Rensselaer Republican, Volume 19, Number 9, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 4 November 1886 — Overwhelming Victory in Jasper County. [ARTICLE]

Overwhelming Victory in Jasper County.

A Clean Sweep and Immense Majorities•The State Almost Certainly Republican. Seven Congressmen Certainly Elected Billy Owen's Majority 2239. Horizontal Sill Morrison Laid Out In Illinois* The Gerrymander is Rebuked and the Books Must Be OpenedLast Tuesday was a glorious day for the Republ ica n cause. in Jasptr county and in the Legislative, Judicial and Congressional districts with which it was united (hey hivt* made the first clean sweep for 16 years. The entire county ticket is elected™ by majorities ranging from, 337 for Washburn to way up above 1000 for Irwin and Yeoman.. On the state ticket the majority is jibout 488. A*, gain of 120 since ISS4. Owen’s majority in the county is over In the district it is 2289. In tlie county Thompson's majority for State Senator is 216. In the district about 459. Dunn’s majority in the two counties is about 1000. Maishall’s majority, for prosecutor is 050 in Jasper county. ‘275 ’tn~3>emjon7 - iniTt~3Ls—in —Npu tun. Total Rl’i. Robinson’s majority for county auditor is 466. Antrim, for recorder, lias about the same. Watson, for commissioner, will do about as well as the state ticket. , 7, . In our neighboring counties the results have also bee” very grati- • fying: 5 Car roll elects a clean ticket. White part of its county ticket. Benton a clean sweep. Rake, likewise. La Route county two county officers, for the* first time in a dozen years. __ , From, the very incomplete re-* turns that have been brought in, it will be impossible to give the full vote in the county until the official canvass is made, which is to be done to-day, Thursday. Below we give however the vote by townships on the state ticket and on such of the offices as were chiefly contested, namely: State SenI afbr, Cnnnt.y Ti pasrirer auo County Auditor. HANGING GROVE. I t Majerttv. Robertson 58, Nelson 21, 37 Thompson 51, Patton 33, 18 Robinson 58y Strong 23, .35 Washburn 54, Hoover 28, 26 < ’ GILLAM. . ■■■■ Robertson 85, Nelson 33, 52 Thompson 33, Patten 48, 35 Robinson 80, Strong 47, 33 Washburn 94 Hoover 45, 49 i WALKER. Robertson 64, Nelson 49, 15 Thompson 63, Patton 49, 14 J Robinson 65, Strong 48, 17 I Washburn 61, Hoover 50, 11

BARKLEY. Robertson 113, Nelson 89, 24 Thompson 109, Patton 90, 19 Robinson 100, Strong 100, 00 M’asJiburn Til, Hoover 88, 23 j . MARION. NORTH. RobertspD 207, Nelson-115, 82 i .‘L’IiLW-jj 205,‘-J’,f;7-' Rjb’injs in 198, Strong 126, 72 Waslibm n 189, Hoover J 45, 44 •rtinoM, snnTiT. ~ | Robertson. 121, Nel.-i>n 78, 43 Thompson 120, Patton <B7, 33 I R iliii.s.in 126, Strung 83, J3| Wsi.-ljlmrh 05. II > >\er 119, 2 ' NEWTON. . 11 iberl.-on 59, Nelson 60, 1 Thump -on 59, Patton 60, i Robinson 61, Strong 63, 2 Washburn 70, Hoover 52, 1.8 KEENER. Robertson,B6, Nelson 12, 74 Thompson 81, Patton 16, 65 Robinson 85, Strong 13, 72 M ashburn 82, Hoover 16, 66 KANKAKEE. Robertson 51, Nelson 34, 17 Thompson Patton Robinson 52, Strong 33, 19 Wasburn 51, Hoover 33, 18 WHEATFIELD. Robertson 33, Nelson 25, 8 Thompson 35, Patton 35, 0 Robinson 38, Strong 22, , 16 Washburn 37, Hoover 20, 17 MILROYRobertson 24, Nelson 30, 6 Thompson 20, Patton 33, 13 Robinson 29, Strong 25, 14 Washburn 15, Hoover 39, 24 UNION. Robertson 75, Nelson 63, 12. Thompson 70, Patton 64, 6 Robinson 77, Strong 62, 15 Washburn 76, Hoover 62, 14 JORDAN. Robertson 55, Nelson 60, 5 Thompson 46, Patton 92, 46 Robinson 82, Strong 46, 36 Washburn 57, Hoover 83, 26 CARPENTER.- : ‘ Only the majorities have been reported. They aie: Republican State ticket 116 For Patton, 11 For Robinson, 106 For Washburn, “ One of the most remarkable features of tho campaign just closed was the attack made upon Mr. Robinsun by Mr. E. C. Nowels. It waajiublished in the last issues of the Message and the Dcutoeratic Sentinel, purposely too late to be answered before the election, and we only refer to it now to show the spirit of thing, and what may be expected from the same source hereafter. The maliciousness as well ns the, nnscra.luiuusness of the attack is shown in the very first allegation made. Great prominence is given to tire charge that Mr. Robinson violated the law and his oath of office by ,not giving legal notice of the meeting of the .county board of equalization last June. There is not an iota of truth in die charge, as Mr; ■ Robinson did fully comply with the law, and on that occasion published such notices of the meeting of that board, and published them at the proper time - and in the proper manner; and if Mr. Nowels or any other person disputes our assertion in this respect we invite him to consult the files of the The Republican and in the issue of May 20th, 1886, he will find the notice. Considering that in the year 1882 there was no county board 'of equalization at all on account of Mr. Nowels’ neglect to give notice, as the law requires; j and considwing further that his neglect of his official duties in another instance caused the first contracts for the jail to be invalidated and jn one way or another cost the county nearly one thousand dollars, bis strictures on Mr. Robinson in this particular would have come with a very bad grace, even had they been true, which they are not Still more the facts that Mr. Nowels’ official record is I probably the worst and most disgraceful of any man that ever held office in the county; and that it was largely ow!n£ to Mr. Robini son’s kindly offices that the consequences to him were not much worse than they were, ought forever to have kept Mr. Nowels’

from entering into a malicious fight against the man who befriended ' him in the hour of his Utmost neetl. As to the effect of Mr. Nowels’ attack there is no’ question whatever but that it largely increased Mr, Rqqinson’s majority, and if Mr. Jvo\Vels can derive any consohdiou from that fact he is heartily welcome to do so. The democratic leaderj 'were in hot water about all of last week oyer the question as to which of the Greenback and Prohibition' uamiidates gh .aid be. placed upon their tickets. Finally they began printing and sending them out with’ the names of Patton and James Yeoman on them, but the saloon element made such an unearthly howl over the latter that his name was taken off and the tickets that had gone out were in part recalled by messengers; but in many of the out townships the tickets with Yeoman’s name were in general use. No end of credit is due to Capt. M. F. Chilcote for the able, impartial and successful manner in . which he has managed the county campaign.