The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1905-11-10
Governor Herrick's Wall.

discontented; pretending to sympathize
with reform, he deplores the tendency
Eof the people to vacate principle for
prejudice .; disclaiming any knowledge
Of the reasons for his defeat, he con-
cludes his wall by giving a list Of sub j
jeets on which he appears to have dit.
fered radically from his constituents,
acts the people defeated him, they did
right, for under the same circumstances
he should do the same again.
Here, then, we have a clear cause OF
controversy between the governor OF
Ohio and the people of Ohio. The peo-
pie wanted certain laws and the COVER.
nor vetoed them. They rejected the
governor in order to show that they
still wanted those laws and were d1ssat-
isfed because they had not gotten them.
The Situation under this new election
in Ohio becomes logical and understand
"a BILE; to every one except Governor Her
rick, He, apparently, is of that school
of politics which demands that the peo-
pie Of the republican party vote the
republican ticket whether they like re-
publican officials and their acts or
not. His argument is that. because the,
country at large is prosperous, he should
have had all the republican votes in
Ohio, whether he gave the people the
kind of administration they desired or
not. This is the very argument of Pen
rose in Pennsylvania and Of Murphy in
New. York. It is also the very argu-
ment against which the people set their
faces sternly1 in the last election. Gov
ernor Herrick would say that, whether
|. he could give the people good admin
istration, according to their notion, or
because the railroads are hauling
great deal Of freight and the farmers
are husking an unprecedenteds amount
of corn. But the people having thought
it over, concluded that the farmers
would continue to husl1 corn and the
railroads to haul freight whether Her
rick was governor of Ohio or not.
| Therefore they felt free to seek a gov
ernor who would give them the temper
ance legislation they wanted, who would
protect them from the encroachments of
the brewery trust, who would give them
effective examination Of public offices;
. who would, in short, do for the. state Of
Ohio the things the state of Ohio wants
done.
Herrick's defeat is significant of
three things:
First-That a candidate for govern
or or any local office cannot make his
appeal safely to mere party regularity
Second-That the people will not
elect a man on noHsequitur. They
will not choose their local officers on
national issues, but will judge men on
their. record. without reference to party
rames. --..
Third-4A big partizan majority is nc
protection to the organization The
bigger the majority the bigger the land
slide. The contagion of doing GOOD
spreads much more rapidly in thickly
populated places than in sparsely settled
localities. Pennsylvania republicans
had no trouble whatever in overturnine
a republican majority of 100000. The
democrats Of New York found it easy
to roll up 225,O00 votes against the or
ganization because they were Disguised
with it. The republicans Of Minneso
ia found it easy to discriminate to the
extent of $4,000 votes between repub
Hcan candidate for president and re
publican candidate for governor.
The time was when the politicians
would have been able, to calculate by
how much Of a "reduced majority
they could pull an unwelcome candidate
thru. But those times have: apparently
gone. There is no longer a politica
arithmetic which comprehends thu
landslide. If there ever was a doubt
whether the people acted wisely in re
jecting Herrick his public statement re
solves that doubt against him. 1t shows
him incapable of e comprehending thu
spirit Of the voting Of his day. -
Wilshire's says such men as Bryan ant
Hearst are not leaders but followers. LIE
the workingmen show them -. 1000, 90
votes for socialism and see how quickl,
they will get on the bandwagon. Yes
| show them