The Washington times., 1929-11-29
VARE FIGHT
WILL Be.
BITTER

of Pennsylvania in the Senate tor
the first time in modern history
II q Democrat -InSurgent coalition
succeeds in it's present plan to
unSeat Senator-elect William S.
Ware (R) in favor of William B.
Wilson, Democrat and a member
OF the wartime Cabinet of Wood
row Wilson.
Leaders Of the coalition an
nounced today they would try TO
seat Wilson Oh the ground That
Vare's official election was voided
by fraud, irregularities and cor
ruption.
Chance Held Slim
There appeared little likelihood
Of the coalition winning, because
Ware rolled up an official ina
jority of 100000 votes, which will
have to be thrown out by Sne
Senate before Wilson would be
entitled to the senatorial seat,
such a result appeared Impossible
The whole contest, opens IN
the senate next Tuesday, revolves
around the question OF electlon
frauds III Pittsburg and Phlla'
delphia, the two machlne-con'
trolled cities which gave ire
rnendous majorities to Ware IN
his 1925 election. This clash over
the seat i1cidently has no direct
connection with the effort to bar
Ware because Of excessive ex
penditures in the proceeding prlm-
ary.
Consequently, even if the Ware
Wilson contest is decided in the
republicans favor, he probably
will be elected because OF the
primary contest.
In order to win, Wilson must
have the Senate decide to throw
out:
i. All votes cast in Allegheny
County pittsburgh on the
ground of corruption, since 13
per cent of all the Republican
voters were paid fees on that
election day as watchers or mes
sengers.
2. All votes cast in 800 Phila-
delphia divisions (precincts), be-
cause the ballot boxes were de-
livered to City Hall before 10 p.
M, on the night of the election
indicating the ballets couldn't
have been counted.
3. All votes in 38 Philadelphia
precincts where voters were
listed alphabetically in the voters
check list, indicating ballot-stut-
fling.
4. All votes in 100 Philadelphia
precincts where tax receipts were
proved irregular, indicating fraud
ulent voting.
S. All votes in so Philadelphia
precincts where election officials
served as registrars ~ were not
themselves registered voters.
6. All votes in five Philadelphia
precincts where the number OF
ballots exactly equalled the num-
Der of voters registered.
All votes in six Philadelphia
precincts where election officials
were indicted for local frauds.
8. All votes in 27 Philadelphia
Zero" precincts, where Wilson
didn't get a single vote.
y 9. All votes in 100 Philadelphia
krecincts where the recount
changed the result by 20 or more
votes.
10. All votes in 500 Philadel-
phia precincts where the oath OF
election officials was challenged
in one form or another.
This program. if approved by
the Senate. would throw out
about 100000 Ware votes and give
Wilson the election.
Vare's Contentious
To these charges, the Ware
forces will reply as follows:
/. The Pittsburgh watchers all
were employed according to law
and therefore the Senate cannot
interfere with official result.
Q, There was nothing illegal in
making "early reports" in these
precincts, since the returns were
oroyen to be generally accurate
FAR more so than in other pre-
cinctS.
8. The alphabetical listing re-
suited from lazinesS of election
officials, included Democratic
voters, was not contrary to law,
and therefore not illegal.
4. Subsequent investigation has
shown only few poll tax receipt
irregularities and only such as oc-
cur in every election by error.
S. Pennsylvania law allows reg
istrarS and unregistered voters to
serve as election officials.
s. Full voting precincts were
result of able organization work
and not due to ballot-stuffing.
7. Local frauds had nothing to
do with senatorial election.
8. In zero" precincts, there
were no Democrats registered,
hence no Democrats could vote
legally. (AlSo there were a like
number of Wilson" Zero" precincts
in other parts of the State where
Ware didn't get a vote0
9. The recount failed TO dis
close either fraud or corruption
in these precincts and changes in
totals were not nearly as large
rs in hundreds of instances in
the famous Brookhart-Steck Iowa
contest, where the totals were
counted in Senate'S recount.
10. The technical irregularity
in oathS of election officials had
nothing to do with tabulation of
vote and thousands Of voters
should not be disenfranchised by
technicalities,