The Waterbury Democrat., 1937-10-19

These figures show that the ad- ministration candidate, in some manner, secured the support of 1262 more voters than he did two years ago. Some of these, 1t may be as- sumed, were the result of the exer- tons of the administration political organization in the dual task of en- rolling new voters and getting the party vote to the polls.
 It Is also apparent that there was an increase of l84l in the 1ndepen- dent Democratic vote. It Is not likely that any great part ot this increase came from Republicans That leaves as. it's sources the Demo- crats and the Socialists. Even aS- suming oil the Socialists voted the Independent Democratic ticket, the increase for that slate indicates 0 considerable defection from the Democrats. Taken with the in- creased total of the Democratic candidate, of course, this assump- ton also indicates that the Demo. cratic candidate really received. the support, in excess of that which he received two years ago, from more than the l252 indicated on the face Of the returns.
 The vote cast for the Republican candidate for mayor in 1887 was 0o7 less than that received by the Re- publican candidate two years be- fore, and this despite an increased total enrolment some of which represented new voters of the Re. publican persuasion.
 One of the developments of the Waterbury campaign was 0 letter from group of prominent Repub- licanS to the voters of that party, urging them not to vote the fusion ticket because 1t was not 0 Republi. can ticket. This letter, 1t was ap- parent to the party workers at the polls, had an opposite result from that intended and resulted in some people voting the Republican ticket who, before receiving the Letter, had expected to stay home and remain neutral in c contest between two Democrats. While this was dc. irlot1strable result of the letter, it is probable that 1t also persuaded some people to remain at home, but this would not be evident to the workers at the polls.
 1900 Votes Not Evident
 The apparent result of the Water. bury result is that there are nearly TOO Republican votes and more than HOO Socialist votes whose whore. abouts this year are c mystery. Did they stay home as c silent protest against the managers of thei: party going over to the opposition ranks for Q candidate7 Did they vote for the administration as the most Cf- fectivc way of rebuking their own party leaderships7 Are their votes scattered among the three totals which are recorded, and If that iB the case, doesn't 1t follow that other people refrained from votlng9 The returns, on their face, fails to pro- vide the answers'to these questions.
 The answers to such questions would be especially interesting now. for they would provide clues to the bUEGLlbJAl VI Viio 0uPpOAV hhVay AohS for Mayor Spellacy among Republic cans, and e gauge of possible Re- publican cutting of Lewis Fox, . Democrat, but c Republican candi- date for the Board of Education. They would also provide some basis for c guess on the New York result, where the Republican organization made Laduardia the party candl- date with Q full realization that his record b not that of believer in what passes for Republicans, but with c recognition of the almost irnpossibiiity of electing anyone ex. cept LaQuardia at the head of the Republican ticket. Heavy enroil- ment, for c mayoralty in New York indicates c heavy vote there in No- vember, but each side makes out c plausible claim for benefits from the high interests represented by the heavy registration and only the vote cast, if anything, will reveal what that interest represents.