The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1899-01-18
IN OTHER SECTIONs-

The southern states show, upon a
similar compilation of majorities, that
there have been no losses in that sec
ton. While the popular majority for
the Democrats fell of in some Of the
southern states, in others. such as Nir-
ginia, Tennessee and Kentucky, there
was a very great increase in the Demo-
cratic majorities. holding the total
Democratic majority in the southern
states well up towards the total of
1886.
In the middle western states of Ohio,
Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin,
Minnesota and Iowa there was a mixed
result. Here the Republicans actually
gained over 1885 in the states of Ohio,
Michigan and Indiana. The Ohio gain
is claimed by the Republicans to be
very significant, and they assert that
this state VIII never go Democratic
again. The Michigan gain was due
wholly to the popularity Of the peculiar
Pingree, who, in the face OF a bolt on
the part OF $4,000 or $4,000 Republicans,
was still able to increase the Republi-
can majority almost 10000 over 1896.
In the other middle states the results
were less fiattering TO the confidence of
Republicans. The gain in Indiana in
maiorities was only about 100 votes In
Illinois the Republican majority fell off
a few hundred votes less than 100000.
liz wisconsin nearly 1900, and Mime
sofa aCLUallN Went LElllbtL6Llt DlA lAAE
head OF the ticket by z0,399.
The net loss in Republican pluralities
from those given in the middle western
group of states. in 1896, aggregated, In
e-act figures. 279190 This, too. al
though in several OF the states there
was no cooperation between Demo-
Gratis and PoDulists, and thus several
thousand votes We're lost which were
cast FOR Bryan in 1895.
This interesting and valuable compi-
Iation demonstrates that in the eastern
states alone, the Mckinley majority of
1896 in the entire country was Wlsled
ont. In the middle wester,, group, the
Republican loss aggregated 2l9,l9O
votes This brings the total ReDub-
Iican loss in the vast region between
the Atlantic and the Missouri and north
OF the Ohio and Potomac. beyond the
600 OOO mark As the southern states
held well ~ toward the total Demo-
cratic majOriues given in 1896, It VIII
be seen that Notwithstanding the con-
eressional reverses Of the Democratic
party in 1898, the people practically
gave them once again plurality Of the
popular vote
IN THE FAR WEST.
A Republican congressman, to whom
the statement just made was repeated
lv your correspondent, promptly re-
nlied: Yes ] know we lost heavily IN
the east. but We more than made uD
for il IL the west. If the states that
went for Mckinley made a bad show
ing in 1898, thqy have done IN this re-
soect Just about the same thing that
the western states which went for Bry-
an have done.
This expresses the general sentiment
snfong Republicans, but it does not
sdeouately state the facts. Here is a
compilation Of the returns from the
mountain states and their neighbOrs
which vert for Bryan, which has been
made by one of the retiring midrOad
TooDulisc congressman, and affords
ample proof that the Democratic or
silver losses in the west are not to be
compared with the Republican slump
IN the east in magnitude. The figures
IN this table are based Oh the presiden-
tiaI vote Of 1896, and on the vote for
Governor in each state except Montana
9rd Utah where the candidate for
chief justice was at the head Of the
fiol,et. While the aggregate for t.is
sToup Of states shows heavy apparent
democratic loss, the condition in all Of
them. as is well known, were consider
ably different from those existing two
years ago, as in each state q consider
able vote cast for the Bryan electors in
1896 by fusion arrangements were this
wear DETECTED from the Democratic
ticket, either by union Of the gold and
eiI,-er Republicans or the running of
independent tickets. The figures fol-
low.