The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1900-12-25

bryan ana INC fOpuiui NV
There have been several tables of the
official presidential vote published. and
one of the latest is from the Omaha Bee
which IS printed in another column In
this. as in others that have been pub
lished. the vote of some of the minor
parties is lacking. but the general result
is shown and the figures are sufficiently
approximate for use in drawing conciu-
sions on the result of the last campaign
According to these figures Mckinley
received 7.207 269 votes in 1900, as compared
with 7le7.soi in 1896. Bryan received $685.
027 in 1900. as compared with e.5S3,0So four
Years ago. Mckinley made very no
ticeable gain over the vote OF 1896, while
his competitor lost. McKinleys plurality
of 1896 was the largest in the popular
vote ever given to a presidential candl-
date except in the case of Grant In ls12
when the successful candidate had plu-
raiity of about $4,000 This year Mckinley
carried the country by plurality OF more
than $4,000, in campaign where the as-
gregate vote OF the two great parties
was 1862. 2sG. This was an increase of
between eo.Ooo and 10000 over the vote of
the last preceding election
There Is more or less significance in
these figures. Mr.. Bryan made claims that
he would receive vote of over six mil
lion and a halt" and for several days
after the election his supporters. while
admitting that he had been defeated
claimed that he had received a popular
majority. He and his supporters might
have been sincere. but 1t turned out that
he and they were totally ignorant of
American sentiment. and the overwheim-
ing defeat of this year has shown that
the people are now more opposed to the
principles and policies advocated by the
Bryan Democracy than they have ever
been before. The vote this year for the \
two great parties was greater I'm the ag.
sregate than In any previous campaign
and the loss Of popular support sustained
by Mr.. Bryan well warrants the COM
ments which have come from Mr.. Cleve-
land and others in the last few days.
II has been the rule in the United States
until this year that when rwe presiden-
tial candidates OF great parties confront
who was beaten Ia the first instance
would win in the second. Adams beat
Jefferson in 1895 and was beaten by JEFF
ferson in 1896. John Quincy Adams de-
feated Andrew Jackson In 1924 and was
overcome by Jackson in 1928 Van Buren,
defeated William Henry Harrison in 1885.
but when 1s40 came around and the log
cabin and hard cider campaign OF that
year was closed. II was found that his OPP
ponent OF four years before had won a
great victory. His grandson. Benjamin
Harrison. defeated Cleveland in 1883. but
was worsted by Cleveland in 1892
This rule, which had been sustained for
a century. was broken in the recent con-
test between Bryan and Mckinley: and
ar the same time the usual run Of presI-
Dental voting in the states of New York
and Indiana was interrupted. These com
monwealths have been osciilating from
one party to another for a quarter of a
century, and II was Bryan's turn TO win
in 1900. He was defeated. however. and
worse than in the previous campaign The
reason for 1t all was that the American
people would not tolerate Bryan or what
Bryan represents. He was not the cam
didate OF the best that there is In Ameri-
can Democracy. and because of that fact
the traditional rules ~ presidential cam
paigns were overthrow. Had Bland or
Boies or Hill been nominated In 1896. the
Democracy would now possibly be united
and working along the old lines. but with
the nomination OF Mr.. Bryan came the
effort to cater to all that Is repugnant 70
the American people and his second re-
lection ought to convince those who have
followed him and glory in the fact Of be-
ing Bryanites that his cause is one that
will never triumph. and that his future
candidacy Is something absolutely out OF
the question.
Gov. Pingrae L. a man who reneraiIv