Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up free
Editorial
May 26, 1858
Carroll Free Press
Carrollton, Carroll County, Ohio
What is this article about?
An editorial forecasts the defeat of eight Ohio Democratic Congress members who supported the pro-slavery Lecompton Constitution, highlighting their prior minority victories due to divided opposition votes, now unified against them.
OCR Quality
95%
Excellent
Full Text
The members of Congress from Ohio who voted for the English-Lecompton swindle, will suffer a defeat this fall, in case they are candidates for re-election, that will be overwhelming. There were eight of them all told, and by scarcely any possibility, or state of things, can either of this number be re-elected. Their faithless ness as legislators would alone have compassed their defeat; but in addition to this the circumstances attending their first election are such that nothing but the direst overthrow stares them now in the face. This is manifest by referring to the returns in their respective districts two years since:
In the First Congressional district Pendleton (Lecompton Dem.) received 6133 votes, Taft (Rep.) 4256, Torrence (Am.) 2643, making a majority against Pendleton of 765.
In the Second district Groesbeck (Lecompton Dem.) received 5728 votes, Gurley (Rep.) 4343, Harrison (Am.) 3229, majority against Groesbeck 1831.
In the Sixth district Cockerill (Lecompton Dem.) had 8603 votes, Emrie (Rep.) 7460, Trimble (Am.) 1598, majority against Cockerill 455.
In the Ninth district Hall (Lecompton Dem.) had 9561, Watson (Rep.) 9382, Wilson (Am.) 271, majority against Hall 92.
In the Tenth district, Miller (Lecompton Dem.) had 7403, Hoffman (Rep.) 5633, Moore (Am.) 4326, majority against Miller 2551.
In the Twelfth district, Cox (Lecompton Dem.) had 8938, Galloway (Rep.) 8582, Stansbury (Am.) 817, majority against Cox 495.
In the Fifteenth district, Burns (Lecompton Dem.) had 9194, Sapp (Rep.) 9143, majority for Burns 51.
In the Seventeenth district, Lawrence (Lecompton Dem.) had 8085, Albright (Rep.) 6805, Davenport (Am.) 2013, majority against Lawrence 733.
It will thus be seen that every member of Congress from this State, excepting Burns, who voted to enslave the people of Kansas, was elected, not by a majority but by a minority vote. They succeeded alone because their opponents were silly enough to quarrel among themselves, to run two candidates, and thus measurably throw their votes away. This, we think, will not be the case this fall. In all of these Districts, so far as we can learn, dissensions in the opposition forces have been healed, the ranks are closing up, and the majority vote that was frittered away two years ago upon two candidates, will this fall be centered upon one, which will render his election morally certain.
In the First Congressional district Pendleton (Lecompton Dem.) received 6133 votes, Taft (Rep.) 4256, Torrence (Am.) 2643, making a majority against Pendleton of 765.
In the Second district Groesbeck (Lecompton Dem.) received 5728 votes, Gurley (Rep.) 4343, Harrison (Am.) 3229, majority against Groesbeck 1831.
In the Sixth district Cockerill (Lecompton Dem.) had 8603 votes, Emrie (Rep.) 7460, Trimble (Am.) 1598, majority against Cockerill 455.
In the Ninth district Hall (Lecompton Dem.) had 9561, Watson (Rep.) 9382, Wilson (Am.) 271, majority against Hall 92.
In the Tenth district, Miller (Lecompton Dem.) had 7403, Hoffman (Rep.) 5633, Moore (Am.) 4326, majority against Miller 2551.
In the Twelfth district, Cox (Lecompton Dem.) had 8938, Galloway (Rep.) 8582, Stansbury (Am.) 817, majority against Cox 495.
In the Fifteenth district, Burns (Lecompton Dem.) had 9194, Sapp (Rep.) 9143, majority for Burns 51.
In the Seventeenth district, Lawrence (Lecompton Dem.) had 8085, Albright (Rep.) 6805, Davenport (Am.) 2013, majority against Lawrence 733.
It will thus be seen that every member of Congress from this State, excepting Burns, who voted to enslave the people of Kansas, was elected, not by a majority but by a minority vote. They succeeded alone because their opponents were silly enough to quarrel among themselves, to run two candidates, and thus measurably throw their votes away. This, we think, will not be the case this fall. In all of these Districts, so far as we can learn, dissensions in the opposition forces have been healed, the ranks are closing up, and the majority vote that was frittered away two years ago upon two candidates, will this fall be centered upon one, which will render his election morally certain.
What sub-type of article is it?
Partisan Politics
Slavery Abolition
What keywords are associated?
Lecompton Swindle
Ohio Congress
Election Defeat
Kansas Enslavement
Minority Vote
Opposition Unity
What entities or persons were involved?
Pendleton
Taft
Torrence
Groesbeck
Gurley
Harrison
Cockerill
Emrie
Trimble
Hall
Watson
Wilson
Miller
Hoffman
Moore
Cox
Galloway
Stansbury
Burns
Sapp
Lawrence
Albright
Davenport
Editorial Details
Primary Topic
Defeat Of Ohio Lecompton Democrats In Upcoming Election
Stance / Tone
Strongly Predictive Of Overwhelming Defeat For Lecompton Supporters
Key Figures
Pendleton
Taft
Torrence
Groesbeck
Gurley
Harrison
Cockerill
Emrie
Trimble
Hall
Watson
Wilson
Miller
Hoffman
Moore
Cox
Galloway
Stansbury
Burns
Sapp
Lawrence
Albright
Davenport
Key Arguments
Eight Ohio Congress Members Who Voted For English Lecompton Swindle Face Overwhelming Defeat
They Were Elected By Minority Votes Two Years Ago
Opposition Split Votes Between Republican And American Candidates
Dissensions In Opposition Healed, Ranks Closing Up
Majority Votes Will Center On One Candidate This Fall, Ensuring Election