The Farmington times. (Farmington, St. Francois County, Mo.) 1905-1926, 1912-02-29


We Democrat. should Jose mo- sleep
ser vh,.u rur Republican friends shall
..omu4'r. Tor assure Won Soc .rur I'k
Guo,rsgIr ID, r,uh 4, I'd. Ep..,..t
rrrui, saw wr r,u lick TY" &, O.. -.
a. .fr nIr 1T Il com STD arl- IS. .... rg.
,r-ur3 whether d. .n" %. E.... ...l ..
rr.
r
EI''''"h !" D. LOUIS.
Nr. Shannon r,4.I 'ltr tr.u4u.t .
.l- speech To- state matters. .IuH d
.,1m. II, said, "ruurrm- ,ua ,.t
election held m lh!,.ul. Dur Rar.a-
.n4n hl.'hr.u ave- bus, cv},u1.. ,.t
Il Vs.. q '''' ''''','N 'u' ''..'' ..''.' ~"
louis or the county p' 81. lous. rhH
should yiusr any citizen to feel 'h.,
thing, were not ,i,Hi la the rpuG... of
the election. Every person 10 TIM. -;4..
knows lhlt the election ~ pIu wle D.
landslide ~ our favor. rrlyIug from
.pa.t g. .nl-, and from the fer F. Gu &.
he extreme south.
I'm the state II Missouri ,hr drift IN
rnt favor ua- 20 ucat thar So elected
be entire rural representation from
Missouri to compress, rrgiuiug the
alg ,r... winch Ne lost 90 100, We
..rri,I. At The same election. enough
muubt.- of the house aud senate Co
ul,. 90. The general assembly hy thirty
$50 a, i.,ut ballot. r,raIulug the house
u representatives. from the Republicans.
ayh.rh ~, had LOST Ia them m 1905.
I'm the election 81 county officer, in
rguS wc elected iur more Democrats to
-uch Office. than dad the Republicans,
and IN rqio We elected loI more Demo
rails than did the Republicans, not
Ntth.au,rng there were fortv-srvcu les,
tu Dc elected than there were IN rguS.
maxim" net gain of lul.
n. u
,....,..,...... .....r..,.,...-
supreme Judge IA tins state Judge "
" Graves. The Republicans had a..
,hrif candidate Judge Argus Cos. Judge
Graves pullrd ~ that election but p.
ucr cent more OF the vote OF this state |
outside OF city OF 81. I.ouis aud ST. Louis /
county than did Judge Cox. III, pupu. I
ilr plurality in that portion of Missouri !
was 1896. He was elected. The Re. /
publCaus did not have enough votes III
The city Of ST. LOUIS ard st. Louis couu-
,v in that election to overcome the
lead OF Judge Graves
In 1910 James u. Can't was the |
Democratic candidate for supreme |
ulgc. and John {. Brown was the Re.
publican candidate. Judge CAN'T ppllcd
per cent more Of the vote OF Missouri /.
outside OF the city Of ST. Louis and st. .
..ouis county than did his opponent aud
! 80
'otes IN that portion Of the state outside
If st. Louis and st. Louis county by q
gain OF nearly 5000 over the vote of
COS, he still lost the election, due en-
irely TO the vote OF the city OF st. Loui,
md st. Louis county.
-.
Sonipar'Soh VI Eo'oS'
The election in ST. Louis city Was
urclv marvellous one. In 1905 Judge
5raves pollcd Il per cent Of the vote of
hat city IN 1910 Judge Can't pulcd
mt - per cent of the vote of st. Louis,
loss OF per cent. In 1908 Judge Cox
lulled 81 per cent OF the vote of St
.uuis. In 1910 Judge Brown pulicd IS
per cent OF the vote OF the city OF st.
.ouis q Republican gain Of 1 per cent,
Il tx lHg u net Republican gain Of 10
fcr cent. In 1908 Judge Cox, the Re
candidate at that election
arried the city OF ST. Louis by plural
" OF II 900 votes. In 1909, the year
GLOWING the Graves Cox election and
he year previous to the utt-Browu
lection, in the race for mayor of that
lily. Krcissman. the Republican candi-
late for MAYOR, carried the city of ST. 4
.ouis by plurality of 1880, a mere
Inference in Republican pluralitieS OF
90 votes between the state election OF
COS and the city election In 1909. In
go Judge Brown carried the city OF ST.
.ouis over Judge Can't by Il plurality
II excess OF $4,000, an increase in two
ears Of over Il. 900.
Our Republican friends explain
his suspicious increase in the vote OF
he city of st. Louis 10y saying that st.
y0uis is 4 Republican city and that by
isou of the tremendous interest oc-
a,ioned by the submission Of the con
.itutional amendments OF 1910, a great
lany citizens voted who would not
iii2 on amendments proP3''tu' 1T.
60 AZ ,',, nrn, "' :, ur,rnc To-
NJ "a H. i.,,t:,,,, l.. 80 , ,,,,,