The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1896-09-13
POPULAR AND ELECTORAL VOTES
Some Interesting Facts About Presi-
Dental Candidates.

two Presidential elections where there
were not at least three tickets offered for
votes. At the same time. the cases in
which more than two such tickets have
received any electoral votes are excep-
tions to the general rule.
! In the early days of the government.
when each elector voted for two candi-
dates, the candidate receiving the largest
vote becoming President and the one
who received the next largest becoming
Vice President there were naturally
many names in the field. Thus in 1883.
while Washington received the entire SO
votes, the second choice was divided
among John Adams. "a; John Jay 8; John
Rutledge and r. II. Harrison, each;
John Hancock, 4; George Clinton, 3; Sam
uel Huntingdon and John Milton, 2 each;
James Armstrong. Benjamin Lincoln and
Edward Telfair, l each; while four ballots
for second choice were not cast. In 1892
! there was more concentration, Washing
ton receiving the entire 1872 votes for re-
election, while John Adams again led for
Vice President, with n. followed by
George Clinton with so, Thomas Jefferson
with 4, Aaron Burr with /, and four bal
lots not cast.
In the succeeding election John Adams
received II votes; Jefferson, 68 Thomas
Pinckney 80; Burr, 30; Samuel Adams, 49,
having a few votes each. Then, in 1900
Jefferson and Burr, of the same party, re-
ceived 70 votes each, while Adams had g.
G. G. Pinckney, 81 and Jay /. The House
had to choose, Jefferson becoming Presi-
dent and Burr Vice President but the
constitution was then altered, as to cleo
TONS to its present form. The result was
very concentrated voting in 1904. jefferson
and George Clinton received 1852 votes each
against IA each for c. c. Pinckney and Ru-
fus King.
The four succeeding terms, those of
Madison and Monroe, offer little for COM
ment, unless it is in the heavy majorities
of the winners, and the few scattering
electoral votes. But in 1924 came another
election which was thrown into the House.
In that election Andrew Jackson polled
155. S72 popular votes and 80 electoral; John
Quincy Adams, 105,32 popular and 81
electoral Henry Clay, 46, 5S7 and 81; w. H.
the voting was quite as peculiar, Calhoun
having 1S2 votes and being elected, while
Sanford had 3d. Macon, "a; Jackson, 10;
Van Buren,. 8; Clay, 2. Mr.. Adams was
elected by the House. In 1923 and 1892 Jack
son was elected by a heavy popular vote
and a still heavier electoral vote. In 1886
Van Buren's popular vote was 1859, but
the wing vote aggregating 1866 was di-
vided electorally among Harrison, White
Webster and Mangum
With 1910 we come upon a series of cleo
lions in which there are repeated in
stances of third parties and fourth par
ties represented in the popular vote, but
not at all in the electoral vote. That
year Harrison, WING, received l,2750l7
popular votes and 234 electoral votes,
while Van Buren,, democrat, received
1,12S,702 popular votes and 60 electoral
votes. Birney of the liberty party receiv
ed 1853 votes. The same three parties,
substantially, appeared in the three sue
ceedng elections. Polk, democrat in 1914,
won by 3S,l75 popular plurality over Clay
whig, in poll of about 100000; and by
an electoral majority of 40 to 105. Birney
had $500 votes but secured no elector.
In 1S4S, when Taylor, whig, was elected
over Cass, democrat the free soil candi-
date, Van Buren,, polled 29l.263 popular
votes but no electoral vote. In 1852
| Pierce, democrat. beat Scott, whig; and
! John p. Hale's 156, 149 popular votes, as Il
free democrat, brought in no electoral
votes
In 1856 came a somewhat different Sc
ries of results Buchanan. democrat, poll
ed 1888. 1863 popular votes and ia electoral
while Fremont, republican, polled 1884,
264 popular and ia electoral votes. The
third party with Fillmore, American,
| polled &4, 5A popular votes and only s
electoral. But peculiar and suggestive at
| the present time as is this Fillmore vote
| il was outdone in the election of 1860
when Lincoln. republican, with a popu-
| lar vote Of 1856, 352. received $50 electoral
votes, or a clear majority. while Doug
| las democrat, received 1,375,157 popular
! and only - electoral votes; although
| Breckenridge, democrat. with S45.76S. re-
| ceived 70 electoral votes, and Bell, union,
! with SIS, ISL popular, received 80 electoral
| votes. This election~ forcibly illustrates
the difference between the popular and the
electoral votes.
| The alertioOS NJ 1874 nd 1853 ehouyad Oply
two candidates in the field, Lincoln
| against Mcclellan and Grant against
! Seymour. But in 1872, when Greeley was
nominated against Grant, his death be-
| fore the time for the electoral balloting
caused his vote to be split among four
candidates for Presidents while the electo-
raj votes for Vice President were still
more divided. Grant and Wilson, how
/ ever, had received the enormous popular
plurality Of 1891. the largest in our his
| tory, and they swept the electoral vote as
! decisively. Charles OConor democrat
polled 29.4OS popular votes, and James
Black. temperance 5,60S, but neither re-
ceived an electoral vote. In the election
of 1876 Samuel ]. Tilden received a plu-
rality of mere than 100000 votes over
| Hayes who was declared President by the
eight-to-seven commission. Peter Coop
er. greenback. at that time received 81, 10
popular votes, Green Clay Smith, prohi-
bitionist, received 9,522, and Walker,
American, received 2,6S6. but none of them
had electoral votes. Four years later
when Garfield received the narrow plu-
/ rafity of T,01S votes in a poll of over 9000-
600, but from the electors PA against 1856
these same three minor parties were rep
resented, and the greenback party, under
| Weaver, increased its poll to 307, 306 votes,
yet did not carry an elector. With $50, 5SI
| popular votes. Bell, twenty years earlier,
had secured 80 electoral votes
In 1884, when Cleveland defeated Blaine.
receiving a plurality of only 626SS in over
| 100000 popular votes, an aggregate Of
2S5, 634 Of the latter were cast for the pro-
hibition and peoples candidates. st. John
and Butler, but neither was represented
electortally. In 1883, when Harrison was
elected receiving fewer popular votes than
Cleveland, there were 29, 907 for Fisk, pro-
hibitionist. and 14S. los for Streeter, union
labor, with no electoral representa- ton;
| while much smaller votes went TO Cowdry
and to Curtis Finally, in 1892, at Cleve-
| lands second election, Viewers 104l, OPS
| popular votes succeeded in harvesting q
votes from the electors; but the prohibit
/ Zionist Cornf ~ RidWall 1gd and The