The Farmington times. (Farmington, St. Francois County, Mo.) 1905-1926, 1910-02-24
ROACH NAILS GMELICH.
Secretary of State Proves Conclusive.
ly that Returns Printed in the
Blue Book are Correct.

con +. bln"llch, maze nnbllc to-day ,
ANSWERS the lieutenant Governors
criticism that the official figures In
the State Blue Book are not in &C.
cordancc with the election returns
on Lieutenant Governor.
Mr.. Roach shows conclusively
TINT tho State Blue Book figures, to
which Mr.. Gmelish objects, are cor.
rect. 1t is also evident that the
Blue Book statistics cnrroboratc the
compilations made by The Republic
mt the time OF the Lieutenant Gov.
crnorship dispute.
II is interesting 10 recall in this
connection that the percentage Of
fraud discovered during the Lieutcn-
ant Governor recount was only
.OUOf. In other words, only five
fraudulent votes were discovered in
the Liars ballots east in IN" City OF
ST. Louis. There were 1i2 ballots
rejected hy the Recount Committee,
but not because they were frnudu-
Irut. THcy were Declared Illegal be-
cause Improperly attcst"d by the
election judges.
Governor lIadlcy's present cry OF
fraud in tn" senatorial primary falls
Nat when a close analysts is made
OF the Lieutenant Governor recount
in st. Louis, based ON figures which
Secretary Roach says tn" records in
biz oillc" prove to be- correct.
Mr. Roach's reply to Lieutenant
Governor Gmrlich follows:
Jefferson City, Mo-, Feb. Hon
orabl" Jacob f. Gmclirh. Jefferson
city, Mo: Dear Sill Yours of Feb
ruary - assuring me that you had
no dies ire to institute newspaper
controversy has been received. As
! r"ud your letter of February II in
the metropolitan press before the or
igtuai reached me, yuu ar" thought
iul in giving that kind of assurance.
II newspaper uutUricty were not your
object.
Il affords m" pleasure to have YOU
agree with IN" IN the con virtiuu that
the election records on ~" in this OF.
lice should not be changed 90 suit
the wilkins and ambitions of any
candidate. However. you now state:
"AllI ask j. that the vote upon thi.
office Lieutenant Governor he re-
ported ms originally made by the
County Clerks Of the various coun.
ties. ~ Had these figures been used
In the manual the totals would have
shown tn" election of Mr.. Painter
by plurality of 2OI. These election
abstracts are on lille in this Office.
are public and you are cordially in
vited to com" and inspect them for
yourself. Allow re to correct for
you the false impression You must
entertain, since you allcgc that my
predecessors compilation giving YOU
a plurality Of thirty votes was n
compilation which included only or
iginal returns. He made coInpila.
tiun which gave you plurality
Of thirty, but that compilation in
clud"d part original and part amended
returns, such parts of each having
been chosen as were necessary to
max" such claim In your behalf
Boiled down, the records here make
this indisputuble showing; Compil-
ing original returns only MS certified
by County Clerks and Election Com
missiOnerS, your OppOnet, Mr.. Paint
cr, had a plurality of 20i; compiling
all amended returns gives him a
plurality of twcnty-thrcc. That to
which you refer ms the Swanger
compilation which gave you plural
ity OF thirty was a compilation with
some original returns and some
returns, IA mixed com.
one made up purely Of
either all the original or Of all the
returns. To convince YOU
Of the correctness of my statements
| invite your personal inspections of
the figures arranged by counties In
columns side by side SO that you or
anyone else may see at n glance that
the declarations make are based on
the certified records.
In all candor and kindness, my
dear sir, permit me To inform YOU
that YOU are dcluded when you say
that the figures | published In the
blue Book" are obtained "by ac-
cepting amended returns from GER
tain COUNTIES and by not accepting
them from Others In my first
letter to you on this subject said
the figures | used included all the
returns. | rejected none of
them, for | believe they were hon
estly certified, are founded on good
law, and entitled to credence ms the
official figures.
Your suggestion that should
have substituted for precinct and
ward returns in the table of figures
the figures adopted as correct by
the Legislative Recount Committee,
in the wards where a recount was
made, was impracticable and impos-
sible, because there is no official re-
port to my knowledge which gives
such figures. ! invite your inspec-
ton of the report of said committee,
on pages 81, - and 81 of the House
j Journal of the last General Assem-
bly,. That report, so far as know,
Is the only official report on the
subject. You will observe that re-
port does not give your vote in de.
tail by precincts, wards and coun-
ties, but concludes that you had
of III. The footnote in
serted in the manual conveys this
same iDfOrInntipu The finding NJ