The Middlebury people's press. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1841-1843, 1842-11-29
A COMPARISON.


1t is we'll, now and then, and puarticular.
ly in time of seeming adversely, TO look
at the past, and by seeing how apparent
weakness has been followed by strength, de-
rive support and confidence for the future.
For this purpose we copy the following com.
parison between the general condition OF
The Wing party in 1888, and the position
in which it now stands, in order 10 show
from the events of 1910, that the wings arc
not without rational grounds for the expec-
tations they cherish for ls43. We copy
from the U. s. (Phila.) Gazette.
With reference TO The elections of 1874
the Wings occupy the same relation, in re-
gard TO time, which they did in 1888, with
reference TO the Presidential election in
1910. And with the exception Of the dis.
tracted state of the Locofoco party, in ref
crence TO their Presidential candidate, the
circumstances, 10 almost every thing else,
is nearly the same.
In 1888, the State of Pennsylvania cleo
ted Governor Porter by majority of 5496
And yet in 1910, Pennsylvania cast her
electoral vote against the Locofoco candi-
date for Presidency.
In 1893, Delaware elected Mr.. Robinson
(Locofoco) her delegate in Congress, by a
majority of so.
And yet in 1910, Delaware elected Anti
Lecofoco electors by a majority of more
than thousand.
Georgia, in 1898, elected Mcdonald
(Locofoco) for Governor, by majority of
375.
But IN 1910, Georgia gave good round
majority for the Anti-Locofoco candidate
for President.
Ohio, in the year 1888, gave TO Shannon
Uocofoco) for Governor, a majority Of
1929.
Yet in 1910, Ohio gave the Anli-Locofo-
CO electoral ticket neat little majority of
Twenty-Five thousand.
Maryland, in 1888, gave to Grayson. the
Locofoco candidate for Governor, major
ity of 259:
Yet in 1910, this same Maryland gave a
majority for the Anti Locofoco ELECTORAL
ticket of 4776.
In 1889, the State of Massachusetts cleo
ted Marcus Morton, the Locofoco candidate
for Governor, by a majority of one.
Yet in 1910, good old Massachusetts gave
to the Anti-Locofoco electoral ticket ma
jority off $3.50.
In 1888, New Jersey returned 10 Con-
gress Locofoco delegation, claiming ma
jority of &C.. This claim was not allowed,
but the Wing real majority was less than
that.
And yet in 1910 New Jersey gave the
Wing electoral ticket majority of 23l7.
Maine, in the year 1888, gave to Fair
field the Locofoco candidate for Governor,
a majority of 1928.
But in 1910, Maine gave majarity IN
the Wing electoral ticket of All,
Michigan, in 1888, elected Stevens T..
Mason, the Locofoco candidate for Govern
or, and the rest of the Locofoco State tick
eft.
Yet Michigan.in 1s4o,gave for the Wing
electoral ticket majority of 1902.
There was no election in Tennessee, in
1898 But in 1887, the Locos carried their
ticket by 1880; and in 1889. they car
ried Polk (Locofoco) by majority of 5000.
Yet in is4O, the Wings elected their E.
lectorial ticket by majority of II, lo2.
We take no notice of those States which
went for the Wings in 1888. and also at the
election,in 1s40, such as North
Carolina, INDIANA, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New York,
though every one of these States gave a
majority for the Wing electoral ticket, in
1910, vastly superior to that which they
gave for State officers in 1888; d that in.
crease of majority goes to strengthen the
confidence of the Wings, that in 1874, tho
same results will be found.
1t is due TO the editor of the Pennsylva-
man to say that the philosophy and patience
with which he credits US, at the present
are greatly owing to his admira-
Die example in ls4o--an example which
wo are sure he will again give in 1874.