USA > Indiana > History of the Indiana democracy, 1816-1916 > Part 52
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101 | Part 102 | Part 103 | Part 104 | Part 105 | Part 106 | Part 107 | Part 108 | Part 109 | Part 110 | Part 111 | Part 112 | Part 113 | Part 114 | Part 115 | Part 116 | Part 117 | Part 118 | Part 119 | Part 120 | Part 121 | Part 122 | Part 123 | Part 124 | Part 125 | Part 126 | Part 127 | Part 128 | Part 129 | Part 130 | Part 131 | Part 132 | Part 133 | Part 134 | Part 135 | Part 136 | Part 137 | Part 138 | Part 139 | Part 140 | Part 141 | Part 142 | Part 143 | Part 144 | Part 145 | Part 146 | Part 147 | Part 148 | Part 149 | Part 150 | Part 151 | Part 152 | Part 153 | Part 154 | Part 155 | Part 156 | Part 157 | Part 158 | Part 159 | Part 160 | Part 161
The platform also contains a resolution in favor of the construction and control by the government of the Nicaraguan canal, and a declaration that all questions growing out of the present war may be left to be settled by the good sense and patriotism of the people as they may arise. The platform declared for the election of United States Senators by the people.
On the financial question there is pre- scribed a flat-footed, free and independent silver coinage-16 to 1-resolution; also a declaration against the gold standard and the announced policy of the Secretary of the Treasury. The inheritance tax is endorsed and Congress asked to give the Supreme Court another opportunity to pass upon an income tax.
The remainder of the platform is de- voted mainly to State issues. The records of the Democratic and Republican legisla- tures are compared and contrasted. Con- siderable attention is devoted to the Demo- cratic tax law, passed over Republican op- position, which has made possible the cur- rent reduction of the State debt. There are resolutions in favor of township and county government reform, primary elec- tion reform and amendment of the tru- ancy law. Much attention is devoted to labor questions. Various measures de- manded by the labor organizations are
commended. There is also a personal lib- erty resolution, a strong endorsement of Senator Turpie's course in the Senate and a richly-merited tribute to the memory of the late Senator Voorhees.
STATE CENTRAL COMMITTEE.
(Elected by District Conventions in January.)
1. John W. Spencer, Evansville.
2. Parks M. Martin, Spencer (Chairman).
3. W. E. Cox, Jasper.
4. Lincoln Dixon, North Vernon.
5. Frank A. Horner, Brazil.
6. U. S. Jackson, Greenfield.
7. Thomas Taggart, Indianapolis.
8. Vernon Davis, Muncie.
9. Willard H. Morris, Frankfort.
10. Edwin J. Forrest, Crown Point.
11. Dr. Marshall T. Shively, Marion.
12. Thomas R. Marshall, Columbia City.
13. Peter J. Kruyer, Plymouth.
THE CAMPAIGN.
Samuel M. Ralston easily maintained his reputation as an energetic, aggressive and effective campaigner that he had proved himself to be during the preceding contest. Undismayed by defeat in 1896, he buckled on the armor and put up such a fight as had never before been made by a candidate for Secretary of State. He not only spent his time in stumping the State, but drew heavily on his professional earnings, so much so that several years of his legal practice had afterward to be ap- plied to making good what he had sacri- ficed during his arduous campaigning as nominee for Secretary of State.
And what did the counting of the votes at the 1898 election reveal? That little, very little, change had taken place in pub- lic sentiment. The plurality of the Repub- lican candidate for Secretary of State in 1898 varied but little from the McKinley plurality in 1896. Let the figures here- with presented tell their own story :
VOTE FOR SECRETARY OF STATE.
Union B. Hunt, Republican. 286,643
Samuel M. Ralston, Democrat. 269,125
Aaron Worth, Prohibitionist 9,961
Henry H. Morrison, Populist. 5,867
William Yochum, Socialist. 1,795
( 379 )
HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916
It will be observed that Hunt's plurality is 17,518. He lacked 105 votes of having a majority of all the votes cast at this elec- tion. Both Hunt and Ralston received several thousand votes more than their as- sociates lower down on their respective tickets. This is due to the fact that when the Australian ballot system was first in- troduced in Indiana voters were educated to mark "the head" of the ticket if they wanted to cast their ballot so as to make it count for all the candidates on the ticket except when the square in front of the name on some other ticket is marked with a cross, which would mean a vote for the candidate on that particular ticket. If no such mark appeared on any of the other tickets, the marking of a cross in the party emblem circle heading each ticket would carry with it all the other can- didates. It was a most excellent provision to expedite or render easy the voting of a split ticket. The people had been thorough- ly educated to voting in this manner- independently if so inclined, "straight" if a strict partisan. Despite all the edu- cating done since the law was changed, the first name method of marking a bal- lot still governs from six to nine thousand voters at recurring elections. Politicians who believe in the old slogan, "For the ticket, the whole ticket, and nothing but the ticket," were dissatisfied with the facility for voting a "scratched ticket," or voting as the sovereign felt inclined, and induced the legislature to change the law so as to render independent voting more difficult. In obedience to this ultra parti- san demand the legislature so amended the law that to vote a straight ticket a cross must be made in one of the party emblem circles heading the various party tickets. To vote a "scratched ticket" a mark must be made in front of the name of every can- didate preferred or favored by the voter. To illustrate how persistent or thought- less adherence to the original method of voting works it may be stated that while the total vote for Secretary of State at
this election was 573,391, the vote for Au- ditor of State was 564,995, or 8,396 less than that for Secretary of State. In a close election such as we have repeatedly had in Indiana, such discrepancies might have quite a bearing on the interests and rights of the candidates lower down in the list of candidates. Usually the difference between the votes cast for the head of the ticket and the candidates lower down is, greater in the Democratic than in the Re- publican vote. The difference in the Dem- ocratic vote for Secretary of State and Auditor of State is 4,653, while the differ- ence in the Republican vote for these offi- cers is only 3,078. Where voting is done by machine these differences do not ap- pear, but where paper balloting is still in vogue, which is the case in a majority of the counties of the State, the propensity to mark the first name on the ticket seems ineradicable.
THE REPUBLICAN PLURALITIES.
Secretary of State, Samuel B. Hunt. 17,578
Auditor of State, William H. Hart 19,093
Treasurer of State, Leopold Levy. 17,308
Attorney-General, William L. Taylor 19,481
Clerk Supreme Court, Robert A. Brown. 19,337
Supt. Puhlic Instruction, Frank L. Jones. . 19,351 Supreme Judge, Alexander Dowling 19,624
Supreme Judge, John V. Hadley. 19,686
Supreme Judge, Francis E. Baker.
19,461
Appellate Judge, Woodfin D. Robinson
18,614
Appellate Judge, Wm. J. Henley. 18,897
Appellate Judge, James B. Black. 18,745
Appellate Judge, Daniel W. Comstock, 19,127
Appellate Judge, Ulrich Z. Wiley. 19,124
Chief Bureau of Statistics, John B. Conner. 19,517 State Geologist, Willis S. Blatchley. 19,771
The General Assembly for 1899 was composed of 30 Republican and 20 Demo- cratic senators, and of 57 Republican and 43 Democratic representatives.
CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION.
1. James A. Hemenway, Republican .20,383
Thomas Duncan, Democrat. 19,337
2. Robert W. Miers, Democrat. . 20,245
William R. Gardiner, Republican. . 18,656
3. William T. Zenor, Democrat. 21,111
Isaac F. Whitesides, Republican 16,791
( 380 )
HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916
4. Francis M. Griffith, Democrat 21,751
5. George W. Faris, Republican. 22,557 Samuel R. Hamill, Democrat. .22,305
6. James E. Watson, Republican .21,048 Charles A. Robinson, Democrat. 18,844
7. Jesse Overstreet. Republican 25,868
Leon O. Bailey, Democrat. .23,269
8. George W. Cromer, Republican 25,388 Orlando J. Lotz, Democrat. 24,021
9. Charles B. Landis, Republican 22,447 Joseph B. Cheadle, Democrat and Free Silver 21,357
10. Edgar D. Crumpacker, Republican. 24,656
John Ross, Democrat. 20,206
11. George W. Steele, Republican .24,367 Charles W. Lee, Republican. 19,733
George W. Michael, Democrat. 20,281
12. James M. Robinson, Democrat. 19,484
Dr. Christ B. Stemen, Republican . 18,044
13. Abraham L. Brick, Republican. 23,368 Medary M. Hathaway, Democrat. . 20,886
Thus the delegation was composed of four Democrats and nine Republicans. The highest, pluralities were those of Zenor, Crumpacker and Steele, all three exceeding 4,000 each. The lowest plural- ity was that of Faris in the Terre Haute district-252.
( 381 )
[CHAPTER XLIX.] NO RAYS OF SUNSHINE VISIBLE
ON THE POLITICAL HORIZON IN 1900-REPUBLICANS CONTINUE TO HOLD THE FORT
N 1896 William Mckinley was Jr., of Versailles, officiated as secretary. extensively advertised as the For vice-presidents the following named "advance agent of prosperity." gentlemen were designated : Through the columns of the 1. Sidney Hatfield, Warrick. press and from the stump the 2. J. O. Giles, Lawrence. people were told that as soon 3. John Benz, Crawford. as the triumphant election of 4. J. F. Cox, Bartholomew. 5. J. B. Oliver, Clay. Mckinley and Hobart to the presidency 6. David S. Gooding, Hancock. and vice-presidency were announced there 7. John Blue, Marion. would be noticeable an immediate change 8. Abr. Simmons, Wells. for the better in the industrial and 9. F. W. Macoughtry, Fountain. commercial affairs of this country. That 10. Jas. McCabe, Warren. much credence was given these assurances 12. John Kimmel, Lagrange. 11. Samuel E. Cook, Huntington. is evidenced by the result of the 1896 elec- 13. Adam Vinnage, Marshall. tion. That there was much disappoint- DELEGATES TO NATIONAL CONVENTION. ment over the non-fulfillment of these At Large-Hugh Dougherty, Bluffton; Major G. V. Menzies, Mount Vernon; James Murdock, Lafayette; Samuel E. Morss, Indianapolis. Con- tingents-Robert C. Bell, Fort Wayne; John Over- myer, North Vernon; James McCabe, Williams- port; Judge D. D. Dykeman, Logansport. promises and predictions is a matter of history. Panics and business stagnations are not easily overcome. With dogged tenacity they take their course. They are more than tenacious. They can't be driven 1. Chas. W. Halbredge, Spencer. Henry Stockfleth, Vanderburg. or chased into precipitous flight. Confi- dence is much more easily destroyed than 2. John H. Spencer, Daviess. Wm. W. Moffit, Greene. restored or revived. Too many wounds were struck during the rage of the '93 3. Jos. H. Shea, Scott. 4. Wm. H. O'Brien, Dearborn. E. J. Nickerson, Jefferson. John L. Britz, Dubois. panic to bring their healing in a few years within the range of possibilities. Signs of recovery from the havoc of the 1893 5. Geo. M. Crane, Vigo. Marion Bailey, Lizton. panic became clearly visible only five or six years afterwards. While it is true 6. Geo. M: Ray, Shelby. Wm. Merrill, Fayette. that a slight easing up became noticeable in 1897, it is equally true that we were 7. Jas. E. Mccullough, Marion. W. E. DuPrez, Marion. near to the close of the decade before gen- 8. L. G. Ellingham, Adams. A. M. Walty, Hartford City. eral business activity fully dispelled the gloom that had saddened the hearts of mil- 9. M. A. Ryan, Carroll. Cornelius Cunningham, Montgomery. lions of men, women and children in this land of plenty. I
The Democratic State Convention for 1900 was held at Indianapolis, June 6. It was ably presided over by Samuel M. Ral- ston, who delivered the keynote speech of that memorable campaign. John Johnson,
10. Daniel W. Sims, Tippecanoe. Martin T. Krueger, Laporte.
11. F. M. Kistler, Cass. R. C. Houston, Grant.
12. Henry Colerick, Allen. W. H. Nusbaum, DeKalb.
13. M. M. Hathaway, Pulaski. Benj. F. Deahl, Goshen.
( 383 )
HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS.
At Large-Judge Allen Zollars, Fort Wayne; Nicholas Cornet, Versailles. Contingents-Judge O. J. Lotz, Muncie; Samuel B. Boyd, Washington.
1. Thos. W. Lindsey, Warrick.
2. W. A. Cullop, Knox.
3. John R. Guffin, Crawford.
4. Carl E. Wood, Jackson.
5. D. O. Newton, Vermilion.
6. Chas. D. Morgan, Henry.
7. Alexander C. Ayres, Marion.
8. Wm. Boland, Madison.
9. Geo. H. Gifford, Tipton.
10. Patrick Keefe, Newton.
11. Milo W. Barnes, Howard.
12. Frank Van Auken, Steuben.
13. Wm. P. O'Neill, St. Joseph.
COMMITTEE ON RESOLUTIONS.
1. G. V. Menzies, Posey.
2. J. H. O'Neal, Daviess.
3. M. Z. Stannard, Clark.
4. W. H. Glidewell, Decatur.
5. Samuel R. Hamill. Vigo.
6. B. F. Wissler, Wayne.
7. John W. Holtzman, Marion.
8. Judge O. J. Lotz, Delaware.
9. C. F. S. Neal, Boone.
10. Chas. C. Spencer, White.
11. W. J. Houck, Grant.
12. Frank Dunton, Lagrange.
13. Daniel McDonald. Marshall.
THE PLATFORM.
The main features of the platform con- structed by this committee are embraced within the following paragraphs :
"We, the Democrats of Indiana, in con- vention assembled, reaffirm our allegiance to the principles of liberty and justice which the Democratic party has advocated from the time of Jefferson.
"We reaffirm and pledge our allegiance to the principles of the Declaration of In- dependence, and acknowledge our debt of gratitude to Thomas Jefferson, the author of that charter of human rights.
"We reaffirm our allegiance to the prin- ciples of the constitution of the United States, and declare our veneration for the wise and far-sighted patriots who insti- tuted its beneficent provisions, not only for themselves, but for the welfare of the people for all time.
"We reaffirm and pledge our allegiance to the principles of the Chicago platform
of 1896, and commend its distinguished ex- ponent, William Jennings Bryan, to the people of the United States as an able statesman, a sincere patriot and an honest man, who can safely be trusted to stand at all times for the people and against their foes at home and abroad.
"And we instruct the delegates selected by this convention to cast their votes for him at the Democratic national convention to be held at Kansas City.
"We call attention to the reform legisla- tion which the Democratic party has given the people of this State, the school book law, the tax laws, the Australian ballot, the fee and salary reform and the many statutes for the protection of labor.
"The Republican party is now hypo- critically claiming credit for the reduction in our State debt, made possible by the Democratic tax law, the enactment of which it opposed.
"It has mutilated the Australian ballot law and repealed the statute making the bribery of voters a penal offense. In four years of absolute control of State affairs it has failed to pass any effectual legisla- tion against monopolies or trusts, but has uniformly defeated all effort to enact anti- trust laws.
"We call attention to the extraordinary concentration of wealth and the alarming growth of monopoly during the Mckinley administration; the arbitrary regulation of markets; the increased cost of living; the loss of industrial independence; the despotic power of employment and dis- charge of American labor, now concen- trating in a few hands; the activity of these monopolies in politics ; their increas- ing influence in the enactment and en- forcement of the laws, and the unconcern or real favors with these things are re- garded by the Republican leaders. Relief can not be expected so long as the friends of trusts remain in office. The Democratic party, free from their influence, and not embarrassed by their favors, pledges its representatives in office to the positive en- actment and enforcement of anti-trust legislation."
STATE TICKET NOMINATED.
Upon the completion of the preliminary proceedings the convention settled down to the nomination of a State ticket, with this result:
( 384 )
HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916
Governor-John W. Kern, Indianapolis.
Lieutenant-Governor-John C. Lawler, Salem.
Secretary of State-Adam Heimberger, New Albany.
Auditor of State John W. Minor, Indianapolis. Treasurer of State-Jerome Herff, Peru.
Attorney-General-Charles P. Drummond, Ply- mouth.
Reporter Supreme Court-Horace G. Yergin, Newcastle.
Supt. Public Instruction-Charles A. Great- house, Mount Vernon.
Chief Bureau of Statistics-Edward Horuff.
Judge Supreme Court-George L. Reinhard, Spencer.
Judge Supreme Court-Joseph W. Adair, Co- lumbia City.
Most of the foregoing nominations were made by acclamation.
There was considerable confusion with reference to the nomination of candidates for Governor and Lieutenant-Governor. A goodly number of delegates favored the re- nomination of both Shively and Lawler, the nominees in 1896. A great deal of un- certainty prevailed as to whether Mr. Shively desired a renomination. The can- didacy of John W. Kern was pushed with much aggressiveness. The situation was greatly relieved when announcement was finally made that Mr. Shively had defi- nitely determined not to be a candidate.
John W. Kern was put in nomination for Governor by John H. Spencer of Da- viess county. The Third district formally presented the name of Frank B. Burke of Jeffersonville, and the Tenth district. of- fered Nelson J. Bozarth of Valparaiso as its choice.
The first and only ballot resulted : Kern, 8191/2; Burke, 36914; Shively, 29234 ; Bo- zarth, 41; Charles G. Conn, 2; Samuel M. Ralston, 1. The usual motion to make the nomination of Mr. Kern unanimous pre- vailed.
The contest for Lieutenant-Governor be- came quite animated. Four candidates were placed before the convention: Cap- tain John C. Lawler, Salem; Major John R. Simpson, Paoli; Johannes Kopelke, Crown Point; Mason J. Niblack, Vin-
cannes. On the first ballot Lawler had 540, Kopelke, 401; Simpson, 383; Niblack, 141. The second ballot gave Lawler 7011/2 ; Kopelke, 4831/2, Simpson, 248; Niblack, 71. Lawler had 1,024 on the final (third) bal- lot to 513 for Kopelke. The names of Simp- son and Niblack were withdrawn after the second ballot. Upon the announcement of the third ballot Mr. Kopelke moved that the nomination of Captain Lawler be de- clared unanimous. This was done, accom- panied with lively cheering.
The nominations of Adam Heimberger for Secretary of State, John W. Minor for Auditor, and Jerome Herff for Treasurer were made by acclamation as a compliment to the vigor of their campaign two years before.
For Attorney-General, Charles P. Drummond of Plymouth, Carl J. Koll- meyer of Columbus, and J. Frank Mann of Muncie were put in nomination. The first ballot gave Drummond 727, Koll- meyer, 549; Mann, 243. Drummond lacked 21 votes of being nominated on the first ballot. He had a surplus on the second ballot, which gave him 840; Kollmeyer, 501; Mann, 153. Drummond's nomina- tion was then made unanimous.
There were no contests over the other places on the ticket, which was generally adjudged a strong one, entitled to the un- divided support of the party, and deemed eminently worthy of the confidence and es- teem of the electorate.
STATE CENTRAL COMMITTEE.
(Appointed in January by Districts.)
1. Clinton F. Rose, Evansville.
2. Parke M. Martin, Spencer (Chairman).
3. W. E. Cox, Jasper.
4. Lincoln Dixon, North Vernon.
5. Frank A. Horner, Brazil.
6. U. S. Jackson, Greenfield.
7. Thomas Taggart, Indianapolis.
8. B. H. Campbell, Anderson.
9. C. F. S. Neal, Lebanon.
10. Edwin J. Forrest, Crown Point.
11. Dr. M. T. Shively, Marion.
12. William Kaough, Fort Wayne.
13. Peter J. Kruyer, Plymouth.
13-History
( 385 )
HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916
FREE-SILVER AND ANTI-IMPERIAL- ISM THE MAIN ISSUES.
The activities of the free-silver element were so marked that two or three separate conventions of its advocates were held in different parts of the country with a view to determining whether to enter the cam- paign as distinct organizations or amalga- mate with the Democrats in case that par- ty reaffirmed its adherence to that cause. The extremists, Populists, unwilling to take chances, nominated a ticket of their own, composed of Wharton Barker of Pennsylvania for president, and Ignatius Donnelly of Minnesota for vice-president. The Fusion Populists also held a conven- tion, attended by 1,000 delegates. They were willing to accept Bryan as the head of the ticket, but also quite insistent that the Democrats name Charles A. Towne of Minnesota for the Vice-Presidency. This caused the Democrats a good deal of trouble at their convention, held at Kan- sas City, July 4. The Fusionists, mostly Free-Silver Republicans, met at the same place and time. The outcome of the con- test, so far as the Democrats were con- cerned, was the nomination of former Vice-President Adlai E. Stevenson of Illi- nois, as Bryan's running mate. Colonel McClure tells the story in this compact form:
"Two conventions were called to meet at Kansas City July 4, 1900, viz .: the Democratic and the Free-Silver Republi- can. The conventions were called to meet at the same place and time because it was well understood that they would harmo- nize at least on the candidate for President and probably upon the entire national ticket. As the Silver Republicans are a mere appendage of the Bryan party, their convention took no important action until the Democrats had finished their work. The Democratic convention was very largely attended, every State and Terri- tory being represented, including Hawaii, and it was little more than an enthusiastic mass meeting to make William Jennings Bryan President. Governor Thomas of Colorado was made temporary chairman,
and Representative J. D. Richardson of Tennessee was permanent president. Mr. Bryan was at his home in Lincoln, Neb., but was in constant communication with his Democratic leaders at Kansas City, and was visited by a number of individuals and delegations who desired to impress upon him the necessity of some particular action relating to the Vice-Presidency or to the platform.
"There were two vital points of dispute between the Democratic leaders. The most important related to the distinct reitera- tion of the free-silver policy to be main- tained at the ratio of sixteen to one, and the other involved the question of accept- ing Ex-Representative Towne as the can- didate for Vice-President, who had al- ready been nominated by the Fusion Popu- lists at Sioux Falls, and who was specially desired as the candidate by the Free-Silver Republicans. The discussion on the ques- tion of simply approving the Chicago plat- form in a general and perfunctory way and making trusts and imperialism the great issues of the contest, was very earnest and developed a considerable de- gree of bitterness. The Democratic lead- ers of the Eastern States were nearly or quite unanimous in favor of relegating the Free-Silver issue to the rear by the simple affirmation of the Chicago platform, and elaborating the issues of trusts and im- perialism in the new platform. It was evident that a majority of the delegates be- lieved that to be the wiser policy for the party, but Mr. Bryan, who was freely con- sulted on the subject, was very emphatic in demanding that there should be a dis- tinct reiteration of the Free-Silver plank of the Chicago platform.
ยท "Notwithstanding the earnest expres- sions of Mr. Bryan there was a very ani- mated contest in the platform committee, and the free-silver plank was admitted by a vote of twenty-six to twenty-four, and five of the twenty-six votes cast in favor of the free-silver plank were given by the Territories of Arizona, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Hawaii and Indian Territory. After the committee had decided in favor of Mr. Bryan's views as to the plank on the silver question, the friends of the more conservative policy decided not to make a battle in open convention, and the plat- form was adopted practically without op- position. The following table gives the
( 386 )
HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916
votes bv States in the platform committee by which the distinct free-silver plank was embodied in the platform:
-Ayes-
Alabama,
New Hampshire,
Arkansas,
North Dakota,
Colorado,
Oregon,
Delaware,
South Carolina,
Tennessee,
Idaho, Iowa,
Vermont,
Kansas,
Washington,
Kentucky,
Wyoming,
Maine,
Arizona,
Massachusetts,
Oklahoma, Indian Territory,
Missouri,
New Mexico,
Nebraska, Nevada,
Hawaii-26.
-Nays-
California,
New York,
Connecticut,
North Carolina,
Florida,
Ohio,
Georgia,
Pennsylvania,
Illinois,
Rhode Island,
Indiana,
South Dakota,
Louisiana,
Texas,
Maryland,
Utah,
Michigan,
Virginia,
Minnesota,
West Virginia,
Mississippi,
Wisconsin,
New Jersey,
Alaska-24.
Mr. Towne was formally nominated for Vice-President by the Silver Republicans, but later on yielded to pressure by with- drawing and agreeing to support Mr. Ste- venson as Bryan's running mate.
THE INDIANA CAMPAIGN.
With John W. Kern at the head of the Indiana State ticket, a vigorous campaign was conducted in this commonwealth. Mr. Bryan devoted considerable attention to Indiana, delivering an unusually large number of speeches within its borders. In most of his speeches he presented anti-im- perialism as the paramount issue, without, however, evading or ignoring free-silver as a live question. The result of the elec- tion in November was about what had been generally foreseen by shrewd observ- ers. Both Mckinley and Bryan polled a larger vote than they had received in 1896. The total vote of Indiana in 1900 was 664,-
094. Of this, Mckinley had 336,063; Bryan, 309,584; John G. Wooley (Prohibi- tionist), 13,718; Debs (Socialist), 2,374; Barker (Populist), 1,438; Mahoney (La- bor Socialist), 663 ; Ellis (Union Reform) . 254.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.