The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1900-08-01
A Vofe-Getter.

A Vofe-Getter.
One OF the ephemeral leaflets whose
hue conveyed the hint that they blush
| ed for their origin, attempted to i'm
| press the people OF the state with the
| notion that they must nominate this
year a ''vote-getter," as. indeed. they
should. 1t is always folly. no matter
how assured the outlook. to nominate
son. come out with a good record from
the test Of the polls.
Nothing could be more instructive to
| the people OF the state upon the ques-
ton OF the relative merits Of the sew
eral candidates for governor as vote
getters" than the records OF Mondays
election. Mayor Humes. who was slat-
ed as the great and original vote-getter.
| suffered much damage on that side Of
his reputation. The fiction of his pop
plarity as a possible candidate was de-
stroyed finally and utterly.
II Is rather extraordinary that such
a delusion should have been entertain
ed. For. although Mayor Humes has
been wonderfully successful In obtain
| ing Office, he owes 1t to arrangements
prior to the voting rather than to
strength at the polls. From the flascos
to which he has lent his name down to
| the comparative vote at the city elec-
| ton last spring and the tally at Mon
days primaries, one gathers abundant
| and conclusive evidence that, while the
| voters have accepted him when they
must, he has been much weaker than
| his party.
Viewed In the light OF this last test,
| Mayor Humes as a vote-getter Is 90
| conspicuous a failure that even had
the plans of his supporters succeeded.
| party prudence would have prevented
| his nomination. In. this city he re-
ceived precisely the support that the
machine was able to line up for him.
| His votes could all be counted before a
ballot was cast. IT was the vote that
l
| cannot be counted beforehand, the
votes OF business men. professional
men. men who seldom go to the pri-
maries. that decided the result And
| OF these votes Mayor Humes got none
| at all. 1t was the fact that they were
cast. that these men voted. which dis
arranged and brought to grief the
| whole plan OF his campaign.
II the people OF the state are inter-
ested in looking for a ''vote-getter,"
they will turn their attention to Hon.
J. NJ. Frink. There are few men who
have achieved more signal success in
that role. He entered this fight with
only his good name, the loyal support
OF his friends and his reputation as
man and citizen to back him. He had
no machine. no pull. no control of mu-
nicipal agencies. no affiliations with
the elements that make up the floating
vote, and no barrel These are cir
cumstances which the average politi-
clan ls apt 10 regard as highly unfa-
vorable. Yet such was the strength
81 Mr.. Frink that his candidacy
brought the voters 20 the polls. An un-
precedented record for primary cleo
ton was made. Mr.. Frink's candidacy
not only controlled but practically cali
ed into being a heavy vote not usually
known 20 the primary election.
We think that 1t is good policy TO
nominate a vote getter'' for governor.
other things being equal We cali at
tention 90 the record as establishing in
a most remarkable way that this IL one
Of the qualities of Mr. Frlnk and that
| II Is consplcuously absent from the
meager list OF attractions alleged b adj
here to the candidacy OF Mayor Humes.
To men who study facts and aSures.
the fiction OF hts political popularity
was obvious long ago 1, is now So
| plainly demonstrated that a victory.
Instead Of the defeat that be has suf-
Tered in his own county. could not have
shaken Republican conviction that his
nomination would be the most danger
oas Of political mistakes. For the
reasons that make Humes weak and
FTink strong in King county apply with
more than ienfold force In every other
par, Of the state
The Sudden death of Duke Alfred OF
SAKE cohurg -Gotha. which win put
nearly every court in Europe In mourn.