The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1897-04-25
APPEAL TO DEMOCRATS
10 IGNORE NATIONAL ISSUES IN
THB STATE CONTENTION.
How the Free Coinage of silver Affected
the Eesult Last November-Earnest
Plea for Harmony


To the Democrats OF Virginia.:
That there are two factions IN ,he Lem
ocra'ic party in every state In the Univ"
cannot be controversial, that this CON
dition resulted from the action =.
the National Democratic Convention
which met In Chicago IN Jul,
last must be admitted that the ieNoi'
against the platform adopted at sdlu IN IN.
yention was widespread ana SUI o''-
must be conceded, when the resu,. -
the election In November 1870 lol ii1
ident is considered.
But let US lay bare the facts SO nc
none can cayil, or question these
ments. ta
The Democratic States OF Connec.i-
cut, Delaware. Indiana, kentucky' 49,.
land, New Jersey, New YORK anu 49, 49,
Virginia with % electoral No''S -
carried by the Republicans by PoP''''
majority OF AS. 1859. ,,s,o
The Republican States OF Sa' 49,. ''|
Illinois ana Wisconsin with 81 eieO co..
votes which went for Cleveland III io,,'
returned to the Republican Coi"N'"
popular majority of 2s'o0'' r-,,
In the following Southern S'a'es 80,
ans maiorities were cut uo"h -.
Cleveland's in 1892 as here sNe"' .,,,
ida,3SJ2. Georgia, 46gl5; LOUISIANA ~, 49,.
North Carolina. 1898; tennessee see -i'''''
and Virginia, 3l,37l. Total llo'oo-'
This falling off in these states was i,
spite Of the Populist vote receinSu W
Bryan. which I'm 1902 was cast for weaver
as follows: Florida. Ash: Georgia. E.93i;
North Carolina, 1888; tennessee @''ff''
and Virginia. u 275. Total lS,2SS
But for the Populist vote Georgia,
North Carolina and Tennessee would
have gone for Mckinley and IN virginia
Bryan's returned majority would nave
been reduced to about 300.
Tho only States in the Union carried
bv Bryan which went for Harrison IN
1902 were Montana. Nebraska, South
Dakota and Wyoming, with an aggregate
electoral vote Of IS
Never in the history OF the Democratic
party, except in 1872, was there "ltHin
its ranks such vigorous and pronounc-
ed opposition TO the declaration OF prin-
ciples by it's representatives In conVeh-
ton assembled. The great leaders drew
back and refused TO give their sanction
10 the platform or support 10 the nomi-
nees. Leading Democratic journals IN
every State filed their columns with at
tacks upon the action Of the convention
and repudiated aimost every plank as
contrary TO the established tenet5 OF
Democracy.
The consequence was the defeat OF the
Chicago nominees by a popular majority
OF COL l6 and a majority OF nearly a
hundred I'm the Electoral College. ana
the Generalization and disruption Of the
party which had In the preceding hve
national contests carried the country on
the popular vote four times. lost II once
by only 1000. won the Presidency three
times. and came out of its defeats before
the Electoral Commission and In the
Electoral College with its ranks IN order
and its lines unbroken. In sixty years.
with the exception Of 1850. when it had
two candidates douglas and Brccken-
ridge) and in 1872 when Greeley was the
nominee. mover has the Democratic party
met with such popular reverse as IN $50.
with an united party Bryan ought 10
have had about 6.22i0o0 Democratic votes,
yet his vote after deductlng from Il the
Popuiist vote OF 1902 with its increase or
four years. was 5.2SS, 992 which was nearly
100000 less than the normal Democratic
strength including the increase, and Dr.
e2G less than Cleveland's strength.
SO much in brief for the country at
large.
Let US now look particularly at the
results IN Virginia. An examination
shows that in this State Bryan ran many
thousands behind Cleveland in 50 coun-
ties and in all the cities. and that his
gain IN the remaining counties was very
little in the aggregate. 1t further shows
that deducting the Populist vote from
him he fell behind Cleveland in 50 coun-
ties