The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1910-11-01

Interesting IA an example of the
Sort Of political arguments Republican
organs are now employing TO keep ZIP
their courage is the following contribu-
ton of travelling correspondent Of the
Tribune setting forth the upstate view
of the present situation:
: -up-s,At. leaders Are very an xious abou- New
YORK city. which they get no line, They
cay New ork must hold up TO the 1904 vote for
HuaHKs Tha, was low HUaHEa los, New
York city by about si.co. while WAITE. running
for Llea,enan, Governor. los, by only so.oD,
A falling or In the ups state Republican vote ia
sKpecsed and can be handled. they say. II ony
REV YORK city I. up tn IN. MARI. Indication.
srs now that this falling 81 won't he 90 bod a.
wss,fcsred a week ago. still It will cost many
x1tRs aboye the Harlem. even allowing the urmos,
mich can be expected nom the new Stimson
tUead.-
~ What the prospect Of keeping the
Democratic plurality in this city down TO
6l 600 IN can hest be Judged by reference
20 the figures in thu, last state elections
in Of years. that is in 1895 when
Mr.. ROOSEVELT ran: in 1902. when Gov
ernor OpELL was reelected. and in 1905
when Mr.. Hughes headed The Re-
publican ticket. In 1893 the Demo-
cratic plurality in this city was - $40.
In 1902 il was n, S33. and in 1908 il was
above laOOOO for all the Democratic
candidates below the head Of tho ticket
and ~ O6I for him. This disparity be-
tween Mr.. HEARsTs plurality and that
Of his associates IL explained by the vote
in Kings county where the McCarren
following cut Mr.. HEARST hut supported
all other Democratic candidates
,t. A glance az the figures for the Presi-
DENTAL years indicates how little value
they have for any student Of OF year
elections Thus in 1898 the Democratic
plurality in this city was $3.50. but two
years later the majority Of the Demo-
:. cratic candidate for Governor was but
"a. 2s3. In 1902 the Democratic plurality
ll<was about ia, 900. but in 1904 il dropped
70 Sc.fsi. In 1905 the average plurality
for the candidates on the Democratic
'6tate ticket below Governor was above
10000. yet in 1905 the plurality of the
Democratic candidate for Governor
barely exceeded 10000.
To base the hope Of Republican victory
fn the State upon the possibility of hold
ing the Democratic plurality in the city
below the figures il has touched and ex-
Ceoded az the last three State elections In
on years ID, therefore. to concets the de-
feat Of the Roosevelt ticket In advance.
Tho fact Is that each Of these elections
has aean q notable increase In Demo-
crnfic pluralities In this city. and any one
funfliar with existing conditions In this
~ WIN recognize that ali promise OF q
eAnngs this year Is utterly lacking.
Thetruth IL that the most conservative
polatical observers believe that the DEM
oorssjo plurality in this city next Tues
day win reach the Coler figure Of ia. 900,
/ and that it may even pass the Chanler
plurality Of 1905, which approximsted
100000. Not since 1904 has the Demo-
cratic plurality in this city in a State
election fallen below tho irreducible
---ssahum OF the Tribunes correspond
81, md zach election has seen a mount
sng total. The value Of optimistic con-
illusions based upon such premises is too
66vious to require debate.