The Democratic advocate., 1896-12-12
Queer Figures From oeio.

From the Washington Daily Post.
Of course the recent election will continue
to be described as a Landslide in favor of
sound money. The term enjoys great popu-
larity 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 cleo
ton was spoken of as Landslide" for Mr..
Cleveland, and although it afterward turned
out that Mr.. Cleveland did not receive as
many votes in 1892, when ne was elected, as
he did in 1888, when he was defeated, the
Landslide went, just the same.
We have had, therefore, another landslide
this year. The honest and patriotic voters
have turned out in overwhelming numbers to
crush the serpent of fbimetallism and the honor
of the country has been upheld by its loving
and proud sons. We may be permitted to
say, however, that nowhere has this outpour-
ing 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 develop
ment of its voting capacity. No State came
within sight of it as producer of surprises.
Ohio this year gave 49, 900 votes for Bryan.
This is 10000 more than it gave Cleveland
four years ago, and is the largest vote ever
hitherto given by that State to any candidate,
Democratic or Republican. 1t is 10000
more than Campbell received last year, and
4S, 600 more than Bushnell, Campbell's sue
eessfnl competitor, received. The biggest
vote ever received by any Republican candi-
date up to 1896 was Bushnell's vote in 1895,
aud that was 427 900. This year Bryan beat
Bushnelrs vote by 4s, 900, and yet he is re-
ported as defeated by, say $4,000 majority.
If, therefore, Bryan received 475,e00 votes,
and Mckinley $4,000 more than that the
total vote of the State, counting in the $500
Populist votes cast by error, mast have been
1,000, 900. Add to this the vote of the Prohi-
bitionists and the Socialistic- Labor Party, and
we reach grand aggregate of, say l, 100, 900.
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
1890, is less than 1000, ,000-to be specific
$685., 900. The generally 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
10000. Ohio is great State, however, for
in 1895 it developed total vote of $40, SOC
nearly 100000 more than she was entitled to
under the one-fffh rule. The campaign was
tremendously exciting. 1t brought out as
they said at the time, every voter in the State.
Some skeptical persons suggested. in fact,
that it brought out great many thousands of
voters from other States But this year the
wonder grows. This year Ohio, responding
to the clarion call of necessity, produces
299, ,494 more voters than it produced in 1895,
when it astonished the world by its achieve
ments in the voting line. Where in the name
of reason did these 259, 494 extra voters come
from? Did Ohio increase in population L.
600, 600 within year. or does Ohio depart
from the to rule, and show. instead of
that, to 81 of the proportion of her voters
TO her popuIation?