San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1897-02-11
CONTRIBUTED SCRAPS.

The most phenomenal circumstance
connected with the recent election for
city officers was the vote received by
Mr.. r. B. Johnson. who ran as indie
pendent candidate, in the face of the
fact, that there were three full tickets
in the field, with their executive COM
mittees, hired ward heelers and cam
paign funds to boost them
In the face of these disadvantages
and against these great odds, Mr..
Johnson polled within a fraction of
900 votes.
A comparison of his vote with the
vote received by the other independent
and single handed candidates, i. e.:
running on no ticket but on his person
al popularity, will show that Mr.. John
sons vote was so phenomenal as to
justify him in feeling proud of it.
1t often happens that an Independent
candidate polls a large vote, because
his opponent is unpopular and many
desire to defeat him, and would vote
that result.
Messrs. Herff, Dreiss and Mccormick
the opponents of Johnson, on the three
tickets in the field. were old and we'll
known citizens, with large family con-
nectiOns, who would never have been
placed on their respective tickets, in
case they had been known to be per-
sOnally unpopular. They had their
tickets to help pull them through.
Messrs. Herff and Dreiss are Ger
mans, and. for that reason, had a
pull on the German vote, for most ma
tionalities are swayed, more or less,
by spirit of racial clannishness in vo-
ting.
Mr.. johnson received nearly half as
many votes as Mr.. Dreiss and Mr.. Nc
Cormick and nearly third as many
as were cast for Mr.. Herff. He has
a right to be proud, under the circum-
stances, of the vote he received.
Mr.. w. H. Huston, independent can
didate for recorder who has been in
the city for a longer period than Mr..
T. B. Johnson, and who held several
public positions here, received but $50
votes, and Mr.. NewcOmb, independent
| candidate for mayor and better equip
| ped for that Office than any of his
competitors, received only So votes.
Not a single candidate on the three
tickets in the filed, received S64 votes
| in excess of the vote cast for his tick
ct.
| The vote cast for mayor sggrega-
| ted 7,40S out of about $500 registered
voters, consequently 1900 voters de-
clined to vote for any of the candidate
for mayor. None of those candidates
| suited them.
If we subtract the vote for judge
| Callaghan-3O67, from the aggregate
vote cast for mayor-74OS, we find that
| 4,341 voters in the city attested by their
! votes through the ballot box, they did
not desire him to be mayor. The COM
bined vote of Levy, Elmendorf and
Newcomb exceeds the vote of Gala
CHAN 1924 votes.
against Callaghan, the 1900 registered
voters, who declined to vote, we have
6,241 votes, against Callaghan and g.
067 for him, or, in other words, more
than two-thirds of the registered vo-
tiers of the city opposed to his being
mayor.
AS he received more votes than any
one of his competitors, he is lawfully
the mayor-elect OF San Antonio, al
though the majority OF voters cast
their votes against him-the proportion
being 3,067 for him and 4,S41 against
| him. He is the mayor Of the minor
| ity of the voters, as is shown by the
| above figures, which are copied from
the Light of Feb. 9Th.
The campaign for CallaghaR was
Napoleonic in dash, vigor and COM
pleteness Of detail and arrangement
No brass bands, nor fire works were
called into requisition. No man was
hired to ride up and down the streets,
bawling for Callaghan in the voice of
| Stentor. Nor was a piece of bunting
stretched across the street, with Cal
laghan's likeness emblazened on it.
His campaign was so silently and
quietly conducted, as to throw his OPP
| ponents off their guard and to cause
their campaign managers to under
rate the strength possessed by Gala
CHAN, and to induce them to overrate
the strength of their own tickets Both
Of those mist a lyeS have Drpyad fatal