The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-10-14


-Counclmen at Large
ROBERT NJ MADDEN, ALBERT f.
! RAUCH, JOHN II. MAHONEY, THOMAS
J. MONTGOMERY, JAMES H. COSTEL-
10, ALBERT HARSTON.
Ward Councilmen-
First Ward-wILLIs F. SMITH Dem.)
Second-JOHN r. ALLEN (Rep)
Third-JOHN II. GRAIL (Rep)
Fourth-THOMAS A. BOWSER (Rep.)
Fifth-RICHARD MERRICK (Dem)
Sixth--EDWARD D. MOFFETT Dem.)
Seventh-GEORGE w. SHAFFER Rep)
Eighth-JOHN A. Won SPRECKELSON
(Dem.)
Ninth-FRANK S. CLARK (Dem.)
Tenth-GEORGE r. Golfer Dem.)
Eleventh-JOHN H. SCANLON Dem)
Twelfth-JAMES w. MGREW Dem)
Thirteenth-EDWARD E. BERNAUER
(Dem.)
Fourteenth - WILLIAM w KNIGHT
Dem.)
Fifteenth-JOHN NJ. HIGGINS Oem.)
The official canvass of ths election re-
turns made yesterday shows that the Dem
ocrats elected all their candidates except
councilmen in the Second, Third, Fourth
and Seventh wards The total vote cast for
the mayoralty candidates was 81 403, which
was several thousand short of the vote that
was expected The official figures show
Taggarts plurality to be but 1914, COM
pared with 3722 in 1895. Police Judge Coxs
plurality was but 1863 showing plainly the
efforts that were made to knife him, and
the popularity of Judge Stubs as well.
Two years ago his plurality was 1,1S7 The
little judge gained in the two years 1S1
votes, while Taggarts gain was but 80
votes. The most surprising gain was that
of City Clerk Stuckmeyer, whose plurality
is 2,223, as against ILL in 1S95-a gain in
the two years of 1106 votes. Taggart, of
course ran considerably ahead of his tick
ct, receiving 20, COS votes. Charles +. Smith,
contrary to general expectations, ran ahead
of John F. White on the Citizens ticket,
the latter polling 256 against AGA for Smith.
The Prohibition candidate, Samuel j. Will
son, received 1874 votes. Philip II. More,
the Social Labor candidate, drew 153
votes. The total vote cast for Mr. Hard
ing was 16 191. 1t has been estimated that
there are now $1,000 voters in Indianapolis.
AS but S7,4OS votes were cast some 5000
voters remained at home. And this largely,
in the big Republican wards north of
Washington street Had half the Republic
ans who stayed at home gone to the polls
to do their duty, there would have been
more than enough to overcome Taggarts
ties the total vote for the candidates
Independent and otherwise was 1907.
There were some surprises in the coun-
cilmanic contest. On the ticket at large
Charles w. Brown ran 1872 votes behind
Conrad Keller who led the Republican tick
ct with 1881 votes John A. Puryear, the
other colored candidate the Republican
ticket, was defeated by a vote of .435 to
l35O the plurality of Edward d Moffett
being IS votes. In this ward William II.
Burford, candidate on the Citizens ticket,
received u votes.
Frank s. Clark was reelected in the
Ninth ward, the prejudice against him on
account of his connection with the Came
well scandal not being strong enough to
defeat him. His majority was greatly re-
duced. He received but "A votes more than
John f. Richards, the Republican candi-
date Evidence of the dissatisfaction of
Democrats with Clarks candidacy is found
in the fact that Herman Mitschrich, on the
Citizens ticket, polled 70 votes more than
any candidate on that ticket polled in any
one other ward.
A DEMOCRAT IN THE FIRST
The official figures seat Willis f. Smith
in the First ward instead of John c. Roach,
as shown by the earlier returns. The Demo-
crat has plurality of AZ votes. George w.
Shaffer, present Republican incumbent from
the Seventh ward. was reelected by ma
jority of IL votes. he receiving 1887, against
1926 for Pritchard.
The Democrats were regretting yesterday
that they had not paid more attention to
the North Side wards and were claiming
that with proper management and jude
ious use of money one or more wards in
they have seventeen of the twenty-one
councilmen.
Below is given a recapitulation by wards
of the vote of Tuesday for mayor, police
Judge city clerk and councilman at large,