The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1896-12-17
GERS0N'S, L,,i,' KS Ave.
TROUBLESOME ELECTION BETS
Light Shed on Some Dark Points in
Connection with Recent Election.
From the PHILADELPHIA Press.

From the Philadelphia Press.
Though the presidential election is
settled beyond controversy ana per-
adventure Mckinley having had the
rare good fortune to secure majority
in the electoral college, majority of
the states and a majority of the popu-
lar vote, the gentlemen who bet on the
election have some difficulty in deter
mining who should have the stakes. At
least we infer SO from the large num-
her of letters received here. and APP
parently at other newspaper offices,
asking for "A decision on the disputes
which have arisen as to the proper dis
position of the stakes.
The terms plurality and majority give
a good deal of trouble in some quar-
ters This is not to he wondered at.
since the word majority is often used
where plurality is meant, and we have
seen newspaper decisions to the effect
that bet that a candidate would win
by a certain majority is gained if the
candidate has a plurality Of that num-
Der of votes. \ plurality Of votes in
elections is the excess which the high
est candidate has over the next high
est. a majority is the excess which
the highest candidate has over ali the
other candidates combined. Major
MCKinley's apparent popular plurality
over Bryan with a few states still to
hear from officially is 725,i4S. His APP
parent popular majority over the votes
Of all the other presidential candidates
ty-three out of forty-fivc states and
his majority in the electoral college is
81.
Those who bet that Mckinley would
have 100000 majority or plurality in
Pennsylvania have lost their bet. Nc
kinleys plurality in this state is 295,-
OI0. His majority over all is 262 2i3.
The tables of the election returns in
Pennsylvania give Mckinley and Ho-
bart 72S,30O; Bryan and Sewall, 427.-
l2I; Bryan and Watson. 6.lO3 This
makes Mckinley and Hobart's plurality
over Bryan and Sewal .l73. But
Bryan is entitled to have the Bryan
and Watson vote placed to his credit
The electors on the Bryan and Watson
ticket are exactly the same as those
on the Bryan and Sewall ticket
Though they occupy separate columns
on the ballot the distinction was in
tended only to catch Populist votes for
Bryan and does not operate in the
counting, since the scattered votes for
the same electors must be punched to-
gether, and if they are Bryan electors
their total vote should 'be placed tC
Bryan's credit.
In Ohio the same condition obtained
as in Pennsylvania. The Mckinley and
Hobart ticket has a plurality of 81 lOs
over the Bryan and Sewall ticket. But
the Bryan and Watson ticket pOlled
2,6l5, and as it had, as we understand
exactly the same electors as the Bryan
and Sewall ticket. they will be added
together to determine the total vote OF
the Bryan electors, reducing McKin-
ley's plurality over Bryan in Ohio tC
4S,494. Mckinley carried KentucKy by
a small plurality-25S. Even though
through blunders in marking the bal.
lots Bryan did secure one of the thir-
teen electors. the state must he cred.
tied to Mckinley, since he has a plu.
rality by comparing either the vote fol-
the highest electors or the average vote
for all the electors on both tickets.
Election betting is contrary to gooC
morals and it operates to disfranchist
the bettors in some safes. Nevertheless
so far as such bets beget a thirst fol
accurate information and close defini
tiOns. they may not be without a Ger.
tain educational value