The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1888-08-12
TaE PROHIBITION VOTE.

It's Erect upon the Constitutiou VI ~
ent Lower House of Congress.
National Tribune, Soldiers Organ.
Gen. Clinton B. Fisk, candidate for President
on the Prohibition ticket, stated q few days ago
that in his judgment 60 per cent OF the Prohioi-
ton vote Of the country came from the hepuo-
lican party and 40 per cent from the Democratic
party. Assuming for the moment that this esti-
mate is correct, il is interesting TO note what
would have been the political effect upon the
present Congress If these votes had been cast
for the Republican and Democratic candidates,
respectively, instead Of being lost by being
thrown a. they were.
They are styled lost simply because IL is as
sumed they were cast TO express an honest pref
erence, and not with the intention OF defeating
by indirection a distasteful candidate, although
it is not possible to suppose that the expectation
was entertained of electine the Prohibitlonists
in any of the districts where this organization
appeared as q third party. The comparative
smallness of the total vote in each district pre-
cludes such an hypothesis, because in an intelli-
gent community where q class of voters 10 less
than 10 per cent. Of the whole, it Is obvious to
all without o poll, that success Ia impossible.
These votes were then willingly wasted so far
as regards the success of the candidate for
which they were cast
If the Prohibition vote had been cast for the
old party tickets in the proportion named by
General Flax, the result would have been 70.
versed in the Fifth Michigan. First New Hamp-
shire. Fourth New Jersey knd Seventh Ohio
districts, as will be shown.
The present Representative from the Fifth
Michigan district is Mr.. Ford. just now ~iuvesti-
eating Italian immigration in New York. He
received Is, 567 votes, and his Republican COM
petitor, Mcbride. received Is. 100. There were
also 3, 086 votes for Briggs, the Prohibition can
didate. Ford was therefore elected, not by a
majority over all. but by o plurality simply OF
AL, being his excess over the next highest Ii,
however. we add so per cent of Briggs vote to
McBride's, he would have Is, 97l, while Ford,
with the balance, or 40 per cent, added to his,
would have 19. S02. In other words. the Repuo-
lican candidate would have come TO Congress by
100 majority.
Take the first New Hampshire, represented
by the hirsute and voluble Mckinney. He re-
csived Is, $40 votes against 1925 for Martin
Haynes. There were ST votes cast for the
Prohibitionists. Applying Gen. Fisk's rule. aud
Haynes would have had Is, 779 votes to McKin-
ney's is, 7l3. and would have been elected in
stead Of the gratuitous apOlOgist for the South
ern brigadiers.
IL the Fourth New Jersey district Pidcock
would have been Kept at home By Gen. Fisks
basis of calculation IL the tbird-party man had
not appeared. He received ii. $50 votes against
- SOB for Van Blarcom, Republican. and 2,772
for the Prohibition candidate. Dividing the
Prohibition vote, rs before. Pidcock would have
had II, 795 to Van Blarcom's l3. 226.
Campbell, the sitting member from the
Seventh Ohio district, holds bis seat by a plural
ity of only two votes over Little. Republican.
The former received Is. 1903. against Is, 30l for
the latter. There were 962 cast for the Prohibi-
zionist candidate. however. which, IL allotted as
before to the Democrat aud Republican respect
lively. would have elected the latter by a vote Of
Is. $50, against 10, 696.
Thus the Republicans would have gained the
four members, and the Democrats would have
lost them. 10 no event could the Prohibitionists
gain any.
Leading Republicans, however, in the States
Whara the PrOhtbttiSn vote il large claim that
General Fisk's estimate is too low on their side.
They maintain that their party furnished fully
three-fourths Of the votes for the Prohibition
ticket. II this hypothesis be correct the RepUb-
licans would HAYES majority OF the present House
Of Representatives, provided the Prohibition
candidates had kept out OF the contest In close
districts.
In the First Connecticut district Vance, Dem
ocrat, received IA. 500 votes against IA. 552 for
Buck, Republican. There were $50 votes for
the Prohibition candidate, which. IL divided in
the proportion Of three to the Republican candi-
date to ono for the Democrats candidate would
have elected Buck by lab majority. On the
same basis Granger. Democrat. from the Fourth
Connecticut district, would have been defeated
by Mills. Republican. by a majority of PIG.
In the Eighth Michigan district Tarsney would
have been beaten by Roswell G.. Horr by 228
majority, Stovers would have defeated Bacon in
the Fifteenth New York district by l03. Scran-
ton would have defeated Lynch in the Twelfth
Pennsylvania district by l62. and Roberts would
have succeeded instead Of Hall by q majority Of
GLIB in the Twenty-srxth Pennsylvania district.
II, therefore, we add to the four changes
shown above, according to General Fisk's esti-
mate, these six which the Republicans claim
they lost by the drafts made upon them by the
Prohibition vote, we have a total of ten 10 be
deducted from the Democratic side and put
down to the Republicans.
What would have been the effect of the trans
mutation in the Houses
"A returned. the House WAS cOmnoaed of In
Democrats, 153 Republicans and two Independ-
ents. the latter being Smith, of Wisconsin. and
Nichols. Of North Carolina. Hopkins, of Vir-
einia, and Anderson. of Iowa. are classed az
Democrats. With the ten changes made above,
supposing the Prohibition vote cast with the
old parties, the Republicans would have had 163,
Democrats 160, while the Independents would
not have been affected.