The Lexington intelligencer. [volume] (Lexington, Mo.) 1901-1949, 1904-11-19
WHAT DID np

most Of them inconsistent with we'll
known or easily accessible facts.
There is nothing more obvious from
an inspection OF the returns from the
various counties than that there was
a falling off 10 the total vote cast,
though every body knows that the
population Of Missouri has increased
materially 10 the past four years.
Why was this falling of? Was 1t the
wonderful popularity Of Roosevelt, as
the Kansas City Star says; or d~issatis-
faction with the subordinate nominees
on the state ticket, as the POst-Dis
patch says; or dissatisfaction with
Folk, as some individuals say; or dis.
satisfaction with Parker, as other
individuals say? II any n Of these
theories is accepted to account for
the results, serious trouble will be-
experienced in re~conciling it with the
election statistics Of the various
counties. 1t may be admitted that
Roosevelt was more acceptable to the
republicans than Parker was to the
democrats, for, while there was a
falling of of the republican vote In
many counties as compared with the
year 1900, the falling of Of the demo-
cratic vote was greater and more gen.
eral. From whatever cause, too, the
falling off in the overwhelmingly
democratic counties was greater than
ln the close counties. But further
than this no uniform law seems to
obtain.
For instance, the Folk and anti
Folk fight was about as fierce in Laf-
ayette and Saline counties as any
where in the state. But the falling OF
in the total vote Of Lafayette county
was only 6 per cent, while in Saline
county 1t was 20 per cent. Randolph
and Ray counties both went against
Folk in the primaries, but the falling
of In vote was in the former 8
per cent and in the latter 20 per cent.
Clay and Henry were both strong
Folk counties, where In the former
he won oYer his opponent, CAN'T, by
about three to one, and in the latter
he had no opponent in the primaries
at all. The falling of In Clay was
II per cent and IN Henry s per cent,
Everybody in Shelby county was for
Folk from the start, but there the
falling off was IL per cent while in
Grundy it was 8 per cent,
The fault to be found with most OF
the current election opinions is that
they are recklessly uttered with view
Of throwing the blame on the other
fellow. Il is far nearer the truth to
say that the rural democracy was set
at loggerheads by a course Of persis.
tent, inslstent, and n%ever-ending
lying on the part Of the, metropolitan
press which held out tOthe last day
that the state would go democratic
by 1905 majority. The state com
mittee even lent itself to this foolish
optimism or malicious deception; and
the people were lulled into a sense oil
security which resulted In the loss Of
seven or eight congressman, a senator,
all the subordinate officers on the
state ticket, and parts or all Of many
county tickets. The democrats might
have carried Missouri by the usua.
majority II they had realized the
danger. But they did not, Since
rural mail delivery has been estab.
lished country people in particular
have come to rely upon the daily paper
A study Of the vote will show that thu
towns were very much more awake
tn the situation than we're the people
of tie country. The towns. as a rule
polled a normal vote,
The lesson Of this election however
does not relate to the past but to TIL
future. 1t is by nc means as profit
able to consider the causes tina
brought about this result as to con
slider means to prevent it ever hap
pening again. No matter what as
~surances the press and COMMITTEE
give, it is the duty Of the people to g
to the polls and vote-vote as If ever,
election we're a close one. The peopl
have lost the services of some Of tn
best men in public life today by
r deceptive sense Of security.
Three days after the election it wa
|, announced In every metropOlita