Norwich bulletin., 1912-11-29
WILLIAM BELcHER WAS
 HIGH MAN ON TICKET.
Democratic Elector Received the Most
 Votes in This State.

While the official election returns, as canvassed and declared, deal only, as far as national tickets are concerned, | with the electors of president and vice president, in calculating the vote for President Taft, Governor Wilson and other candidates for the presiden- cy, with their running mates, the high est figure for an elector on each ticket is given, thus following the custom which governs the tabulating of the vote in the Connecticut Register and Manual. ExGov Frank B. Weeks is the high man on the republican ticket, and Norman F. Allen the low man, the difference between their votes being 1,S1O. William Belcher who has the highest vote on the dem ocratic ticket, has 1,296 more votes than Henry /McManus. who has the lowest. A difference of 666 votes sep arates W. Edwin Butler, who, has the big figure on the progressive ticket, from Marcus L. Floyd, who has the little figure. The other differences between high and low electors are as follows: Socialist, 2O5; prohibition, 77: socialist labor, 13. The votes for presidential electors follow:
 Republican-Allen, 66.514; Wood ruff. 6s,279; Bryant, 6s.256; Goss, T. 244 Mowry, 6S,166.
 emoeratic-McManus 73,265; Coyle, 74,562; Belcher, 74,561; Cary. 74485; Tanner, 74.494; Perry, 74,485; Fisk, l 74,409.
 Progressive-Floyd, ss,52s: Butler, 34,129; Borglum, 34,0SS; Brinsmade, ! 34.0S5; Allen, S4,0s9; Hammond, 34, ] 103; Cosgrove S4O06.
 socialist-Clarlz, 9,S51; Barnes, 1o.- O43; Andrews, 10,056; Plinkett, 11,,051; | Ryan. 11.054; Muzzy. 10,049; Lezotte, 10O49
 Prohibition-Manchester, 1891, Stan ley, 2,0e3: Platt, 2,06S: Darbie, 2.062; Todd, 2,061; Knapp, 2,05S; Benedict, 2,060.
 Socialist 1abor-suessbrich, 1,247; Mentze, 1.26O: Knotek, 1,256; Feldman, 1,257; MareE, 1.253; Arnold, 1,25S! Bigelow, 1.259.
 It is not usual for electors on the same ticket to vary so much in their votes. and it is doubtful if it ever hap pened before.
 It will be noticed that all of the | electors at the head of the ticket ran | behind their associates, but it must not | be supposed that this is evidence of their unpopularity The principal req son for the smallness of their vote is found in the Australian ballot, which i fooled many of the voters, beyond a 1 doubt. The name of the elector at the head of a ticket was very close to the words "Electors of President and Vice President" and it is evident that vot- CTS carelessly overlooked the fact thai a candidates name appeared in this l space, the result being that the nom inee failed to get the benefit of lit tie cross mark and lost many a vote | in consequence. Had Connecticut been closer, the failure of voters tc mark the first elector might have haC seious consequences, leading to division of the electoral vote of th'
 state, for, while the highest demo-
 cratic elector had 6,237 votes more | than the highest republican, the mar
 gin between the low man on the dem
 ocratic ticket and the high man on tht republican was less than 1000.
 The Australian ballot did anothe,
 thing, in cutting down the scattering
 votes at the first presidential electiol
 in Connecticut at which it was used
 At other elections it has been neces
 sary to count for the sake Of ac
 curacy. votes cast for men of who's
 names the voters were not quite sur
 and at which they made "stab" aft
 CT getting to the polls. With tn
 Australian ballot giving the names O
 the candidates of all parties the vote
 can usually find what he wants o his pink paper and has no excuse flo
 writing in the name of 'J. Jones, when the name of John J. Jones
 on the ballot, ready to be marked There were half a dozen votes cast i the state for presidential candidates which were In the scattering class, be ing given by men who did not care bother with a middleman like a presi dential elector. but wanted to vote di rectly for the presidential candidate Wilson got four of these votes and Tai
 and Roosevelt one each.