The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1912-05-13
HIGH COST OF VOTING.

That there is certain cash basis for the
WONDERFULLY yrilc popularity of eS-presideut
Roosevelt has just been graphically dis
closed by the sworn statements OF the primary
expenses filed at Albany by his campaign man
AYERS IN New York county. Although the
Ftoc~evcft- Committee est.i-t the Roosevelt
League spent over $4,000. they secured
scarcely more than 1900 votes. Whilst the
presumably mucv more corrupt "otd Tine
managers worried along with patry $4,000.
with the result that it cost the regulars only
about twenty-ops cents per vote polled. agains,
q Roosevelt expenditure Of 81 90 per voter
From the extremely csrefnl New York EYcning
rost, take the following excerpts:
Never has money been handed out more law
ishIr to small band Of workers. rammany
Hail, in It's most opllent days never had. even
At regular election where It's continuance in
bower was at stake. NOR. money To spend per
"a ptta the vuters- Actual comparisons cf
results different. but taking the per capita
expenditure OF the Republican couny committee
last fail and accepting the vote cast for sheriff,
who ran also on the Independent League ticket
~ tho measure. the facr Is disclosed that while
ii r1st the two Roosevelt organizations U.9d",
81 approximately IS q vote. TO poll $500 votes
cost tho county committee only about twenty
one cents votc To poll the $4,000 cast for the
fusion candidate for sheriff.
According to the statement of its treasurer
! ogden l.. Mills the Republican county
mlttee spent only little more than $4,000 on
I the primary, all Of which contributed by
the Taft National League. This does not sp-
parcntr the ordinary expenses of the
committee its headquarters and SO on, which
it did not charge up against the primary ex-
penscs But at rhis rate the expenditure per
/ capita ting thirty thousand votes cast for
I Taft delegates WAS ttrtte eighteen cents.
According TO these figures, the total amount
spent by the Roosevelt managers previous 10
I md tr day IF the spring primaries, March
| %. was sT0946.T7, OF this amount the Roosn-
/ Welt committee. or which Hooker treasurer,
| spent $50, 2656. and the Roosevelt League, y
CO. ordinate organization, according TO the sup
! Elementary statements Of Amos r.. +, Pinchot,
its treasurer. spent sf1.s20.22. This foots up
grand total Of sI0.946.7l. The money spent
! By the Roosevelt committee. previously re-
! ported contributed largely by three men
! George W. Perkins. j. Pierpont Morgan's for
mer partner; Frank A. Munsey, the publisher.
| and Alexander s. Cochran, the young carpet
/ manufacturer of Workers. each of whom put
1 fifteen thousand dollars into the pot. George
! Raxter was the only other contributor whose
I sum reached $4,000. The funds of the League
largely contributed, far the record
shows. by Pinchot himself. Henry l.. sloddard
/ contributed s2.ho0 to each fund. bur got nearly,
If not all. of It back in advertising for the news
/ paper with which he is connected.
Knowing as. he bound TO know, that
these facts would soon be made public. il is
almost refreshingly audacous in Mr.. Roose-
Welt to continue. as he is doing, to charge that
the votes casts for himself honest ballots.
and those cast for Mr.. Taft are tainted with
their purchase price, Is 1t not bit surpris-
ing that man backed by the arch type OF
Wall Streeter should still be able to success
fully insist upon purity the corner stone
Iof his campaign? Will the people still con
itinue 10 believe protestations ont of line
with practice" Is the Roosevelt tradition TO
continue forever TO be that of the sideshow
which depends for its patronage upon the
human desire of -huneoed- customer
I''catch" anothers
4