Crawford avalanche. (Grayling, Mich.) 1879-19??, 1897-03-04

1t Will be seen by study or the above
table that the vote of 1892 was an unusu-
ally light one, being a gain of but SO
per cent over that of the preceding presi-
dental election. This is the lowest gain
made al any time in the quarter of a cen
fury which this table covers. The vote of
1892 was evidently the lightest in proper
ton to the voting population that has been
given within the period in question.
1t would not be surprising. therefore,
If the increase in 1896, compared with
1892, should be an unusually large one,
especially in view of the fact that the in
terest in the election was more intense
than was perhaps ever felt before, at
least in the memory of the present gen.
Grafton. An examination of the percent
age column, however, will show that the
actual increase over 1890 was only 1876
per cent, while in 1876 the increase over
the preceding presidential election was
301 per cent. and the increase in 1883
over that in 1884 was 1873 per cent. nearly
as much as 1896, on which occasion the
interest in the campaign was unusually
great and the efforts to rally every vote,
by both sides, were exceptional. A study
of this table will show to those who ex-
anime 1t that 1t cannot be successfully
charged that the total vote of the nation
in 1896 was excessive or out of proper
ton in it's increase, especially when il Is
| remembered that the vote of 1892 was
unusually light and that the percentage of
gain is estimated upon that light vote.
| In order to give, however, those who as
sumo an excessive vote in certain States,
the full advantage of every fact, let us
| examine the votes in the States of which
Mr.. Allen complains and compare them
with the vote of 1892, confessedly light
vote. Pennsylvania increased her vote in
| 1896 1874 per cent, as compared with the
vote of 1892, and Mr.. Allen complains
| that there was a fraudulent excess" of
"a 900 in Pennsylvania vote. He makes
no complaint, however, of the fact that
the State of Montana, which was as
earnest for the free coinage of silver as
was Pennsylvania against ii, increased
| her vote 21.9 per cent. Indiana increas-
ed her vote 14.7 in 1896, as compared with
| 1892. yet Mr.. Allen, whose party carried
South Dakota. makes no complaint of the
| fact that South Dakota increased her vote
| Ill per cent, nor does he refer to THE
| fact that Indiana, in the election of 1876,
| when she went Democratic, increased her
vote 26.3 per cent. Iowa increased her
vote 17.6 per cent, and Mr.. Allen charges
1880 fraudulent excess" of votes, but
makes no comment on the fact that North
Carolina, a Populist State, increased her
vote 17.S per cent, nor does he refer to
the fact that Iowa in 1876 increased her
vote 80 per cent. California increased
her vote o. per cent in 1896, as compared
with 1892, and Mr.. Allen charges $4,000
fraudulent excess" of votes, but makes
no reference to the fact that his own
State, Nebraska, increased her vote Ill
per cent in the same election. Maryland
increased her vote 12.9 per cent in 1896
as compared with 1892, aud although Mr.
Allen charges fraudulent excess" OF
500, he raises no objection to the fact
that ten States, giving their votes to the
Populist-Democratic candidate. increased
their votes in a much greater ratio than
did Maryland, nor does he refer to the fact
that Maryland herself. in 1888, when she
went Democratic, gained 1875 per cent
over her own presidential vote In the pre-