The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1886-09-15
The Elections.

on lnelr STATE tlcket lnere Is 1alllng
off in the aggregate vote of both par
ties as compared with presidential
years, but it is some four thousand
larger than in 1882. The aggregate
gubernatorial vote cast this year is
56,470, of which Ormsbee received
37,6Sl; Shurtleff, II, 091; Seelev, ,532;
greenback and scattering, 275-a re-
publican majority of 1878 and plu-
rality of 20,590. The prohibition vote
was drawn mostly from the republican
party. In 1882 the aggregate vote was
81 $3.50, divided as follows: Barstow (re-
publican), $3.50; Eaton (democraD,
4,446 Martin (greenback), 1856;
scattering, eight-a republican majority
of 1880 and plurality of 1873. The
associated press report says: 1.-The re-
publican vote this year exceeds that of
1882 by 1892; the democratic vote
this year exceeds that of 1884 by 1925,
and the prohibition vote of this year is
about equivalent to the greenback vote
in 1882. The difference in the gain
made by the democrats and republic
cans this year is 6S5. Add this to the
difference between the scattering vote
in 1882 and that of this year, 267, and
it makes 952, which represents very
nearly the difference between the re-
publican majority this year and in 1882"
1t is apparent that the greenbackers
need not go to the trouble of holding
another state convention in Vermont.
The vote on congressman is as fol-
lows: One hundred ten towns, compris-
ing the first congressional district, give
Stewart 16,O5O and Brigham 5,791;
scattering, 240 = Stewards plurality,
1899, and majority, 10,059. One hun
dred thirty-one towns, comprising the
second congressional district, give
Grout 1904; Folsom, 1921; and scat
tering sixty-six-making CIRCUITS major
ity II ,019 and his plurality ,0S3.
The senate is republican, with
single exception. According to the
associated press report, the represen-
tatives are divided politically as fol-
lows:
EdmundS republicans. .,................ 100
Anti Edmunds republicans. 6
Straight republicans. Observation-Disclosures. As
Prohibition republicans. ............... 2
Straight democrats. Observation-Disclosures. ~
Edmunds democrats. Observation-Disclosures. 4
Total. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. 239
In two towns-Shefiield and Granville
no representatives were elected Anti-Ed-
munds republicans represent the towns of
Bethel, Milton, Richford, Middlesex, Bak-
ersfeld and st. Adams. Edmunds demo-
Gratis represent Burlington, South Burling-
ton, Peru and Brookline. Washington and
Chelsea send prohibitionists.
The democrats are much puzzled to
account for their reverses. They had
boosted that they would have from sixty
to eighty representatives, and some re-
publican politicians had conceded to
them seventy-tive. 1t is possible that
large number of democratic voters
improved the opportunity to express
their dissatisfaction with the Cleveland
administration and its chief henchman
in this state. The associated press re-
port says
The following seventeen towns, repre-
scented by democrats from 1884 to 1886, are
this year represented by republicans: Brad
ford, Braintree, Fairlee, Orange, Vershire,
Holland, Pawlet, Berlin, Plainfeld, Brattle-
boro Stratton Nottingham, Eden, Bakers
field Underhill, Readsboro and Sunderland.
The following eleven towns, represented by
republicans from 1884 to 1886, are this year
represented by democrats Troy, Wells,
Fayston, Marshield Brookline, Isle La
Motto, Bolton, Wheelock, Dorset, Peru and
Sandgate. Three counties-Windsor, Addi-
son and Lamoille-are represented exclu-
sively by republicans. 1t may be added
that the democrats, though casting a larger
vote than usual for an off year, have lost in
the general assembly; also that the school
question has been a prominent issue in
some sections and probably some repre-
sentatives will go to Montpelier pledged
against legislation in favor of the town sys-
tenn of schools.
How much reliance can be placed
upon the classification made by the as.
ISOLATED press reporter of the represen'
tatives on the senatorial question we
are unable TO say; but it is probably
more nearly correct than the reports il
the Free Press, which have claimed
pretty much all the representatives al
Edmunds men. If any anti-Edmund
man is greatly surprised at the resul
we think he has little reason to be, il
view of the circumstances. The anti
Edmunds republicans had no organiza
ton that was effective, save in a. fey
localities; they had not more than fou
or five newspapers actively supporting
their cause; they had none of the "sinew
of war;" even for legitimate campaig
and election expenses; and great ms
iority of the active, working politician
of the state were against them. The
had made little effort at organizing an
canvassing until within three or fou