Birmingham state herald. (Birmingham, Ala.) 1895-1897, 1896-11-28
OHIO A GROWING STATE.

AS the final returns from the Noven-
Der election are made public and calcu-
lations and comparisons are made it be-
comes more and more evident that in
the use of the unlimited corruption fund
against which he had authority to check,
Hanna found but little trouble in pro-
curing several states for Mr.. Mckinley.
regardless of the will of the voters. The
Washington Post. an independent news
paper, has the following to say of the
election in the state of Ohio:
OF course the recent election will con-
tinue to be described as a Landslide" in
favor of sound money! The term enjoys
great popularity among the newspapers
1t is effective, a metaphor of the utmost
force, and when employed with skill and
discretion, Is almost certain to put an
end to argument. 1t was the same in
1892. That year, also, the election was
spoken of as a. Landslide for Mr.. Cleve-
land, and although 1t afterward turned
out that Mr.. Cleveland did not receive
as many votes in 1892 when he was elect
ed, as he did in 1883. when he was de-
feated, the Landslide" went, just the
same. - r-7.
We have had, therefore, another land
slide this year. The honest and patriotic
voters have turned out in overwhelm-
ing numbers to crush the serpent of BIZ
has been upheld by it's loving and proud
sons. We may hetpermitted to say how
ever, that nowhere has this outpouring
been so tremendous and so significant as
in Ohio. New York and Pennsylvania
did nobly. They gave majorities truly
colossal, but no state approached Ohio
In the development of its voting capacity.
No state came within sight of it as q
producer of surprises. Ohio this year
gave $4,000 votes for Bryan. This is
10000 more than 1t gave Cleveland four
years age, ana Is the largest vote ever
hitherto given by that state to any cam
didate. democratic or republican. 1t Is
ITO, 900 more than Campbell received last
year, and $4,000 more than Bushnell,
CampbeIrs successful competitor, re-
ceived The biggest vote ever received
by any republican candidate up to 1896
was Bushnell's vote in 1896 and that was
$4,000. This year Bryan beat Bush
nells vote by $4,000, and yet he is re-
ported as defeated by, say $4,000 majority.
If, therefore, Bryan received 475,000 votes,
and Mckinley 80, 900 more than that, the
total vote of the state, counting in the
1900 populist votes east by error. must
have been 100000. Add to this the vote
of the prohibitionists and the soclalistic-
labor party, and we reach grand aggre-
gate of, say 1,100,O0e.
wonderful outpouring, truly.
But where did. all these votes come
from? The total population of OHIO, as
estimated last year by the secretary OF
state, based upon the calculated increase
over the census Of 1890, is less than 4,000,-
000--to be specific, 3,S25,000. The general
ly accepted theory, verified by statistics
without number, is that the voters are to
the population, Of any given state as one
to five. BY that well-established rule
the total vote of Ohio should have been
765, 600. Ohio is a great state, however,
for in 1895 1t developed a. total vote of
$40, 5O6-nearly 100, 00o more than she was
entitled to under the oneyffth rule. The
campaign was tremendously exciting. 1t
brought out as they said at the time,
every voter in the state. Some skepti-
cal persons suggested, in fact. that it
brought out a great many thousands of
voters from other states But this year
the wonder grows. This year Ohio. re-
spending to the clarion call of necessity,
produces 259.494 more voters than it pro-
duced in. 1895, when 1t astonished the
world by it's achievements in the voting
line. Where in the name of reason did
these 259.494 extra voters come from ?
Did Ohio increase in population 1.008,-
900 within a year or does. Ohio depart
from the to rule and show, instead
of that, 1 to 8 2-3 as the proportion of
har fp har mi