Middletown transcript., 1896-10-03

Sussex county gave 25 per cent. o
that vote, Kent 10 per cent. and New
Castle So per cent. Kent and Sussex
counties combined gave AZ per cent. o
the vote, yet to the former was givel
the member of Congress and to the lat
ter the Governor. If there is an!
thing in locality, any thing in count.
rotation. any thing in awarding to th'
people who cast the bulk Of the vote |
choice in making nominations should
not New Castle county now have the
Republican nominee for Governor
And we have in Hon. John G. Hig
gins. To say nothing of his higf
character and eminent fitness, is he moi
entitled, other things being equal. tt
the endorsement of the Republicans oi
the State under county rights and the
majority of ballotsP But the Republi.
cans of Kent county, or certain oi
them, deny the rights Of New Castle.
Kent county claims in the Union Re-
publican candidates both the Governor
and the Congressman and with less
than 10 per cent. of the Republican
vote in the State sets herself up to
have just that much or to defeat the
party. No compromise is the war cry
in Kent. Will the Republicans of New
Castle submit and surrender? A de-
sire to win has lead many to debate
that question. Where does such self
ishness leadp A Kent county politician
said this week in Middletown that
Kent county looked to New Castle to
furnish the money, TO pay the taxes.
The situation summed up is this: Kent
county demands to name the candid
ates, leaving to New Castle to supply
the necessary funds and to New Castle
and Sussex to cast over four-fifths of
the votes. Nothing small about that.
Suppose surrender, for the sake of
victory, is made to the selfish demands,
then not only are those candidates ac-
cepted but the conditions and rules un-
der which they were nominated must
be accepted. In the convention nomi-
mating the Kent county candidates
that county had one delegate for every
62 voters, Sussex had one delegate for
every n voters. while New Castle was
permitted to have one delegate for
every 191 voters, each county having
go delegates. Can any Republican de-
fend the fairness or justness of such
nominations? Kent county by a COM
bination with 81 of the delegates from
Sussex county, in all representing less
than third Of the Republican voters
in the State, could always control nom
nations and the policy of the party.
Will the Republicans of New Castle
county acknowledge that it shall take
three of our citizens to make one in
Kentp Shall the dog wag the tail or
the tail the dog? In thinking of
compromise all of these questions
should be considered. The TRANSCRIPT
is for a compromise but it must be
fair and honorable one, aud not one
that means merely one victory.
But the Kent county demand, or the
demand of certain Kent Countians, is
that all candidates except hers shall
withdraw. This Is in the face of the
general belief among Regular Republi-
cans that not less than go per cent. of
the Republican vote of the State will
be cast for their ticket. Nothing but
,he expenditure Of large sum of
money can change this and even that
nay fail to do it. The Union Repub-
lean primaries in this county have
lever shown up large vote, though
he newspaper figures may have indi-
ated as much. The estate Sentinel''
las claimed that Kent and Sussex have
lot over 100 Regulars Let men
Who are seeking for the truth look at
heir vote at the primaries last Satur-
lay in Sussex and know that they guar
ntee from 1900 to 1000 votes on Nov
d for the Regulars. The claim that
be Union Republicans can carry the
tate over all is bluff. A most liberal
stimate of their vote would divide the
republican vote in the State about as
blows:
REGULARS. UNION.
ew Castle. ....... $500 1000