New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1908-09-13
WHAT NIGHT HAVE BEEN.

..,,, r,,ro,,ns+; Enouirer" specializing the
other day on what might have Deen, hsu'eu
ont that had Mr.. Bryan received l''ooV nv
votes than he did receive in 1896 ana hau h0
haen able TO distribute those votes Where lhe1
vould have done the most good, ne "oulu hafo
had majority over Mr. Mckinney III Tue
EJoctoraI College. This particular form OF
nostnortem investigation Is not new, slhc0
SENATOR William Joel Stone, Of Missouri, VICE
chairman of the Democratic National Com
ro,+tao In 1896 and 1900 once used some such
n,o+bod IN show how meaningless the popu-
lar maiorities of 1896 against Mr.. Bryan were
and bv how narrow margin he missed capt
uring the Presidency that year Inc Ell
o,,iror,, cites five states lost by the Demo
cro+io candidate in 1896 whose gain would
have given him the election. Ihose suites
were California, Indiana, Kentucky, oregon
and West Virginia. credited WIN lorlE-elsh'
electoral votes, in which the JOINT piuI amy
for the Republican electors was only 34S63.
G. +bo+ II aga votes. rightly distributed would
have made Mr. Bryan a winner instead OF
loser.
The demonstration is faulty in some details.
California for instance. is credited with ten
electoral votes. instead of nine, and Inc
ENQUIRER has forgotten that Bryan got one
electoral vote from California In 1880 anu
also one from Kentucky. Had he carried the
five states named he would have mad only 81
electoral votes-three short or majority. ~
win he would have been obliged to carry Dela-
ware also getting 1919 more votes there than
he actually did get But less than Zo,oVo 'u oeo
iudiciously placed would have reversed the 1896
verdict.
Of course II is equally easy to show that
less than 10000 additional votes for Mr. Nc
Kinley judicously placed. would nave re-
duced Mr. Bryans strength in the Electorai
College In 1896 almost TO the lever OF Juuse
Parker's strength in 1904. MI Bryan car
ried wyoming in 1896 by 5S3 votes oouth
Dakota by 1S3, Washington by l2'495, ran
sas by 10 $50 and Nebraska by 12493. osllls
tho Observation-Disclosures method, it can be
demonstrated that he would have iost "!o
ming bv a change of 800, South Dakota by
change of "a. Washington by a change OF
6 247 Kansas by a change of 6,l3o and Ne
brosl,o nv a change OF GAGS. A change OF 10
votes would have cost Mr.. Bryan his elector
from California and change OF 20 FoteS
would have cost him his elector from heh-
lucky With a net change of 1926 votes MT:
| Rrvan's total in the Electoral College would
have fallen TO 145, only more than Judge
Parkers,
These specuIations have the merit Of suggest
ing what power under our electoral system
may reside in small body Of voters in the
! closer states. A change of 525 votes In New
| York in 1884 would have given the PRESIDENCY
TO James e. Blaine instead of Grover CleYe-
land. Though over 100000 votes the country
over are cast in a Presidential election lie"
votes more or less in particular localities may
count enormously in determining the result.
1t is never safe. therefore. for the 1nd1Vlduai
70 neglect his duty citizen on the theory
that the popular tide seems TO be running
strongly in favor of his candidate. Each vote
may count, and count heavily, in certain con-
tinpencies The voter who loses his vote
through inattention or ignorance may ruefuily
ponder after the election on what might nave
been and shoIld have been the result.