Cottonwood report. [volume] (Cottonwood, Idaho) 1893-1901, 1896-12-25

reasonable increase, when we con-
slider that the last Republican t
candidate was Mr.. Harrison and
that bic lives in indiana It was
CLAIMED in 1892 that Harrison
bought out remarkably full vote
Thereforathare was little stay at
hQme voW to swell this tremen- |
dous increased vote. The increased |
vote wouHindicate.that the pop |
ulation efthatstate had increased |
a halt million since the last cleo
ton, and this is unreasonable.
ANOTHER thing that proves that
this Increased vote is not straight
is that nearly the whole OF it is
counted for Mckinley. Ju&t think
of it, Bryan this year got 10000
more votes in Indiana than Har-
rison got in 1899. Now a man
who could gain $4,000 Of votes
that were cast for Harrison in
1892, would certainly get at least
half of the increasd vote if it was
not bogus. It is clear that the
gold ring bought up election Of
ficers and stuffed the ballot boxes
or made this increase in some UNI
lawful way and countedit all for
Mckinley.
Now let us look at Ohio, That
state this year gave 475,000 votes
for Bryan. This is 10000 more
than it gave Cleveland four years
ago, when the vote was so close
that one of the Cleveland electors
was elected, and is the largest
vote ever hitherto given by that
state to any candidate, Demo
cratic or Republican. It is l7O,-
900 more than Campbell received
last year, and $4,000 more than
Bushne ell, the present governor
of the state received. The biggest
vote eyer received by any Re
| publican candidate up to 1896
was Bushne.ps vote in 1895, and
that was $4,000. This year
BRYAN beat Rushnell's vote by
$4,000, and yet he is reported as
defeated by, say 10000 majority.
How was it done? The returns
show that the total vote of that
state this year is 259,704 votes
more than was cast last year
| (1995.) The contest in that state
last year for governor was very
exciting one, and the vote was
100000 larger than ever cost be-
fore in the state, The Republicans
tried to explain the great increase
then by saying that every vote
in the state was cast then for the
first time. On the other hand the
Democrats charged that votes
were imported and that ballo
boxes were stuffed. They showed
that the population OF the stat
was 1926, 900, and that counting
one vote for every five OF popu
lation that the total vote ooulC
not be over 76E 900 while the re
turns sa 640,506 votes. Now her
: comes Presidential election
: only one year later and the tota
vote is $50, 444 larger than it wa
; last year.
There is something very rottel
there. No man can claim lha
the population of Ohio has in
: creased over a million in on
i year, and it would take such a
g increase of population to explai
this increase of vote even if tt
election was honest in 1895. |
!. short comparing the populatio
and the total vote in Ohio tn
) year, it would show that nearl
one person out of every 3 pop'
lation counting women, childre
, convicts and insane) voted. TIL
" is absurd. 1t is impossible.
'e Yes there is something rottf
y in Ohio, and lift can be invest
y gated and the truth arrived 6
q it would show that Bryan carrie
- the state.
~ ain 1892 Kentncky's total vo
- was 34O,84S. Cleveland reciv'
fe 175, 461 and Harrison 1876, A
N In 1895 Kentucky's total VIC
10 was 367 ,057. In 1896 Kentuck,
% total vote was 100000. Of the
TO- Bryan received about 202,9S
81 Mckinley about 1884
nd Kentucky Bryan received at lei
TO $4,000 more votes than Cle'
od land received in 1895. But Ike
~ tucky's vote increased about 5
be 900 in one year. Where did tn
~ all come from?
no Next let us look at Iowa.
1892 the combined Cleyela
ote and Weaver vote in Iowa v
ng 1000; Harrison's vote was .
hit 900: total vote. 5000. The to
ID vote this year was $4,000,
ota which Bryan received 223,(
is and Mckinley 10000.
nut This was a gain of 100 votes
each of the 100 counties of
are state. Counting five .inhabita
zen to each vote, we have an incre
r---1 L.. - {