Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1896-12-03
Dover Dolawaroan, Nov. as,n.

Dover Delawarean, Nov 2sth.
In discussing the present complica-
tion OF affairs in Kent county. result
ing from the recent alleged election
and the action of the board of canvass,
we have endeavored to be fair and con-
servative. We have denounced the law
lessness Of the Union Republican party
on the Sd day of November instant
the wholesale bribery, the intimida-
tion, the disregard of law in the
selection of certain officers Of election,
the corrupt conspiracy between some
of such officers and the workers of
their party, the unlawful opening Of
ballot boxes during election, and the
forceful and unlawful obstruction and
prevention of an electon in one of the
election districts in Kent county. But
concerning the action of the board Of
canvass we have hitherto said nothing,
nor have we expressed any opinion as
to the course which would or should
be pursued by the candidates WHOSE
election has been certified by ma.
jority of the members OF said hoard.
Before doing so wo desired to give the
matter careful investigation and ma
ture deiberation.
1t has been our aim to treat ques-
tions with fairness and to give an
honest and fearless expires ssion of our
opinions. We have abiding faith in the
principles Of the Democratic party,
and for that reason the Delawarean is
a Democratic newspaper. But it is not
personal organ. 1t is not run to
promote the interests of one man, or
OF a faction, but it ia run in what we
conceive to be the interest of the
people. We always like to side with
our party, but it has sometimes been
necessary for US TO dissent from the
action OF some of its members and
officials. We have considered it neces-
sary that our expressions should repre-
sent an honest conviction.
The present situation In Kent has
engaged our earnest attention. We
have given to it our very best thought.
We have not felt entirely sure as to
the policy OF the action of the board
of canvass, for we realize that the
throwing out Of returns by board
Of canvass when they are duly certified
to it as prescribed by law is not
authorized by the laws OF this State
and would become dangerous prece.
dent. Nor have we at all times been
fres from doubt as to the proper course
To ny lut bbtuUCTdllC CHT1-
didates in Kent Therefore, we have
given the matter our very best study
and have sought occasions to consult
fair-mipded and intelligent men of all
parties
The Union Republican party managed
to secure plurality on the face of the
returns for its candidates, but by the
means employed it completely vitiated
all moral and legal claims to the cleo
tion. Bribery is no new crime in this
State, but the fact that there had been
violations of the law in this respect in
the past dues not justify the open,
brazan, wholesale debauchery of nearly
one e-fourth of tho voters Of county.
A purchased vote is not legal vote.
Not only are the guilty parties to such
transaction punishable, but bribery
is a legal ground for contesting an
election.
The law of this State is clear in
reference to the selection OF officers of
election. At every polling place in
Kent county whore the Union Repub-
lean party controlled the election
board the law was ignored and vic,
lated in the appointment of the voters
assistants. The law requires that these
assistants shall be chosen from the two
principal political parties as shown by
the last preceding election, In 1854
were the Democratic party and the
Republican parry. Two factions claimed
to be the Republican party. The oil
GERS designated by the law of this State
to decide such disputes decreed that
tho party So designated on the Official
ballot was the Republican party. Te
ii the party name and the party en-
blem were given. The Union Repub-
lcan party bad no right whatever tc
dispute this decision of the constituted
authorities in this state. No man car
he permitted to take the decision ol
such questions into his own hands ano
attempt to run our elections to suit
himself and without regard to law.
Nor had the Union Republican party
the slightest right TO complain at tht
decision Of the State authorities al
that decision was in strict accordanct
and conformity with the decision D
its National Convention, tho supreme
tribunal Of the Republican party of thu
United States. The Union Republican
party cannot plead ignorance in de
fence of its usurpation and larceny o
these offices. The law officer OF thl
State, the attorney general, gave hi
opinion before the election as to which
parties were entitled to these assist
ants He went so far as to say tina
the appointment OF voters assistan
from any other party than the Demo
cratic and Republican parties in an!
election district would furnish suili
cient ground for throwing out the vot
of such district. The Union Republi
can party, therefore. had fair warning
as to the possible consequences OF it
own lawless act in stealing voters
assistants who belonged to anothe
party. 1t did not stop at the theft o
these. offices. The shameful reason 70
its action became all too apparent
Some OF them became tools of cor
ruption inside the voting booths, re
vealing unlawfully to workers outsid
that corrupt contracts with bri6e
voters were being carried out In
Union Republican party, then, ha
conspirators. both outside and insid
the voting places, dehauching tn
electorate, violating the law an
vitiating the election.
Tbs Union Republican party wen
oven further than this. Its agents