Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1882-03-10
THE NEW CONGRESSIONAL
DISTRICTS.

UlSIRlCIS.
In the 1e-districting of the Estate FOR
members of Congress, the Democrats are
much better off than many of them know,
that is if they are as ill informed as a
Washington correspondent of Virginia
paper who gIibly tells his journal that John
Randolph Tucker and John T. Harris have
been thrown into district in which the
Coa1itionists have a majority Of two thou
sand seven hundred +! AS matter of fact
these gentlemen are in district in which
they have only eight hundred and six ma
majority to overcome, and which will quite
certainly elect either of them that is the
nominee of the Democratic party. Fur
ther, as matter of both fact and figures,
the Democrats have majority of only $50
in the First fredericksburg district and
1872 in the Third (Richmond) district to
overcome to carry those districts. Another
which may be called hopeful is the Fifth
(Botetourtl in which. in November, the
Coalition majority was only 1,23O. Two,
the Sixth Hynchburg) and Eighth (Alex-
mocracy.
The new districts are just now an inter-
esting study. The First holds those devo-
ted adherents of the Coalition the Norton
brothers. II is also the district of Hon.
B. L. T. Beale and W. W. Walker of the
Democratic side, and the unterriied ].
W. Woltz of the whilom Republican party.
The Second district is the home of Hon.
John Goode. Hon. G.. T. Garrison and the
Hon. J. W. Dezendorf against all three of
whom majority considerably over two
thousand is arrayed. The Third district
is the home of Hon. George Wise who has
proven himself fully able to take care of
himself in canvass. The Fourth district
is the stamping ground of Hon. Mr.. Jor
gerson but so altered that this gentleman
will hardly know it when be sees it. If it
does not please the Boss to give him re-
nomination however, Mr.. j. has it in his
power to give enough trouble to make even
its Coalition majority of nearly seven
thousand tremble. The Fifth (Botetourt)
district can be carried by the change of
seven hundred votes and so it is not likely
to be without Democratic candidate.
The Sixth seems to have been used to coop
up any number of prominent Democrats.
1t contains John W. Daniel, Hon. George
Cabell. of Pittsylvania, Hon. Thos. White
head of Lynchburg, Hon. R. T. W. Duke
of Albemarle, and Hon. r. A. Coghill of
Amherst, of whom all save the first and
last named have served in Congress. The
Seventh district is now the home of Hon.
John Randolph Tucker, Henry Z. Allen,
Hon. John T. Harris, two of whom have
worn congressional honors and the other,
Judge Allen, ran Hon. John Paul danger
ously close when the district was much
more unfavorably constituted for the Dem
ocrats than it is now. If the rumor that
Rev. John E. Massey, of Albemarle, a [ O.
alitionist with strong congressional pro-
clivities, is about moving to Rockingham
is true, it will very much c0mplieate
Coalition politics in the seventh. The
Eighth has been made another coop for
any number of distinguished men. Hon.
John S. Barbour, Hon. James Barbour
Gen. Payne and others reside in the coun-
ties composing it. The Ninth is like it in
some respects containing Hon. Abran.
Fulkerson, the unterrifed Senator New
berry, and that old Democratic head on
young shoulders Connolly Trigg. Its SIX
thousand majority could be badly shaken
up by Newberry if he was so minded. We
give below carefully prepared list of the
majorities, Democratic and Readiuster, in
the counties composing the districts and
she clear majorities in each:
Stafford, R. 161; King George, R. 1884;
Westmoreland. r. 259; Caroline, D. Ia;
Essex. r. II; Richmond, r. 26S; King Will
liam, D. -; Northumberland, D. ID; King
and Queen, D. IS; Lancaster, r. 1919; Mid
dlesex. r. 1872; Gloucester, D. $50; Matb,
ews, D. 414; York. r. 200; Fredericksburg,
D. S22. Clear Readjuster majority in the
LIST district 567.
Warwick. R. 1877: Elizabeth City, R. COZ;
Surry, D. 22O; Isle of Wight, D. %; Nanse-
mond, R. 993; Norfolk, R. LIT; Princess
Ann, r 247; Accomac, D. GIT; Norfolk
City. B. asa; Portsmouth, d. 216. Clear
Readjuster majority in the I'd district 1886.
III.
Hanover, D. 1913; Chesterfield, R. 146;
Pnwflatan, R. $40: Amelia, R. So: New
Kent. Il. 325; Charles City, r. 10S; James
City, R. 1858; Nottoway, R. 1,196; Rich
mond City. D. 1892; Manchester. D. 1855;
williamsburg, Il. II. Clear Readjuster
majority in the Sd district 2S2.
w.
Prince George, r. Ais; Dnwiddie, r..
4S2: Sussex, r. 3O7; Lunenburg, r. sol /;
Bruins wick, r. 1882; Greensville. r. 5O4;
Mecklenburg. r. 1851; Southampton. &.
529: Petersburg, R. 9s6. Clear Readjuster
majority in the 4tn district, 6.647.
v.
Allegheny, D. IA; Craig, D. 1O7; Bote-
tourt, D. 366: Roanoke, Il. sos; Montgom-
cry, R. 1e; Franklin, D. SO; Floyd. r. 352;
Carroll, D. 1854; Grayson, R. 1856; Patrick,
R. 1856: Henry, R. 100 Clear Readjuster
majority in 5th district, 1880.
vi.
Albemarle, d. 154; Nelson. ID. l37; Am
herst, D. eo7; Bedford, D. ISL; Campbell,
D. 1927; Pittsylvania, D. 1856; Lynchburg,
D.; Danville R. Y. Clear Democrat
ic majority in 9th district, 1910.
VII.
Rockbridge, D. SO; Shenandoah, R. 3S9;
Page, R. EST; Madison, r. 451; Greene, &.
90; Augusta, D. $50; Highland, r. 100;
Bath, R. 40; Rockingham, z. 497; Staun-
ton, D. 1858. Clear Readjuster majority in
! the 18th district, S06.
VIII.
Frederick, D. 764; Clarke, D. 652; Lou
doun, D. 1913; Warren, D. -; Fauquier,
d. 7l7; Fairfax, R 40; Prince William,
ID. 1876; Rappahannock, d. 476; Culpeper,
r.. 55: Orange, D. 346; Alexandria R 1913;
VInohpctar r.