New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1910-12-05
cnyernor of Delaware Points to
Republican Losses.
BIG FALLING OFF IN VOTE
Comparison Of Returns Shows
Party Was Not Guilty of
Corruption.

nover. Del Dec 4-In refutstion Of
D.r,orrsfic assertions that the Republicans
carried Kent and Sussex counties in the
-.oe-+ election by the use OF large amounts
=, money in debauching the electorate.
Governor Fennewill gave interview to-
ssv Il has particular bearing on condi-
SONS II, sussex, the home county of the
C7o-erzo-
-, can best ne shown that the Re
rus,iczas had no part in bribery or vote
,,,,-fr,e II the last campaign by comparing
.Aa vote in the various districts in Sussex
co-,r-v This wear with that Of two years
e-o- said the Governor.
ssrve-,- district in Sussex County except
indian River and Little. Creek showed a
ealing off IN the Republican vote as COM
,arrd -yith two years ago II has been
n-ocl aimed 70 the world time and again
~ the very persons who are back %
>t.se present charges Of bribery by the
re-ublicanz that i there was a place on
earth where the elective franchise could
h Influenced by money Il was Sussex
County.
Accepting such 2 dissraceful assertion
~ the Democrats for the time being for
lie r1ere sake Of argument. II the Repub-
E-ars had used money il would have been
manifest in gains in the Republican vote
e., the several districts. instead Of losses.
As only TWO districts !n ali Of Sussex
COUNTY show Republican gains. II seems
n ne that fact alone series 10 refGte these
Democratic charges, particularly when the
dissipation Of Republican dissension in
those 10 districts explains fully why there
ware gains there The Sussex OF today is
the Sussex il has always been. Therefore,
tie Democrs tic charge OF the past that
the voters in SUSSEX could he influenced
ls-Esly b. money and that that influence
would ne manifest on the election returns
gov arises 10 ccnfound those who used
Il
Y think II may be accepted q political
axiom that Democratic voters arc not made
~ the use Of Republican money. It seems
70 ne II is more incumbent upon the
Democrats TO explain their gains in the
vote for their legislative candidates than
Il IS for the Republicans to explain their
losses I also think that with the Demo
cratic vote increased in all the districts
save THO IN Sussex County. it viii be eX-
oeedin-Iy difficult for the Democrats e
liiAlEEie I'll ilfIetttSeitE pt43Ht mat SUN
result vas brought about by the use Of
Republican money
Let Us consider for = moment the vote
o. the county ticket in Sussex County thi:
year and two years ago. Two years age
The Republican candidate for County Treas
u-e- was elected by $40 majority; the Re
publican candidate for ProthoDotary hat
$40 ma jority: the Republican candidate fo'
Sheriff had eea majority, and the Repub
Hcan candidates for Register in Chsncery
and Recorder had 5s2 and 5a5 majority, re
spectivelI
This year the Republican candidate fol-
County Treasurer carried the county bS
only -: the Republican candidate for Cor
oner by 544. and the highest majority re
ceizaed BY any Republican on the county
ticket raS yo9 by Lingo, the candidate fol
F-e-fs-e- Of wF1IIE IN other words, on the
ca1r1ty- ticket the Republican HaJorities
zAov-ed = falling off Of more than 30 pei
cent That is another fact which, 1 think
= vir he difficult for the Democrats Il
expIs.r IN connection with their CRY OF Re
---Jtf;can bribery and corruption