The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1892-06-16

against HILL. The Mugwumps OF tho city
were all enthusiastic for CLEVELAND. and
against HILL, and tho opponents OF the Int
ter had raised besides. a largo election
fund, generally estimated ut $4,000, to be
used In this city for the defeat OF HILL and.
incidentally. to secure votes for CLEVELAND.
Yet despite oil these elements OF organized
support in his favor, CLEvELAND's major
ity In tho city OF New York was 55.sl5.
while HrL1.s was fraction short OF
10000. CLEVELAND ran behind HILL
In tho various Democratic districts OF
tho city ns follows: First Assembly,
400 votes; Second Assembly. 700; Third AS
sembly. 200: Fourth Assembly. 700: Fifth AS
scmbly, 300: Sixth Assembly. 60o Eighth
Assembly. GOO; Ninth Assembly. 200; Tenth
Assembly, 500: Twelfth Assembly. 700: Four
tconth Assembly. 800; Fifteenth Assembly.
800: Sixteenth Assembly. 400: Seventeenth
Assembly, 800; Eighteenth Assembly. 400;
Twentieth Assembly, 400; Twenty-second
Assembly, 900; Twenty-fourth Assembly.
100 HILL ran ahead of CLEVELAND in every
Democratic district Of New York city.
The situation to-day Is good deal
changed from what 1t was In 1888. but not
favorably to CLEVELAND. There are no
longer any CLEVELAND oillceholders In tho
Federal departments. There is no longer
tho County Democracy organization OF
political leaders, banded together by
patronage In support OF CLEVELAND. Tho
Labor party is thing Of the past. Many
of the Republican Mugwumps have gonc
back to tho Republican party. CLEVELAND
received u considerable Republican vote in
Now York city In 1883. q good share OF 1t
coming from the dry goods and banking
element. Tic Custom House was ut
that timc In Democratic hands. The Sec
Rotary OF tho Treasury was CLEVELAND
man. A great part Of these clements now
have no preferences which prevent them
from supporting tho national Administra-
ton in power. This year. US matter OF
interest. they are largely with tho R"pub-
leans. 1t is no moro than the truth to say
that CLEVELAND, IL q candidate for Presi-
dent this year. could not get % per cont OF
the Republican vote in New York city which
was cast for him in 1888. Tho reasons for
this are given above.
Could CLEVELAND get as largo proper
ton of the Democratic vote OF New York
city, II n candidate this year. as he received
in 1888 1t is doubtful. Probably not.
There are many reasons. Here are six:
CLEVELAND Is personally unpopular in
New York. HILL is strong with the people.
CLEVELAND has never taken any part in the
affairs Of tho Democracy of New York state
except to got Office himself. and TO hold on
to IL, at any sacrifice CT the party's pros
poets So far as is generally known or can
be ssccrtaincd, he never performed a
friendly service. except rs condition of
some benefit to himself. for any voter re-
siding on Manhattan Island. Hc lives a
good part OF the time away from tho city
His personal friends and associates arc
mostly Republicans. Few OF them belong in
New York. Fewer of them vote here. Among
many Of the most active workers who.
against fearful odds. secured his success in
1884, his treatment of HUBERT o. THOMPSON
and DANIEL MANNING still rankes. Both
men are dead. and MANNING was known by
the political workers In this city only at
long range. But THOMPSON enjoyed gen.
eral and extensive popularity among tho
best equipped political workers in New York.
These men. oil OF them. arc now bitterly
hostile to CLEVELAND. In Mr.. THoMPsoN's
old district. tho Eighteenth. scores OF them
on election day in 1888 worked openly for
HARRISON. Not one Of these men would
raise a hand to secure support for CLEvE-
LAND to-day. and it is very doubtful II
many OF them could be induced to
vote for him. Their opposition Is not
due merely to q political disappointment q
temporary grievance quickly cured in poll
tics, but to tho conviction that CLEvELAND's
treatment Of THOMPSON proved him faith
less to tho most sacred obligations OF
personal pledges. TnoMpsoN's lips are
sealed by death. but the story OF his treat
ment is part Of the common knowledge OF
men upon whom in great measure the
Democracy had to depend for support OF
its electoral ticket in New York city in 1898,
and will have to depend in November.
The free trade issue in New York has al
ways proved n losing ono for Democrats.
Thousands OF active and loyal Democratic
voters in Now York arc by heritage, con-
viction, md personal experience opposed
to the methods OF revenue which find
greatest favor In Great Britain American
mechanics, almost without exception, are
opposed to frce trade. New York city is
great hive OF manufacturing industry.
Most Of its skilled artisans arc Democrats.
They arc opposed to free trade, but on oil
the great issues OF tho party they arc firm
in their support OF Democratic candidates.
CLEVELAND cmbOdics tho ideal OF n
free trade candidate. With this great
class of voters it is an clement OF irre-
dccmablo weakness. What is true OF tho
American mechanics OF New York city Is
true also. and to n very similar extent. OF
tho Irish American mechaECcj, almost MI Of
whom are opposed to tho English method
OF raising revenue. From experience
in their own country. the Commandment
cans are protcctionists. They hall from
q protection country. Among the In
dustrla voters OF New York city.
cosmopolitan centre OF population.
free trade cry Is. therefore. always dan
gerous to tho Democracy. 1t docs not
make very much difference who Is the Re-
publican candidate. HARRISON received In
1888, though not then popular with Demo-
Gratis. and no moro SO now. tho votes OF
many Democrats on the protection issue.
With CLEVELAND as the candidate. tho