Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1901-05-23
THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEES
Excellent Ticket Nominated at
Saturdays Primaries.
CAPABLE MEN WERE SELECTED
The Party Leaders Delighted
With the Result.
j. Harvey Whiteman the Nominee for
Mayor, and William #. Kurtz for City
SoIicitor--Democratic Counciimen Who
Sought denomination Were Successful.

A ticket which all voters OF Will
mington can support at the municipal
slection on June 1st, regardless of politi-
cal affiliations, was nominated by the
Democratic party On Saturday after
noon. 1t isas follows:
For Mayor. Harvey Whiteman.
President of City Council William
8. Alexander.
City Treasurer William L. Hamann.
City Solicitor-Wiliam f. Kurtz.
Assessor and Collector: Northern dis
trict--Benjamin r. Rawnsley Southern
district Eugene M. Sayers.
Members of City Council: First
ward-George A. Willis.
Second ward-Michael E. Cannon.
Third ward Thomas M. Monaghan.
Fourth wnrd-James Kane
Fifth ward = Charles d. Bird.
Sixth ward Frederick w. Heiss.
Seventh ward-Samuel j. Newman.
z Eighth ward-William j. Johnston.
Ninth ward--Prince A. Mousley.
Tenth ward-Joseph E. McCafferty.
Eleventh ward-Hairy R. Smith.
Twelfth ward = Charles M. Iebley.
The nominees are all we'll -knowI citi-
zens of ability and each man is fully
qualified to fill the position TO which
be aspires. The party leaders are de.
lighted over the result, knowing that q
ticket la presented to the people which
needs neither introduction nor recon-
mandation.
There were several interesting con
tests, but all were friendly and each
terminated with the nomination. Conee-
qnently all of the nominees are assured
Of receiving the full party vote, and
there is every reason 10 believe as a
result of the high standard OF the
tlcket,it willreoeive the united support
Of the Independent vote and also the
assistance Of many Republicans who
realize that that is the only sure way
to administer blow to Addicksism in
city politics. 1t seems, therefore, that
4 the outlook for Democratic success is
very encouraging.
The CONTEST for the mayoralty nomi.
nation was between Mr.. Whiteman and
DIR. J. Harvey Spruance. David W..
Hughes, who was also candidate, cut
no figure, having three less votes than
were as follows: Mr.. Whitenian, ], 751 !;
DR. Spruauce, 1898; Mr.. Hughes, 449.
Mr.. Whiteman carried II of the 81
primary districts, the other four being
carried by DR.. SEruance.
The only other contest on the general
ticket was for city solicitor, Mr.. Kurtz
defeating Howell s. England by vote
OF zoos to 1876, q majority Of 682.
Both men are popular and each had
many friends working for him. The
party could not have made mistake In
nominating either. Both are young mon
and each is qualified to fill tho position.
With the exception of John e. Healey
OF the Tenth ward and James b. Oberly
,of the Twelfth, all of the Democratic
members of the present City Council
were candidates for denomination, and
each was successful. Several had no
opposition, and received the full party
vote in nearly every instance as folie VS. i.
Third ward-Thomas M. Monaghan,
1908; Eighth William j. Johnston, 229;
Ninth Prince A. MuusleY, 1914. New
men we're nominated in other wards as
follows: Fifth Charles D. Bird, 1863;
Sisth-Frederick W. Heiss, 1866; Seventh
Samuel j. Newman. 1862.
In the First ward George A. Willis,
the present Councilman from that ward,
defeated James j. Corrigan by vote of
l25 to so. In the Second Councilman
Cannon triumphed over William H.,
tried men in the political arena were in
the field in the Tenth ward, contestinR
for Mr.. Healey's place in Council.
They were Joseph e. McCRfferry, a
blacksmith, and Patrick L. Walsh, a
plumber. Both are young mrn aud
popular and it was thought the conf test
would be very close, but when the vote
was counted it developed that Mr.. No.
,Cafferty had trium phed with 261 votes
TO spare, the vote being as follows: Mr..
McCalferty, 423; MIR. Walsh, leg
In the Eleventh ward Councilman