New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-10-16
THE FAClS ABOUT ONO.


tation, cot Judge Hoadly's plurality ut one time
nearly up to $4,000. Mr.. Newman, the Dem
ocratic Secretary of State, upon careful estlm-
ate, makes it 6, 1898. This is difference WIN
distinction. Mr.. Ncwman's own plurality laSC
wear was 1915. The Democrats poHed dOuDt-
less the largest vote they have ever had, ana
vet they lost almost exactly one-halt OF lasI
wears plurality If this is great Democratic
cain. the Republicans will be satisfied with re-
netition of it next year on little larger SCALE
From another point of view, the Democratic
victory In Ohio grows smaller to the eye. Last
voor Mr. Newman had not only the plurality
stated but clear majority over Republican,
Greenback and Prohibition candidates com
bined of $50 votes. Judge Hoadly must be
about 10, 900 votes short of majority. AS
comparcd with the pluralities on Congressman
last wear, tho showing is still poorer Inc
Democrats elected thirteen members OF the
House bv pluraltics aggrcgating 33,29G while
the Republicans elected eight by plurallhcs ae-
grcgating II ,S73, making the total Democratic
nlurality 2O,424. On this showing the Dem
ocrots have lost more than One-half of last
years plurality.
They have lost all this ground in spite of the
~
in this campaign which they are not likely to
have next year They had not only very rich
candidate and an abundance of funds; but
every grog-shop keeper was their ardent
worker, while every active Prohibltionist was
their aly whether he would admit 1t to himself
or not. One class of voters wanted to KICK the
Republican party for having touched the lem
pcrancc question at all. Another class wanted
70 kick it for not having gone much further
than il did. Ii suffered on both sides by having
tried 10 do its duty without going to extremes.
Then. late i'm the campaign the Prohibition
Amendment furorc swept over the state, "ip-
ing ont all the calculations of the politicians.
This situation will not be- repeated in Prc~i-
DENTAL wear. Even extreme PrOhbtiOul~i-
feel that i'm Presidential election, the Ten
pcrancc question j. not practical one. IN "a
state election where the regulation OF the
Iiouor traffic by the State is nm issue, 1t does
hammer that some thousands of them are led, ~
they were in Ohio, into voting 80 n to and the
marty of Free Rum instead of that party which
has done more than all others for Temperance.
But even among these the wiser feel that their
views of the relations OF the State to the liquor
traffic cannot, without ab,urdity, affect their
votes upon the administration ol the N"'I"h"i
finances, etc. The fluctuations of tn" Prohibl-
ton vote in Ohio show this. In 1871 1t was
4,OS4; in 1872, the Presidential year, 1t
dropped 10 2,O15. I'm 1875 1t was 2,5"3 IN
1876. 1916. In 1870, ill5j in lNso, 2,Gl6.
Thus in every Presidential year while the great
partic, increased their votes largely, the Pro-
hibtion vote dropped from - to % per cent
The Prohibition vote during the election of last
week was much larger, and the leaders claim
that they will make still greater drmon,iIa-
ton next year. But the voters will be wiser, and
we venture to predict that tn" Prohibition vote
will drop, ~ it has always done before. The
figures plainly show that if II had not been for
the unexpected growth of this disturbing Gle
mcnt in the later campaign, the Democrats
would have been defeated by a majority which
would have sent them into the Presidential
battle di,hcartcncd and ready 10 be routed.
]