The Topeka state journal., 1900-10-15
AGAINST NICHOLS
Detailed Statement From Citi-
zens' Committee.
Why So Many Republicans Are
Opposing Him.
AGAINST HIM ALONE.
Committee Fighting Nominee
For County Attorney Only
&C Whom We Know and Have
Proved Received
&c So Called Nomination by Gross
HIM ALONE.
'S So Called Nomination by Gross
and GIaring Fraud"

The citizens committee in charge of
the organization opposing the election
of Galen Nichols as the 'so-called nom
inee" of the Republican party for coun-
ty attorney has issued an address ITO
the Republican voters of Shawnee coun-
ty. 1t sets forth the history of the
movement and gives specific seasons for
the opposition. The committee is em-
phatic in it's statement that its organi-
zation is opposing only the nominee for
county attorney and is making no fight
on any other candidate on the Repubii-
can ticket. The address is given below;
Topeka, Kan, Oct. 10, 1890.
To the Republican Voters Of Shawnee
we. members of the Republican party
acting as a committee, having IN chaIge
the conduct of the canvass OF the -Clt-
izens'" candidate for county attorney,
submit for your careful consideration
the facts presented in the following ad-
dress:
HISTORY OF THE "CITIZENS' "
MOVEM ENT.
Immediately following the primaries
called by the Republican party last spring
a mass meeting of Republicans was
called to protest against the illegal and
corrupt practices resorted to at those
primaries by which Mr.. Galen Nichols
appeared to have a plurality OF l5z votes
for county attorney. This mass meetlfiS
appointed committee of 200 to wait
unOn the Republican county central
committee and ask for a recount OF the
ballots and an investigation Of the fraud
and corruption which We're specincaliy
charged to have been committed IN De-
half of Mr.. Galen Nichols. This COM
mittee appeared before and stated ITS
charges to the central committee. Ihat
body without either recounting the bal
lots or investigating the charges, declar-
ed Mr.. Nichols the nominee on the race
of the returns. The committee reported
to the mass meeting what mad peen
done, and thereupOn, a subcommittee or
IA was appointed with full power to can
vass the ability, popularity, and charac-
ter of the attorneys at the Shawnee
county bar and from the number to
choose one and take the necessary steps
to nominate the one chosen by petition
as the Citizens candidate. The COM
naittee after a full and careful investlga-
ton selected George w. Clark, ex-1udge
of the court of appeals, lawyer or un-
questioned ability and unimpeachable
honor, who has declared that If elected
he will enforce all the laws Of TINS com
mOnWealth in Shawnee courtyard NOM
mated him in accordance with their in
structions by a large petition contain
ing over 400 names, more than three
fourths of whom are staunch and tried
Republicans 1t is that committee that
now addresses you and asks for your
suffrage in behalf of Mr. Clark.
STATEMENT OF THE FACTS.
This election was not held in accord
ance with the instructions issued by the
county central committee The judges
of election in the city were directed to
take the name and the residence of each
voter when accepting his ballot. In GER
tain precincts this direction was not FOL
lowed and in those precincts the vote
was of such magnitude and character
as to excite suspicion and lead to an in
vestigation- Two Of these precincts were
the west precincts in the First and Sec
ond wards. The returns of these pre-
cincts were tested by two methods: One
by comparison with votes at former
elections; the other by an investigation
of the names which appeared as voters
upon the tally sheets.
FIRST. BY COMPARISON.
On July %. 1885, a sharply fought Re
publican primary was held over the
question of senator and county attorney
7. J. Anderson, and T. A McNeal, were
the candidates for senator, and A. p.
Jetmore and H. G. Larimer, were the
candidates for county attorney. The
contest was spirited and more than the
ordinary primary vote was brought out.
A comparison of the vote on that occa-
sion with the vote now under consider
alton, is startling:
First ward. first precinct 1S1 1926
First ward, second precinct. 290 5ll
First ward total.....-. AL Sa6
Second ward, first precinct. SAT 6%7
Second ward, second precinct 81 4i9
Second ward, third precinct IA
Second ward totaI...... 558 1.07O
In other words, in the first precinct Of
the Second ward, the vote at the primar-
les in 1900 was 29O greater than at the
primaries in 1898; and in the two wards,
the primary vote of 1900 is about double
the primary vote of 1890. This showing
is very significant. but there IS another
comparison which is even more striking
The general election of 1898 was for
state officers Every vote counted, and
the most vigorous efforts were made to
poll a full Republican vote, resulting-in
the election Of Stanley for governor. I'm
fortunately comparison can not be made
precinct by precinct, because the cleo
ton precincts were not the same as the
primary precincts, but the comparison
can be made by wards:
first ward, vote for Stanley. 625
First ward, vote in 1900 primary. S35
Excess Of the primary vote of 1900
over the general election vote of
1893 ...-...---..---.-..-. 18f
Second ward, vote for Stanley S0S
Second ward, vote for primary Of
1900 ...-.-...... .......-....,....1. .1.O7O
Excess of the primary vote of 1900
over the general election vote of
1879 - -------- - .--- 20
In the two wards therefore, the ordi-
nary Republican vote at a state election
is 1.z55.
The vote at the primary Of 1900 was.
however. 1895, an excess over the Re
publican vote at the general election of
1888 of 451 votes.
What does this excess over the pri-
mary election and the general election
cf 1898 znean2 Let every Intelligent voter
supply the answer. These 451 votes were