The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1886-11-11
Mr.. Carlisles Election.

After it was ascertained that Speaker
Carlisle was reelected to Congress by
768 majority, he was visited by repre-.
sent.sive of the Associated Press, who
asked him what in his opinion was the
cause of the comparatively small majority
received by him at the recent election.
He said:
eff the vote against me last Tuesday
had been larger than the vote against
me heretofore, some significance might
be attached to it. Such, however, is not
the fact. Two years ago my opponent
received 1926 votes, or nearly, if not
quite, twice as many as we're cast against
me on Tuesday, and yet two years ago my
majority was nearly 5000. If it had
been generally supposed that the opposi.
ton 70 me really amounted to anything,
I think my majority at this election
would have been 5000 or 1000. Outside
of tbs cities and towns adjacent to them
it was scarcely known that. I bad an op.
ponent, and even in the cities and towns
my friends attached very little impor-
tance to the opposition. They were
thrown off their guard by the fact that
several times heretofore candidates had
announced themselves in opposition and
had received q very small vote. They
supposed it would be the same way this
time, and, therefore, gave scarcely any
attention to the election"
Being asked if his views on the tariff
affected the vote to any extent MIR. Car.
Isle replied:
"The tariff question had no more in.
duence upon the vote this time than it
has had at any previous election in this
district. There are always few men
who vote against me on account of my
advocacy of revenue reform, and I pre-.
sumo they did 30 at the recent election,
but / have no reason to believe that the
number was greater than usual. This
Congressional district is overwhelmingly
in favor of revision of the tariff and q
reduction of taxation, and no man who
openly takes opposite ground could be
electsd on any ticket. Of course sys-
tems;.c attempt will be made to show
that the losses sustained by the Demo
cratic party at the recent elections are
due to its position on the tariff question,
but careful examination of the returns
will prove that there is no foundation for
such conclusion. The losses are by no
means confined to States or districts
whose representatives voted to consider
the tariff bill at the last session of Con.
gress, and there is nothing in the result
to discourage the advocates of revision
and reduction. Many causes contributed
to the defeat of our candidates in differ
ent localities. Some of these causes
were local and some general. 1t is too
early to attempt to enumerate them, but
I think. it is safe to say that local causes
have contributed far more to produce the
result than general ones. At any rate
there ia no just cause for alarm or despon-
dency. The Democratic party has sur
viyed many defeats which would have
been fatal to any other political organi'
zation, and this little repulse will only
stimulate it to greater exer:ions in the
future. We need not surrender any
principle or abandon any policy hereto
fore announced, but We must prepare to
meet our opponents openly and manfully
on every issue that divides the two rar.
ties.