The Montgomery advertiser., 1908-12-19
DrmocHAFIc sTAY-ATlHoME vor-
 Ens,

the recent election is far from being dead. ss some easily discouraged peo- pie argue. Even under adverse cir- cumstances and the disinclination of the independent element to vote for Mir. Bryan s.4oo.oop votes were cast for him as the nominee of fhe Democratic party. If all those votes could be centered upon a man for whom the in- dependents would vote he could be elected. If Mr. clevelands idea in 1900 as to getting back to old prin< cipIes were well founded then they are infinitely more so now. An effort was made in 1904 to get back to old Dem- ocratic ideas. but the feeling of ador- ation for Mir. Bryan was so intense in certain parts of the country that Judge Parksr's campaign was but lit- tie better than farceaHe went down under a greater adverse vote than Bryan did in is9s and 1900 The solid South, with Missouri and West .vir- ginia outside the fold. was all that he had to. show. Having an intimate ac, quaintanes with many of the men who were really interested in the success Of Mr. Parker. we can truthfuIiy say that long before the election none of them .believedS he had. the remotest chance of success. ], There was never Q funeral with more distinctive ear marks than those around Democrats head. quarters in New York a week before the election in 1904.
 From conservative viewpoint there was no objection to Judge Parker. He had occupied the highest judicial place in the State of New York. His Demo- cratic record was anassaiIebie even from the Bryan standard. having twice voted for the Nebraska candidate ! when hundreds of thonsaads of other Dsmoer4ts rsfdsed to do SO He was however. not the choice of Nlr Bryan who did what he could at the conven- ton to defeat him. dramatically casting the vote of Nebraska for ex-senator CockrelI. ''southern brigadier" Just why he did this is one of those things which only an adept in the occult sciences win ever be able to unfold The general belief was that 1t was his way of emphasizing his opposi- ton to the nomination of any man who did not more thoroughly agres with his views than did Judge Parker The attitude of thousands was. nov you have nominated your man, elect him if you can" That sentiment wat confined to no section of the country and we had as the result the election of Mir. Roosevelt by the unparalleled plurality over the Democratic candi. date of 2.541.0oo. In 1900 McKinley'l plurality oyer Bryan was sso. 900 about one-third that given four year. later against Judge Parker, yet Roose, velt's vote in 1904 was only 4o0.ooG greater than McKinley's in 1900. How then was this wonderful landslide tC be accounted for? A brief, examina. ton of the facts will show that i was not due to Democrats vot ing for the Republicans but tc the refusal of Democrats to vot. for their own candidate. For in. stance in Missouri in 1900 Bryan re- ceived 352.0o0 votes and Mckinley 3i4,- 900 votes, Democratic majority oi I ss,oOO. Tn 1904 Judge Parker received in the same State 2Ss,OoO votes and Roosevelt s2i,00O. a Republican ma. jority of 2S.OOo. It will be noted that while a Democratic majority of ss.oot in 1900 gave way to a Republican majority in 1904 of 5,00Osa change oi sS.o0O votes. the Republican vote 1T the latter year was only 1000 greater than four years before. The Demo
 cratic vote was. 5s.ooo less It wal the stay at home Radical Democra
 who did the work of transferring ont of the States hitherto impregnabl, Democratic over to the Republicans The demoralization following such { course was not cured by 1908. for tn, state again gave it's electoral vote t, the Republicans, but by the narrow margin of 1000 votes,
 The most fragrant case, however, O. Democratic stay at home policy, wal in Illinois. The vote in that State ir 1900 was Mckinley 5ss.OOO. Bryan 5O8,
 900. In 1904 the vote stood-Roose
 welt ss2,OOo. Parker s27.OoO. Thii showed gain of only s6,OOO for tn, Republicans in four years and a fall
 ing of of Democratic votes of 17s,OOO Illinois voted for Cleveland in 1892 Other eases could be cited, but tnes, are sufficient to show that it was no
 the tremendous volume of votes cas-
 for Roosevelt which gave him in 1sol a plurality of 2,5Oo,OOO, but the fail ure of Democrats to so to the ponI and cast their votes.
 IT WAS SINGULAR.