The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1896-11-27
lIInts the loIlowIng toble.
Total ........ ........l,C25 ,so7 I,gUl2l

Our first comment IS that the Constitu-
ton is considerably of in its addition.
Clcvcland's vote in 1892 was not 1.G2G.e07
MS the Constitution has it. but l.6s6.SS7. ass
anyone can determine for himself by
casting up the figures. That makes the
alleged gain 29O.35i. instead Of 5000. as
the Constitution claims.
But. even with this correction the
statement is about as misleading as our
Atlanta contemporary could have made
II. ia the first place. it will be observed
that four Of the States mentioned, to-wit:
Alabama. Georgia. Louisiana. and Viz
ginia gave Cleveland in 1899 about G. 1000
moro votes han they gave Bryan in
1895. and the Constitution fails TO state
that Maryland. West Virginia. ana Ken
lucky. which were Democratic in 1892.
and In every other presidential election
since the solid South came into exist
once. I'm the late election were transferred
TO the Republican column. But that is
not the point. The votes which the Con-
sttution counts for Bryan. in the States
above named were not all Democratic
votes, but the votes of Democrats. Popu-
lists. Silver Republicans. and all other
advocates of free coinage combined. Just
how many Democrats voted for Bryan
will never be known, but we do know
that in 1872 the Populist vote for Weaver
in the States named by the Constitution
was as follows:
AINU0Uld -. -. ....ss sss CNflNl
- i.'.i'"' F'.'f ''''''. '''' A'f''4
ftOildi 80. ... ........... ............. 4,oij
p'oIhid ''''. ''.s'-' $500. '''.'''.. . 4Z'''f
N'h'uNhy .'"' $4,000. ''' '''s.' '.s -'''"'
LOUISIANA ...... ..... ........ ........ INV
Mississippi ....... ..... $500. ........ l0,llS
MISSOURI ..... . . ..... .s........-..... qlf-lj
North Carolina ..... ..... ........ see. A, 40
South tdroInd ....... - ...... ....... Z,fui
tennessee -. -. -. ....... -.... D,ff'
ltAttS ....... ........ ...... ,....s .... H',taS
Virginia So. ....-...... ....-- ..--.-.. l2,Z.5
IOtai .--...... ..... 80. ...... .......f5O,l JOG
1t IS certainly a conservative estimate
TO say that as many Populists voted for
Bryan in 1896 as voted for Weaver in 1892.
TO say nothing of the silver vote which
he received from the Republican party
and other sources. But putting the entire
silver vote outside Of the Democratic
party at 4s0.lO6 we have a net Demo-
cratic loss Of 10000 in the States in ques-
ton.
What did the Constitution say? Let US
have the exact words. We quote:
Some Of the newspapers Of the East
nave been loudly claiming since the re-
cent presidential contest that the nomi-
notion AH Ar EVssup MO- "a oYauf IToxr
TO the Democratic party in the South.
IL is claimed that in comparison with
the vote of 1872. the Democratic loss III
the recent election was signally heavy.
OF course. It is not intended by these
organs TO reflect upon the personal char
acter Of Mr.. Bryan, but rather upon
the platform adopted by the Chicago con-
v%ention. SO far as the qualifications OF
Mr.. Bryan as a great leader are con-
ccrned, every fair minded critic must
recognize his commanding genius, but
even with respect to the platform on
which he stood, the wisdom OF the con-
vontion has been overwhelmingly APP
proved by Southern Democrats.
Instead Of losing votes in this section,
IL is shown by the returns that 350.Ou0
more votes were cast for the Democrat
&c ticket in the last election than in 1872.
Tho following table gives the exact Zig
urc5:
And then follows the table above
quoted.
But we have shown that the figures of
the table ere not exact; that, accord
inc 10 the Constitutions own showing.
four States named show n big Demo-
cratic loss: that three Southern States
ara lost 10 the Democratic party; and
that. instead of being a net GAIN there
g. n net loss to the Democratic party OF
10000 to the Democratic party. leaving
ont OF the account the losses IN west
Virginia and Maryland.
II the followers Of Mr.. Bryan can ma
any comfort IN this showing, they are
welcome 10 st.
IMPROVEMENTS IN
Mt(lfINIS.