The sun., 1895-01-02


year Of the past policy Of Tsmmsny. Th'
head Of her municipal ticket polled at th'
recent election 108, 900 votes. His defeat
and the defeat Of the Democracy here ant
elsewhere, was attributable 20 no genera
impairment Of confidence in the organiza
tlon OF Tammany, or the administration by
members OF It Of the chief municipal de
partments; but to the fact that Demo
cratic candidates and prospects were en-.
| gulfed In the sweep Of popular resent
ment in every State and district OF
the country. Tammany withstood the
shock Of the electrical cloudburst better
than any other Democratic orRaniza-
tion in tho United States. The detection
from her ranks was insignificant com
pared with the result elsewhere. In 1890,
when Mr.. GRANT was candidate for Mayor,
there was a Democratic tidal wave through
ont the United States which carried Re
publicans to defeat, giving only 81 Re-
publicans to 237 Democratic Representatives
in Congress. Mr.. GRANT, at that election,
received 116, 900 votes for Mayor, and Mr.
GoRNAN, his associate on the Tammany
ticket for the Office Of Sheriff, received n
total OF 100000. At the recent election
Mr.. GRANT received 10S, 900 votes, and Mr..
SoBMER, the Tammany candidate for
Sheriff, i1e 1000. Actually, therefore, there
was decrease Of 5000 votes on the Mayor
and gain Of 10000 votes on the
Sheriff for Tammany in 1894 compared
with 1890. Nor must 1t be forgotten that,
while at the recent election Tammany
fought single-handed against combination
Of seven organized adversaries. the Tam
many ticket in 1890 had the more or less
valuable numerical support Of many of
those who had been prominent in various
stages of its establishment, and Of the State
or Reform Democracy, notably Mr.. REPPEN-
HAGEN, Mr.. SMELL, Mr.. KUNZENMAN, MIKE
DUFFY, and others Tammany Hall was
the strongest organization participating in
the recent election.
Such are the reasons why politicians think
the Tammany primaries should not be post
poned until June. There are others, too
The boundaries of the various Senate dis
tricts have already been definitely and un-
changeably fixed by tho Constitution, and
all that remains for the Board of Aldermen,
as Supervisors, to do in June will be to sub
divide them into Assembly districts. 1t so
happens that not more than three Of the
present Tammany leaders are residents of
any one of the Senate districts and therefore,
no district leader in Tammany need be dis
turbed. The resolution of Judge MCMAHON.
it is pointed out by those opposed to it,
defers the organization of Tammany for
1895 until latter such time as the redis-
tricting shall be made" But the amended
Constitution says that any apportionment,
either by the Legislature "or by any other
body" shall be subject to review by the Su-
preme Court, at the suit of any citizen; and
it is not unreasonable to suppose that what
happened in 1892 may occur again in 1895,
and that the apportionment to be made by
the Board of Aldermen will be attacked on
partisan grounds If it is. with Tammany
in minority in the apportioning Board,
Tammany men would he the sufferers
from any manifestation OF partiality or
unfairness and weeks, perhaps months may
elapse before the Assembly district appor-
tionment is finally adopted. In 1899 the
validity of the Democratic apportionment
was not upheld until within a very short
time of the election; and under Judge Nc
MAHoN's motion, September, 1895, may
find Tammany unorganized by districts for
the battle of November.
Manifestly. RICHARD CROKER was absent
from the meeting Of the Tammany Execu-
tive Committee; and the absence of a strong
hand at the helm in Tamnany was equally
ON that occasion.