The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-07-25
1t Is Thought that Not More Than One
Vote to the Precinct Was
Thrown Out.
M'GREGOR CARRIED TWO WARDS
HE a SMALL M~AJORITIES IN THE
NINTH AND FIFTEENTH.
The Vote for Charles n. Elliott for
City CIerk-Tabie Showing
the Vote by Wards.

The Republican election commissioners
put in the greater part of the day yester-
day in canvassing the primary returns, and
it was not until 8 o'clock in the evening
that Chairman Logsdon was enabled to an
nounce the official vote. The returns from
the l95 precincts Of the city show that there
were 11,047 votes cast at the polls on Tues
day, exclusive Of the votes which were
thrown out because they were mismarked.
1t is impossible to say just how many
voters marked their tickets incorrectly, but
it is thought it would average about one TO
every precinct, which would make the total
vote about 1l,250. This is considered a re-
markable turnout of the voters, and Re
publican leaders feel deeply gratifed at the
interest shown.
The official vote gives Mr.. B~ookwalter a
total of 7,211, or a majority over Mr.. Nc
Gregor of 3,375. McGregor having received
but 3,SS6 votes.
1t was thought on Tuesday night that
Bookwalte had carried every ward in the
city, but the official count discloses the fact
that McGregor carried the Ninth ward by
a majority of IL votes and the Fifteenth
ward by a majority of % votes. In most
all OF the wards on the South Side Nc
Gregor ran his opponent a very close race,
but on the North Side Bookwalter received
large majorities in nearly every ward, nota-
bly, the Third. in which he received LOIS
votes to McGregor's 81. the Fourth, in
which he obtained 81 votes as against
McGTegor's lSS, and the First ward, where
he received $50 majority.
HI VOTE FOR ELLIOTT.
Charles n. Elliott. who had no opposi-
ton in his candidacy for the nomination
for city clerk, secured S,S46 votes, running
2.20l votes behind the total number of votes
cast. This decrease in Mr.. Elliott's vote is
accounted for by the fact that many did
not vote for him because they knew he
would be nominated any how and there
was, therefore, no reason for placing the
mark in front OF his name.
Probably the greatest surprise to those
who had been keeping an exc on the diff
ferent fights OF the various candidates was
the nomination of George w. Stubs for
the great majority of those who were in
different about the selection of a candidate
were firmly impressed With the idea that
however, gives Judge Stubs a majority OF
twenty seven votes over both Collins and
Holmes, and a plurality OF SIS votes. StUpbs
received. sos, Collins 4,175 and Holmes sol.
Judge Stubbs got his heaviest vote in the
Second, Seventh, Fourteenth and Fifteenth
wares. Collins carried bat two wards in the
city, the Eighth and the Thirteenth. The
Vote in several of the other wards, how
ever, was very close.
With one exception the six candidates at
the head of the ticket, for co~uncilmen-at-
large, were nominated by a vote ranging
from $500 to 500. The exception was Brice
L. Brown, who was G few hundred votes
behind the other fve men and was beaten
by Edward @. Sourbicr. Those who received
the nomination were Harold G. Megrew,
5,275; John l.. Mcfarland, 5.165; J. S. Hol-
liday. 1893: Harry NJ. Halderman, 1916;
Lewis w. Cooper, 4.9Il; Edward u. Sour
bier, 4,257.