OCR Text |
Show ARE lt RFPUBLICANS SURE TO ELECT THE j NEXT PRESIDENT (Harper's Weekly.) We have yet to read a Republican newspaper or meet a Republican politician poli-tician that fails to express absolute confidence as to the success of the. Republican Re-publican nominee for the presidency in "--'U4 The unanimity with which the confidence exhibited is. so far as the party is concerned, affords, of course, no guarantee of its justiticr.tion. The Republicans do not feel today a whit ! more certain of electing the next president' presi-dent' than the Democrats did in 1S33; than the Whigs did in 1843: or than the Democrats in 1847. In 1839 the Democrats Demo-crats could point to the fact that Martin Mar-tin .Van Buren three years before had secured 170 electoral votes against 124: and that the minority had been divided among the candidates of four factions, a union of which seemed impossible. Such a union was arranged at the last moment, however, and in 1S40 William Henry Harrison obtained 234 electoral votes aguin&t 60 cast for Van Buren. This was a victory even more over- whelming than that w hich Andrew j Jackson had gained in 1S32. and, naturally, nat-urally, therefore, the Whigs in 1843 counted upon electing Henry Clay in the following year. Nevertheless, Cla was beaten, receiving only 105 electoral votes against 170 cast for James K. Polk. Under the circumstances, supplemented sup-plemented as these were by their having hav-ing carried to a victorious conclusion the war with Mexico, the Democrats j ielt warranted in the belief that nobody no-body could beat their candidate. Lewis Cass, in 1S48. Nevertheless, their candidate can-didate was defeated through the loss of the state of New York. The conviction convic-tion that the Republicans -will be more, fortunate in 1904 than were the Democrats Demo-crats and Whigs at the three elections named, is based upon several assumptions: assump-tions: first, that the existing prosperity, prosper-ity, the credit for which is claimed by the Republican party, will continue until un-til November of next year: secondly, that a reunion of the Democratic party, as it existed in 1SS4-92, cannpt be effected: ef-fected: thirdly, that Mr. Roosevelt, should he .be the candidate of the He-publican He-publican party, will prove as strong a? was Mr. McKinley in the pivotal states, j Let us see whether these assumptions are well founded. It is certain that in the states of New York, New Jersey and Connecticut Connecti-cut scores of thousands of voters have lost money through the extraordinary drop in the value of high-class securi-I securi-I ties which h.--s taken place on the stock i exchange, it is perfectly true that this extraordinary shrinkage of value cannot can-not be imputed to an industrial crisis, and that the scores of thousands of voters who have suffered by the shrinkage shrink-age must ascribe their losses to some other cause. Rightly or wrongly, most ! of the sufferers attribute the shrinkage of values on the stock exchange to Mr. Roosevelt's programme of warfare against the trusts, a programme the eonerete results of which are visible in the suit brought by the attorney general gen-eral of the United States against the Northern Securities company, and in the coercive legislation enacted by congress, con-gress, which may be turned to account by the bureau of corporations in the nnv department of commerce. There i.- probably not a voter in the three pivotal states just named who, if, during dur-ing the last year and a halt he has lost money through the shrinkage -of values on the stock exchange, does not hold Mr. Roosevelt responsible, direet-lv direet-lv or indirectly, for his misfortunes. From one point of view this is unreasonable, un-reasonable, for Mr. Roosevelt. of course, did not foresee the financial effect of his aggressive demonstrations against concentrated capital. We are not here concerned, however, with the. question whether, as a matter of right, Mr. Roosevelt otiffht to be more or le?! popular in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut than Mr. McKinley was in 1000. We simply assert that, as a mas ter of fact, he is verv much less popular popu-lar in those particular states, -and. so far as we can observe, is growing les.- popular every day. Mr. McKinley himself was 'materially weaker in New York. New Jersey and Connecticut in Iflft) than he had been in IM'ti. This is a fact olten overlooked, although al-though Us political siienificancf is obvious. obvi-ous. In IS'ffi Mr. McKinley's plurality in New York was 2",S'.4tj!i; in New Jersey it was S7,'K2: in Comiertii-ut it was M.o-il. In '900, although, meanwhile, he' bad cur--ried the war with Spain to a triumphant cloae, his plurality dwindled In New York to 14.1,6'ti; in New Jersey to 56,8)!. and in Connecticut to l'S,57 That is to say, within four years his plurality was out down bv about 45 per cent in New York, by upwards of 3') per cnt in New Jersey and by nearly 50 per cent in Connecticut. With the tide of opinion ebbing at such. a rate. Mr. McKinley himself might have found it difficult to carry New York, New Jersey and Connecticut in 1904. even if no prejudice existed against a third term Nor are these the only doubtful states in which 'Mr. McKinley's plurality fell, off materially between 1S96 and 1900. In the former year he carried Maryland by 32.-224; 32.-224; in the latter year by only 13.941. In lMlfi he actually carried Kentucky by Sl plurality; be lost that state four years later by 7.975, Not only in Connecticut, bat in all the other New England states. Mr. MeKifdey's -strength declined rapidly in the four years following his first clec- tio-i The figures are startling on this Point. In IS!S his plurality in Massachusetts Massa-chusetts was 173,2(5; In Maine. 45.777- in nfrmot. 40.49(i; in New Hampshire. 35.-94, 35.-94, and In Rhode Island. 22,y?&. In 19K Mr- McKinley's plurality had shriveled to Tm-Vn m Massachusett3, i!8,3 in Maine, 29.119 in crmont, 1it.SH in New Hampshire Hamp-shire and 13.972 in Rhode Island. Last o0!?1 . Democrats actually carried Khode island, and this vear they are no without hope of electing their state tick-,ts: tick-,ts: n Massachusetts and New Hampshire, Hamp-shire, if not also in Maine. Now. what reason have we to suppose that Mr.. Roosevelt would run as well in November. 1904. as did Mr. McKlnlev in 19Kt? it may be admitted that he is as strong as was his predecessor in mot of the states west of the Mississippi "and in pome, perhaps, a liule stronger IP-may IP-may sweep them &11, and yet b uYlVatci n le is beaten in all the former slave-bo. slave-bo. dins- states and in the northern stites of New York, New Jersey. Connecticut and Indiana, ft is undeniable tht Mr Roosevelt has irremediably offended the v.mte race in all the former s!a ve-ho!ii: -' stares, and. therefore, he has fr n-alf or. chance-than had Mr. McKinley 0"i' lurrying lur-rying Delaware, Maryland, West" Virginia and Kentucky. His Democratic opponent .-nould be able to count on large aces- i sions of white Republican votes in everv ! one of those border commonwealths. " I j As for the relative popularity of Mr. ' Kooscvelt m New Jersey and Cnnnecti- I cut. we have as yet no means of judging - ! except so far as those states must he i held lively to he influenced by the same I considerations which aU'eet their eolo.-sai I neighbor, the state of New York. Mr I Koosevlt has had an opportunity or J snowing how popular h- is in Now York j which is his native, state. In November, l.V'i. with all the laurels of San Jn.in ' freth upon his 1 row, he. cut down Me- I Kinky s stupendous plurality uf two I years biVtre from t;s.46:f vote:; to less! than lx.0i.u In other- words, a change of i 9.0u0 votes from one side to the other that year would have nipped Mr. Roosevelt's political prospects in the bud. and it is notorious that more than that number of votes were subtracted . from the Democratic Demo-cratic candidate by Mr. Croker s refusal to renominate Judge Daly. It seems to be certain that Mr. Roosevelt is today much weaker. in his native state than he was in 1WS. He still appears to have Mr. 1'latt behind him. as he certainly had seven years ago. but he has mad'es Inner enemies of veteran politicians, wno control many Republican votes in certain cer-tain agricultural districts. As for his popularity in the city of New York, wa know that, when he was nominated for mayor be ran far behind the normal Republican Re-publican vote and was beaten not onlv by A brum S. Hewitt, hot by Henry Ceorge. Should Mayor Low be re-elected' this vear he might undoubtedly render considerable consider-able assistance- to Mr. Roosevelt in 1904; but should a Democratic mayor be chosen Mr. Roosevelt, can hardly expect to escape defeat in his native commonwealth. If hi; is beaten in his native state, he is aimosi certain to Jose Jew Jersey and Connecticut also, provided his opponent is a man calculated to heal the dissen-I dissen-I sions in the Democratic party. The Dem-i Dem-i oerat who could effect such unifying work in the east should meet with similar simi-lar success in Indiana, especially if th.-Democratic th.-Democratic candidate for uie. vice presidency presi-dency should be selected from the last-named last-named state. . " Thus far we 'have taken for granted that there will be no Industrial crisis, but that the prices of our agricultural and manufactured products will undergo no sensible decline before November. I'M'.. ve have also taken for granted that Mr. Roosevelt will be enthusiastically supported sup-ported by the Grand Army of the Republic; Re-public; and loyally upheld by the engineers engi-neers of the Republican machines in sucn j indispensable states as Ohio, Illinois ana Wisconsin. It remains to be seen whether the veterans and sons of - veterans composing com-posing the Grand Army of the Republic will completely condone and quickly forget for-get the treatment of their illustrious comrade. Lieutenant General Miles; and j whether the expert wire-pullers who op-' posed with the utmost vehemence the selection se-lection of Mr. Roosevelt for the vice presidency will work themselves to the bone in order to keep him four years longer in the White house. |