The herald., 1896-12-30
) BRYAN'S VOTE IN
DOUBTFUL STATES

The public will remember that when
the press reports of the late election were
stating that Mckinley had swept all
the doubtful central western states by
| big majorities. that Chairman Butler
| would not concede McKlnley's election
even after other campaign managers
had given up. He stated that he had re-
liable information showing that Bryan
had made gains in states like Indiana,
Ohio, Iowa, Minnesota, California and
other states big enough to give him the
| electoral votes of these states by good
| majorities. Even when the state char
man in these states conceded that Me-
kinley had carried them, Chairman But
Ter said that he could not understand
| it, and insisted that there was some thing
wrong
The official count of the vote in these
! states is now coming out and they throw
| much light on the matter. The vote tab
| ulated in Ohio. Iowa, Minnesota and In
diana show that there is something
not only wrong but very rotten.
In Indiana the following are the COM
plete figures as taken from the official
| returns:
Democratic and Peoples 305. .425; Re
| publican, S23.S SOS: Prohibitionist S055;
Gold Standard. 2146; National, 22es; So
cialist Labor 1928. McKinley's plurality,
1s,40S; McKinley's majority, 961o Total
| vote cast. 637 ,O46
lowing vote: Democratic. 262, 740; Re
| publican, 255,615; Prohibitionist, 13,050
Populist. 2220S. Total vote. 553,613
This shows an increase of S3,433 votes
since the last presidential election.
| This is an unreasonable increase when
we consider that the last Republican
candidate was Mr~ Harrison and that
| he lives in Indiana. 1t was claimed In
| 1892 that Harrison brought out a re-
markedly full vote. Therefore there was
| little stay at home vote to swell this
| tremendous increased vote. The in
! creased vote would Indicate that the
| population of that state had increased
half million since the last election. and
| this is unrea sonahle, Another thing
that proves that this increased vote is
not straight is that nearly the whole of
it is counted for Mckinley. Just think
| of it, Bryan this year got 50,000 more
votes in Indiana than Harrison got in
| 1892. Now a man who could gain $4,000
of the votes that were cast fr Harrison
in 1892, would certainly get at least half
! Of the increased vote If it was not bogus.
| 1t is clear that the gold ring bought up
| election officers and stuffed the ballot
| boxes or made this increase in some
| other unlawful way and counted it all
for Mckinley.
Now let us look at Ohio. That state
this year gave 475.00O votes for Bryan.
| This is 10000 more than it gave Cleve-
| land four years ago. when the vote was
| so close that one of the Cleveland cleo
| tors was elected, and is the largest vote
| ever hitherto given by that state to any
| candidate, Democratic or Republican.
1t is 10000 more than Campbell re-
ceived last year, and $4,000 more than
| Bushnell. the present govern of the
state received. The biggest vote ever
received by any Republican candidate
| up to 1896 was Bushnell's vote in 1895,
q
| beat Bushnell's vote by $4,000, and yet
he is reported as defeated by. say $4,000
| majority.
! How was it done? The returns show
| that the total vote of that state this year
| is 259,7S4 votes more than was cast last
| year QS95). The contest in that state
| last year for governor was very eXcit
| ing one, and the vote was 100000 larger
than ever cast before in the state. The
Republicans tried to explain the great
increase then by saying that every vote
! in the state was cast then for the first
| time. On the other hand. the Demo-
| Gratis charged that votes were imported
and that ballot boxes were stuffed. They
| showed that the population of the state
was S.S25,O0O. and that counting enc
voter for every five of population that
| the total vote could not be over 765, 900,
/ while the returns showed $40. SOC votes.
| Now here comes a presidential election
| only one year later and the total vote is
25s,444 larger than it was last year
| There is something very rotten there.
No one can claim that the population
| of Ohio has increased over million in
| one year, and it would take such an in
crease of population to explain this in
| crease of vote, even If the election was
| honest in 1895. In short, comparing the
population and the total vote of Ohio
| this year, it would show that nearly
| Of three of
| lation Counting women, children, con-
victs and insane) voted. This is absurd.
| 1t is impossible.
| Yes there is something rotten in Ohio,
and if it can be investigated and the
| truth arrived at, it would show that
! Bryan carried the state.
| In 1882 Kentucky's total vote was
| 340.S .S4S. Cleveland received 175,461 and
| Harrison 1854 In 1895 Kentucky's
| total vote was 357 .057. In 1896 Ken
! tucky's total vote was 100000. OF these
Bryan received about 202,9S1, Mckinley
about 203,410. In Kentucky Bryan re-
! ceived at least $1,000 more votes than
| Cleveland received in 1892. and at least
10000 more votes than the successful
| candidate for governor received in Ken
lucky in 1895. But Kentucky's vote in
| creased abSut 10000 in one year. Where
did they all come from.
| Next let us look at Iowa. In 1892 the
| SolIlDllleu SleNeIdllC anu w edVeF vote IN
| Iowa was 216,000: Harrison's vote was
$4,000; total vote, 435.0OO. The total
| vote this year was $4,000, of which
Bryan received 223,000 and Mckinley
| 2S9000 This was a gain in four years
of 1000 votes. OF this gain Bryan re-
ceved 1000 and Mckinley 10000.
This was gain of no votes in each of
| the 100 counties of the state. Counting
five inhabitants to each vote. we have
an increase of population in Ohio in four
years of $3.50 to the county, total of
| $4,000!
The census of 1890 gives Iowa 1911, 900
| population. The state census, taken last
year. gives the population as 2,05S 900,
a gain in four years of 147. .000
If the vote this year was honest, and
the census of 1890 and 1894 correct then
Iowa has gained 23800O souls during the
hard times of the past year, whereas she
gained but $4,000 during the four sub
sequent years.
Could such thing as this happen? 1t
is absudr and shows that there is some
thing rotten in Iowa also.
Another most remarkable phenomenon
of the Iowa vote is found in the fact that
nine-tenths of the 10000 new voters
voted for Mckinley. This phenomenon
was also witnessed in Minnesota, where
every one of the $4,000 new voters of
that state voted the Republican ticket: