Western Kansas world. [volume] (WaKeeney, Kan.) 1885-current, 1898-11-19

pendent, says that ''when the ballots
were turned over to the county clerk
HE NOTICED that there was but one
dim line to separate the different
tickets, and he called the attention OF
several parties to it," The LAW says
''if any mistakes be discovered. they
SHALL BE CORRECTED without delay.
The law requires the county clerk to
deliver the ballots to the judge of
elections twelve hours before the
opening of the polls which, in this
case, was o'clock Tuesday morning,
November s. There was then five
days, nine hours and thirty minutes
in which to correct any mistakes
which either he or l made, if any 1t
is evident that he did not consider
the so-called chair" line mistake.
1t was too much like hair splitting,
besides he had already OKD the
proofsheet which in letter and line
was like his own copy.
The use of one separating line, in
stead of two, between ticket columns
was probably an oversight all around
but if ''there must have been some OBJ
ject in view when the change was
made" then what, l ask, was Mr.. Uf-
ford's object when he drew but one
line in his copy, when he OK'D the
proof and when he failed to have cor
rected the mistake which Mr.. Cox
says she noticed'' almost a week be-
fore election? OF what advantage or
disadvantage was this to him or to
any one else? None whatever.
And yet Mr.. Cox attempts to raise
tempest in teapot by pretending
that the one line is responsible for
the election of Mr.. Harlan, or defeat
of Mr.. Sunley, and possibly two other
candidates. Mr.. Cox says ''every Pop
ulist who went into the both 10 mark
his ballot. and did not examine the
same closely, was just as liable to vote
the Republican ticket as the one he
intended to vote" l will not lend
dignity and character to such a state
ment by calling it point blank lie.
1t is too utterly childish and silly to
be accorded the respect an ordinary
liars work deserves. / do not quite
understand his object in making such
rash and outlandish assertions. If it
is to salve the wounded feelings of
the defeated candidates it is useless.
Mr.. Sunley is too Intelligent a gentle
man to be soft-soaped in that way.
Even Judge Tunnel has mOIe sense
than to believe such rot. If the OBJ
ject be to stir up resentment among
Populist voters then it is an insult to
their intelligence. They notice that
the single hair line did not defeat the
Democratic candidates on the fusion
ticket. Can Populists not read as
well as Democrats? Could they not
see the party name at the head of the
ticket in black face type half-inch
high? Does it take two hair lines to
keep pop in his own stall? If two
hair lines would give Mr.. Sunley a
majority then three, or four at most,
would make it unanimous for him.
Was it the general custom through
out the state to print the ballots with
lone very dim hair line?" Was it the
hair line or crinoline that gave Leedy
the blackeye, or pinkeye, whatever
he has? Was that the ''object in view
when the change was made?"
fOOllSn. vi CouTSe LII Is COA dTSu-
ment run to seed.
Is not line as wide from right to
left as from left to right? Is the sim
gle line responsible for the fact that
some Republicans voted for Mr.. Sun
ley: Some Democrats voted for Mr..
Harlan although his name was not
near their column and although they
had to pass over Sunley's name twice
to get to Harlan's. Mr.. Suniey's
name had the advantage of position
and repetition on the ticket. Is it
not true that good many Populists
voted the Republican ticket and the
! ticket they intended to vote at the
same time? 1t looks very much that
way all over the state 1t Just hap
pened by intention and not by mis-
take and no one is 'sliable" for it.
An exact copy of the ballots fur
nished voters this year was published
in WORLD of the week previous to
the election. L did not ask or receive