Smyrna times., 1897-03-10
The Discrepancies in the Sussex Vote.

1ne Union Republican candidates. il
was claimed by the party at the time.
carried Sussex County at the election
last fall, but were counted out by a
combination of the Democratic cleo
ton officers and the Higgins voters
assistant To get at the vote the in
vestigatiOn was held at Geogetoyn the
three first days of last week by Con-
gressional authority under the right
vested IN the Willis Handy contest,
the latter latter protesting that the in
vestlgation was not legal because not
done in the specified time. It was CON
Quoted by Jacob Y. Foulk, of Milford.
Notary Public, Chas. L. Moore and
Joseph Cahall representing Mr.. Willis.
assisted by Sheriff johnson and Ex-
Sheriff TruxtOn, Mr.. Handy and his
Attorney, Eddie Cochran, ignoring the
examination.
The Sentinel accepts these revels-
tions at their face value, and sum-
marizes the result as follows:
The recount of the ballots of Sus-
sex county shows a discrepancy aver
aging 30 votes in the returns from ten
voting places, all of which were con-
trolled by the Democrats and Regular
Republicans. In the three Republi-
can hundreds of the county and
where the Uunion Republicans were
IN control, the returns are all
right; no discrepancy between the
votes cast and the votes returned is
found. The total vote cast in the
county was 8,672; the total number Of
ballots found in the boxes was s. 800:
the total number of missing ballots
was 367, more than enough to DESTROY
the Democratic plurality of 2T6 re-
turned by the Democratic election
officers on November 9Th, 1896.
The true result of the election. how
ever, is found by deducting the 367
ballots from the total Democratic vote.
and adding 367 to the Union ReDubIi,
can vote, as follows:
Democratic vote. 4474
Stolen vote. 'g87
True Democratic vote. .41O7
Union Republican vote. .419S
Stolen votes returned. 1867
1866
Democratic vote. e..............@. .41O7
Republican plurality .........!. 45Sr
With these facts in view it must a4so}u
be remembered that the discrepancies
all occur at Democratic polling places.
and it is highly improbable that Demo-
Gratis would have removed and hiddsnal
or destroyed Democratic ballots,
needed to make a Democratic majority
and elect Democrats to office: the All
surdity of that idea makes it untenabIe
That those ballots were removed from
the ballot-boxes as described is proved
by both the tally sheets and the polI
lists; they show that thu ballots were ],
cast and counted; and if counted as
cast there was. no necessity for their
removal; on the other hand. beino |
there, if they were not counted as cast
they would show q majority against |
The return of the tally sheets. and i
against the Democratic party. It fol- |
lows as a logical and necessary con- |
,lusion that these ballots were not |
Democratic ballots.
Says the EUeTy Evening:
Nothing could be easier than this
method of recounting tho returns of an
election after four months have ex-
bred. We wonder that the Addicks
,rgan does not go further and claim
New Castle County by the same man
Ter of calculation. All it need do is to
so much from the Democratic
'ot0 and add it to the Union Republi-
an vote, and the thing is done.
A Wilmington paper in speaking of
he investigation says:
'sFraud upon fraud has been nm
arthed and if some men got their inst
eserts they would be occupying cells
n thes Georgetown Jail. But thew
'on't. 1t is not considered a crime ~
heat for the Democratic party. Rnk
such thing was done by Republi-
ans, they would, every one of them
g arrested and railroaded to iail Rnt ,
len it makes a difference whose or il
ored" s,r
The Democratic and Higgins papers [
snerally belittle the account. "a a
lrce and charge that il was in the /
ands of one party and say the Union
epublican may have taken out the
allcts.