The Monmouth inquirer., 1924-11-06

South Dakota ........... 10000
Washington Northumberland 100000
Wisconsin ................ .3l5,UOD
His vote In other States varied
from 1000 or less In Arizona to about
$4,000 In Maryland.
The forecasts by the Progressive
Party leaders that La Toilette and
Wheeler would carry Illinois, Ohio
and probably a few Eastern States
were not made good. In both Hi
nois and Ohio Senator La Toilette
w. Davis, Democratic nominee, and
the Wisconsin Senator received only
fraction Of the total vote given to
President Coolidge
In New York State, where the back
ers of La Toilette had predicted that
the Progressive ticket would carry
New York City. La Toilette was Il
bad third. La Toilette received fewer
than half the votes recorded for Mr..
Davis, and President Coolidge beat the
Third Party candidate in New York
five or six to one. Most of the La
Toilette strength in New York, as in
other Eastern States, was concen-
trated in few industrial centers.
In Massachusetts,, where President
Coolidge beat Mr.. Davis six or seven
to one, Mr.. Davis beat La Toilette
more than two to one. Even in Bos-
ton, city which La Toilette leaders
had protested confidence of carryingA
Senator La Toilette received but q
negligible vote.
In Connecticut, another State where
the Progressive Party leaders claimed
great strength, early returns showed
that President Coolidge was getting
more than six votes for each given
La Toilette and that Mr.. Davis was
leading La Toilette about two to one.
Poor Showing In South and West.
The Progressive Party had expected
to run first or second In New Hamp-
shire, according to the predictions
made, but the returns indicated that
President Coolidge would beat Sena-
tor La Toilette by fifteen to one or
better, and that Davis was running
ahead of La Toilette at the rate OF
eight votes to one.
Another example of the collapse Of
the La Toilette movement was sup
piled by Indiana, where President
Coolidge was running about twelve to
one ahead of the Third Party candi,
date In the early returns, and John w.
Davis was running ten to one ahead
of La Toilette.
In Michigan, another State swept by
President Coolidge, the La Toilette
Wheeler vote was an unimportant
factor, and La Toilette was third. In
dications were that President Cool
idge was beating the Third Party can
didate about eight to one and that
John w. Davis had two-and-one-half
to one lead.
The same story was repeated In
Ohio, where President Coolidge OBJ
tanned an overwhelming plurality.
President Coolidge was leading John
w. Davis by about two to one and La
Toilette by better than five to one.
Ohio was one of the States where tho
La Toilette movement expected to
show great strength, as 1t is the
stronghold of the railroad brother
hoods. But the result showed that
Senator La Toilette was scarcely a
factor In the contest.
The result in the Southern States
was just as discouraging from the
Third Party viewpoint In Kentucky
President Coolidge led La Toilette In
the returns by about four to one, and
in Tennessee the Wisconsin Senator
was third, with but small fraction OF
the number of votes received by John
w. Davis. In Oklahoma Senator La
Toilette received less than 1000 out
of 10000 votes recorded In the early
returns received.
In the Middle West Iowa, a State
which the La Toilette leaders ex-
pected to carry by a big majority,
President Coolidge early obtained
commanding lead and there was every
indication that the President would
get heavy plurality in the final re-
turns
-