The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1904-12-07
AIT DEMOCRATS
WERE {: ] .|' { {: J.
Overwhelming Defeat Of WysoiA
by slclnp Hard to
Explain.
THE POLL TAX 4 THEORY i . !
Report Of Payment OF These
Fees by Republicans Is
Insufficient.

The overwhelming defeat OF Hon. J. c.
4 wysor by Colonel Campbell Slemp In the
4 Ninth Congressional District on NOvcm-
her 9Th, came MS IL complete surprise to
many Democrats, and they are ut loss
low to account for the tremendous Re-
publican gain In that district when the
party made no noteworthy gains in The
other districts. Many explanations have
been given, many causes for the decrease
of the Democratic and the increase Of the
Republican vote have been suggested, but
many admit they are wholly unable to
n explain the result. Some attribute Colo.
mol Slemp's recollection by lac unprccc
z: dentcd plurality OF 3,ol7. whereas lie was
4 elected over Hon. William r. Hhea two
years ago by but 2is majority, to the lib
eral use Of money by the Republicans for
the payment OF poll Staxcs or ncpubicHn
voters and to other expenditures OF qucs-j
tlonablc legality.
In The light of intelligent comparison of
the figures of the two elections. how
ever, t,tis claim s not fully borne out.
IT appears that many Democrats who
L voted for Mr.. Rhen In 1902 did not vote for
z Mr.. Wysor In 1904 but whether they were
qualified to vote and remained away from
the polls through apathy or whether many
OF them changed their fcalty and voted
( for tho Republican, candidate. are mat
T tcrs for speculation. which Will probably
never be determined absolutely " Il
In 1902, Mr.. Rhca carried Buchanan
Craig. Dickinson. Giles. Russell Scott
washington and the city OF Bristol. lack
ed two votes Of carrying Pulaski; fifteen
!; OF carrying Bland. and flfty-one ofscarry-
II ing Wythe. In 1901, Mr., Wysor lost
Buchanan, Dickinson, Russell Scott and
Washington; lost Wythe by over two
hundred. aud Bland by sixty-onc ma
jority no carried Pulaski, his home
& county by Quo hundred and foIty-four
majority: Craig county by Il slightly In;
3 creased majority. and Bristol city bya
considerably decreased majority. The
Republican vote In tile district IN 1904 in-a
creased 1893 over that III 1902. while tho
!. Democratic vote In 1901 decreased ] 1906
compared with that cast for Rhcn IN 1902,
Republican Increase.
From these figures 1t would appear that
even with the poll tax TO pay, the Repub-
q leans vote increased nearly 2, 900 over that
I, OF 1900. when payment OF the tax was
not required as a prerequisite TO suffrage
On the other hand, the Democratic vote
III 1891, with the poll tax prerequisite do
creased nearly eighteen hundred, COM
pared with 1ae. when there was no poll
tax requirement. Even though II Is adj
& mlttcd that many Democrats lost votes
does not account for the even greater
Republican vote despite the poll tax re-
aulremcnt- IT Is plain. therefore. that
j 1888 men in the district who had former
II voted the Democratic ticket or who
s aid not vote at all in 1902. voted the Re-
publican ticket In 1901. 1t Is rather a
coincidence that almost tina number
voted for Rhea In 1902 and did not vote
e for Wysor In 1901.
s5 Here Is a table OF counties showing the
Democratic gains or losses and the Re-
publican gains or losses In 1904. compared
with 1902:
Democratic losscs-Brlstol city, EOS;
Bland. 81; Buchanan. 14s: Dickinson, 29;
Lee. 300; Russell. A32; Scott. 296; Smyth,
I'll: Tazewell. 96; Washington. 1885,
Wythe, So. Total losses. 2o36.
Democratic Gains-Craig, Sc; Giles. 49,
Pulaski tAlr. Wysor's home). 1sS: Wise.
Colonel slemp's home), 49, Total gains
In district over 1902 vote, 200.
Republican gains-3rstol city Az Buch-
4 nnan county, 1856; Craig. &c: Dickenson.
lit; Lee. 80; Russell. FOG; Scott, 1871;
ssmy,ll, 147; Tazewell. 1856; Washington.
$40; WISE 26S: Wythe. 13l. Total Re-
publican gains over the 1902 vote, 1867.
49 Republican losses--Bland, 81; Giles, 6;
Pulaski {. Total losses compared with
1909 vote, 81.
Thus 1t Will be seen tho Democrats
s gained in but four counties over their
vote Tor Rhea in 1902. the total gain be-
Ing but 900, while they lost ,03G. net
loss In tho district compared with 1902
Il OF 1,746. The Republicans lost In but
three counties, compared with the 902
vote. and the aggregate losses We're, 81.
They gained in eleven counties and-eno
city total OF 1867. n net gain in the dis
trlct OF 1888.