Carolina watchman. [volume] (Salisbury, N.C.) 1871-1937, 1908-11-18
SoAE ROW. POST ELECTION FIGuIES,
Klltchln's Majsrlty64S ,Hackett's 45S, ery.
ans 355. According FiGaI Corrections.

s'ai
II know that election figures
have palled on the public, but il
is just as we'll to keep poIitlca.
history straight, for present jus.
tica and future reference, saio
Hon. Theo. F, Kluttz, Democratic
chairman Of the 9th District, to.
day. "Wi:h no desire to detract
from Mr.. Kitchin, but to do bis
associates on the State ticket,
Congressman Hackett, and the
Democrats of Rowan, justice,
feel it my duty" said Mr.. Kluttz,
"to say that Mr.. Kitchin's true
majority in Rowan is 64S, and not
LIB as officially reported and
published.
Not until after the county
canvassing board had completed
i;s work and gone home, and after
the official returns had been for
warded to Raleigh, was it discov-
cred chat through the erroneous
tabulation of the vote Of four
precincts, the vote instead of be-
ing Kitchin 2,78O and Cox 1862,
should have been Kitchin $3.50
and Cox 1891, making Mr.. Kitch-
ms majority G4S instead OF Lis.
This error seems to have occurred
in this way:; the official returns
for Lands gave Kitchin 107,s.Cox
II; for Morgan, Kitchin 1873, Cox
90; for Gold Hill, Kitchin 81,
Cox %. These figures should have
been exactly thereverse, the Kitch-
in vote was inadvertently PUTIN
the Cox column, and vice versa.
Again, the returns from the West
Ward of Salisbury officially gave
Kitchin 80, Cog II, while the
true figures, as I am informed,
should be, Kitchin 270, OK III.
There was no intention Oh any
body's part. of course, to do any
body injustice but these errors
were doubtless the result of haste
and inadvertence. The error at
Gold Hill was the only one made
by the county ~canvassing board,
the others having been made by
the precinct election officials, as
1 am informed.
"With all the influence at
work against Mr.. Hackett, and
with the Republican fight holly
conferred against him. his vote IN
Rowan was 2,446, only SO less
than Mr. Kitchin's, and SO more
than he received against Mr..
Blackburn two years ago. Mr..
Cowles' vete, however, being 800
more than Blackburn received
two years ago, and 81 more than
Cox received this year, reducing
Hackett's majority to 458. Mr..
Hackett also received more votes
in Iredall, St~A}y, Cabarrus ana
Aahe than he did two years ago,
and was only swamped by the
TIRE mendous and unexpected i'll
crease in the Republican vote.
II have felt," said MI. Kluttz,
shat to say this much was due
to both Mr.. Hackett and myself"
Owing to the above and a mum.
Der of other errors in our tabulat-
ed statement last week, THE
WATcHMAN has made every effort
possible to make the statement
correct in every particular. To this
end we have, with the kind assls-
lance of Capt. John A. Ramsay,
gone over the official report of
every precinct in the county. for
the candidates given. and verified
every figure, and, making such
corrections as appeared just.
This tabulated statement there
fore can be taken to be absolutely
correct, with all other statements
to the contrary nevertheless.
For township tax collector, A.
M. Rice received a majority of
811.
The Democatic majorities IN
the county, for 1906, for the eight
candidates named below, which
are taken as representative of the
vote cast, were as follows:
Hackett for Congress, 1850.
Krider for sheriff, 444.
Miller for register Of deeds,
1852.
N:.Ll,. Gov 4rooorror S72