns
not from republican towns is not re
markable.
Mr.. lIager says the first distric
had "a nominal republican majorit
:sOO' because Mr.. LaAlourc who raj
on Il fusion ticket in 1850 had tina
majority. But Mr. lIorgan. the demo
cratic candidate on the same tickle,
had l3l majority, what kind of {;
"nonlinal' majority WAS that Re,
publican or democratic. The vote
for state officers in 1880, shows an
average democratic and populist ma.
jortty Of over 100. The Times says
that it is a "nominal majority" of 300
for the republicans and that the rcpub.
licans gave the democrats two lcgis-
lators when they had this "no-
minal majority of 3GO." II the re.
pubiicans conceded the democrats
two Legislators when they were sure
Of 200 republican majority for candi-
dates Of their own political faith,
they were certainly fools. But, fac
Ing the flood-tldc Of democratic and
p"pulistic fusion OF 1892 and the fact
that the returns If 1880 showed them
to bc In IL minority, they couldn't
figure out that 1900 nominal MAORI
ty" us does the Times. Perhaps IL
was because they were fools, and per
haps it is somebody else is figuring
foOlishly.
The Times in Its figuring, notwith.
standing the 800 nominal majority
conclusivcly proves that the rcpubli.
cans have been losing ground in this
county since 1850. when VIC had six
republican representatives in the
legislature, but now we only have one
republican and five democrats. But
its hardest kick seems to DC that the
first district has saved the zone re.
publican" from the wreck. Oul
point was, that the first district In
1882 under the leadership of Mr.. La
Moure increased its republican vote
while the second district under the
leadership Of Mr.. Ilager and almost
every other legislative district in the
state lost ground, and that Icing ;
fact, it is a direct insult to the re
pnblicans of this district to assume
that they could not be trusted to sc
lcct Il successor to Mr.. LaMoure. Mr.
Hager's figures don't answer that
The Times in its diggings finds some
cold comfort in the decreased vote of
NJ. N. johnson. If the Times will gt
through the returns of 1892 it viii
find figures not only in the first dis
trict, but in st. Thomas city itself
that in view of that gentleman
honorable and able record since, ",
may all now be we'll ashamed of.
But figures, in a contest similar t.
that Of the last election, are dr.,
reading. But if Mr.. Hager wants t,
go into the crooked paths Of politica
figuring. will he explain some thing
to us? The vote on the state officers
in st. Thomas was approximat cly likt
that of the vote on governor, to-wit
Burke al, Shortridgc 1855. Will
that fact in view, will the Times OK
plain why Mr.. Booker only received
81 votes while Nomland got 2O4
Why Mr.. Kabcrnaglc ran 30 or 4,
votes behind the ticket? Why Mr.
Holmes only had 43 republican vote
out Of 40?
Will the Times explain how I'll,
county conventions, never nominal
cd st Thomas candidates agains
each other: Why if the democrat
run a st. Thomas man for rcgistc
did the republicans nominate a st
Thomas man for treasurer and VIII
are both elected, as has happcne,
every time since 1887 until the las
election? Will the Times explain
how it is, that without reference t
political affiliations, the solid vote o
st. Thomas invariably goes to the st
Thomas candidate, with the result
that Of the four best county offices il
the gift of the people, register, treas
urcr, sheriff and clerk Of court, a
least three Of them have been OF
cupied by St. Thomas candidates am
their St. Thomas deputies each yea
since 1887 until the present year whc
they only hold two?
The fact is notorious, that no re
publican Or democratic candidat
ever could depend on a full part
vote, or anything like it, from st
Thomas when opposed by a st. Thorn
as man!
The fact is notorious that ii. L
Holmes was deliberately sold out 70
what has resulted in "dcad sea an
PIES"