The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1892-07-03
FORCES TO BE REGARDED.
"TBIHD PARTY" r0TEs OFTEN HArB
1URNkD THE SCALE IN NEW YORK

The strensts OF the People. Party.
|. by n reporter who mot him az he was aet-
ting OF OF a railroad train one day last week.
Calvin &. Drico. Chairman OF tho Democratic
National Committee. was said, to have given
expression to his opinion that third party
movements " do not amount to much anyway.
Such ia certainly tho case In the country at
large the most pretcntious and apparently
formidable thrd-party movements having in
nearly every case collapsed when brought to
tho tcst OF votes in a Presidential contest IL
10 also. In an especial sense. true OF the State
OF Ohio. which State. along with John Sher-
man. Mr.. Brice represents in the United States
Senate. there having been In every cleo
tion held there for many years four po-
litical parties. the two outside organiza-
tons Just about ofrsetting each other. and
not affecting the result as between tho Demo-
Gratis and the Republicans. Thus in the light
OF a year ago In Ohio which was 30 closely
contested. tho nominee Of tho Peoples party
for Governor against Mckinley. the Republi-
can. and Campbell. tho Democratic candidate.
polled $4,000 votcs. while tho prohibltionist
candidate polled 10000. Tho Peoples party
drew most OF its strength from tho Demo.
crafts. Tho Prohibition pnrty drew most Of its
strength from the Republicans. But what Is
true OF Ohio Is not at all true OF Now York. and
here important elections arc usually decided
not by q majority, but by q plurality vote.
This hns been the cnse for many years, and IL
causes. therefore. political leaders to calculate
the influence Of outside forces. however small.
They will do so this year.
In tho Presidential election OF 1870 over
1.oOO.O00 votes woro cast in this State. but the
outside parties got only u fraction OF thom.
1900 for the prohibitonists and 1000 for the
Grecnbackers. Tho year following the Green-
backors jumpod to 10000 and the Prohibitions
lists t" 7.20o, with the result that the Demo-
next year he Gre Greenb"eK Mr made nnoth"e
ton vote shF.nk to 5000, This meant the
In tho Presidential election OF 1850 nil the
ed to ksop down the Prohibition vote. Con.
Clarified u was very roruar With o number q
his behalf throughout tho rural districts OF the
Stat" bore abundant fruit and kept down Neal
Row vote to patTy @ IN The
the Greenback vote. which was 1000 and this
vas ono Of tho contributing causes to Gen.
The next year the Prohibition vote increased
to 400. and the GrGenbnck vote got, up to
Of 10000. In 1875; the tables were turned. and
the Gr ,%n xGte was kort down to 1900
had and secure the success Of the Democratic
state ticket In these elections the influence
though tho Vote cast for the nominees Of each
the regular parties hall ). million voters each.
In the frssidcntial election Of lss! iras-
cent the Of Ss ots ros
dTfdtSs q SnG Per Mr. BsiSs; The Es-
fifteen one: hundred,hs Of one per cent. Neith-
one hundredths of one per cont. decided the re-
suit tstwsen them: The Prohibition vote that
decided 5enot tho had
their supporters restricted to the two Old
f.o47 would no , doubt h have BEEN swept f away.
md Ia ReppSlican plurality would have re;
recent years. but not the closest Contest In the
States history Exactly thirty years before
cratic Gs nr seae
on by 3n5 votes. He survived the mishap. was
s,s or iss S spa
III IN tho Contest eontes. Of 1855. one Of tho outside
b nsnn fSt tint Thu
votes. The Green back vote had shrunk to
ticket. thanks in great measure to the de-
fiction Of the Prohi biinnists from tho Herub-
sss Gs Sa sEs Getting TT Ind vote
q the state. His percentage was 4Ssi In
d fS again ATTENDED sn prrty
Prohibitonists peiled that yenr 38.oOo
So5Ss and ths Labor patty Gle Green.
They poied. collectively. larger proportion
S o Similar eeco" ssyeaf
votes. two.thirds OF them drawn from the
s%st iGr hS ntef
EuTcan vcr: east for the PoIibtio ''t can d.
date, 1900 votes. most of them drawn from
| wing OF the Labor party: 1000 votes were
cast for the Union Lanor party. and 453 votes
soniusion Of seven sanaiiatas IN the nald the
Dcmocrnts won hut the suercs, ful nominee
eke ns cent
t$eas$ Ms '" Isal Sn: 13 %S ' Es yas s"s
ton Of ss Harrson got little more tha 1t %
n"r cent. Of the total vote of tho State. Tho
LABOR PARTIES three OF them-poIlo! $500
| votes al told. and 10000 wcre cast for the
6den yaS sh ta Ir Ts
d hSs To Ge nt y y!a f npa hot do SosIs
r"r porte "hoy Of tneir own eand.s eE Sd fSr
President New York would probably have been
IN tho state contest OF iss' tthr i last to- be
held undcrth" old system OF votingl tho Labor
ence. MS it's prototype. the (irecnJack PARTY.
tni done some, years before. Its candidate
Tic IahDion canddat" "n the He othsr hand hand
had 900 votes; 900 more than tho plural
ity OF tho successful Dem Ocratc cand idnte for
SECRETARY Of state In 1870. when the present
electoral system had its first trial in New York.
tho Democrats amt Republicans wero agreed
on tho head OF tho state ticket. But
the frohibitionists pollcd $4,000 votes. and
the Socialists. new factor In state politics.
rolled l3.Wh. In last yoar's contest The
strength Of tho two outside parties was sub
sthntinlly tho same M the year previous. tho
frohlnitionists getting 3OG'W votes and the
Socialists 5000. Desni 10 his largo and fiat
terinG plurality Of nearly $4,000. Mr. Flower
barely crossed the limo which marked OF onN-
hall Of the voters Of tho state In that election,
His percentage was 5O.o3 That is. no had
three hundrodths OF one Yer cent. moro than
half. MIR. Shoehan was less fortunate-though
fortunate enough. for no was olected-getting
1919 In looking over tho results Of these
elections since 1875. Il may he said that
third rnriiss DE- amount to great deal in New
for good. cannnt with safety he moderated. X
i peculiar thing; and we'll wort ny of remark.
that in this State there seems always to be a
decided disparity between tho two outside
parties. The vote OF ono does not. ms Is tho
The Prohibit N party on one side, and the