Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1915-10-20
SUFFS WIN But
SINGLE WARD IN
THE WHOLE CITY
Eighth Votes for Suffrage, but
Others Are Strongly
Opposed.

Despite a vigorous campaign waged
for many months in an effort to Sc
cure equal suffrage, the leaders and
followers of the movement were able
to secure a majority in only one ward
in the city at the special election.
This was in the Eighth ward. strong
Republican section. where the ma
jority in favor of equal suffrage was
an even ninety. In all the other fifteen
wards of the city the suffragists met
with a crushing defeat. The total vote
cast was, "Yes" 1S,047: NO" 24,222,
making a total majority against equal
suffrage of 11.175 in the city.
In some of the strong Republican
wards the leaders exhibited an in
difference as to the outcome, with
the result that the contest, where
this feeling predominated, was very
keen. Practically every polling place
in the city was manned with per-
sonal workers, all members of the
Women Suffrage organizations. They
worked from early in the morning
until late at night, making personal
appeals to voters, distributing litera-
ture and spreading their propaganda
In the hope of victory.
Political leaders generally. both in
the Republican and Democratic ranks,
were more than surprised at the great
interest in the election They had
predicted a light vote. but their pre-
election opinions were reversed, due,
in measure, to the persistent and
complete campaign made by the sur
f,.ot futc nf NJ
| ieved that the heavy vote was due,
in a great measure, to the fact that
il was the last opportunity to regis
ter for the general election. This pre-
| diction did not come true, since the
vote in the early morning hours was
| heavy.
At the City Hall, where the returns
| for the city were made. the first dis
| trict arrived at $3.50 o'clock and tlli
| last district came in at 1;45 o'clocl
this morning. Some of the election
boards began to count their votes a
the close of the polls, at 3 o'clock
while others worked on the registry
list. Women watchers carefully kept
record of the count. There was no
dissatisfaction officially expressed as
to the manner in which the boards
conducted the election.
1t was a source of keen disappoint-
ment to the local leaders of the suf-
frage movement to find that but one
ward in this city was carried for
their cause. In districts where they
expected to receive a majority, the
results were entirely opposite.
The Eight ward contest was close.
In the first district the vote was:
Yes. 40; no, 1877. The second dis
trict was lost by thirty-two votes.
The third district was lost by four
votes, while the fourth district was
carried by forty-one votes. A ma
jority of nineteen was polled in the
fifth district, while the suffragists Sc
cured q majority of siXty-siX votes
in the sixth district. The vote in the
seventh district was divided by a ma
jority of one. the total being: Yes.
129; no, 130. In the remaining seven
districts the antis secured three dis
tricts while the suffragists secured
four ditricts.
Suffs Get R0seville.
The Eleventh ward, which embraces
the Roseville section, was lost to the
suffragists by forty-three votes. A
strong suffrage organization had been
at work in this ward, and favorable
results were expected by the expo
nents of "Votes for Women" The to-
tai vote was: Yes, 1.240; no, 1928. The
First district was lost by three votes
likewise the second district. Nineteen
votes separated the total vote in the
Third district, while the "suffs" only
lost the fourth district by two votes
The suffragists carried four of the
remaining 5even districts.
In all other wards of the city the
CONTINUED on Page 2, Column ~