Evening Star Newspaper, October 31, 1896, Page 26

26 EVENING STAR, SATURDAY, , OCTOBER 31, 1896--TWENTY-EIGHT PAGES. vote then was 25,487 against 15,836 for the democrats and 6,475 for the populists. The votes then against him are now for him, and most of those then for him are now against him, but he has still enough re- publican following to make it probable that he will be elected. Seventh—Candidates: Rep., Frank M. Eddy, Glenwood, renominated; fus., E. E. Lommen, Crookston; pro., J. F. Heiberg, Twin Valley. The vote two years ago was: Rep., 18,- 200; dem., 3,486: pop., 17,408. The fusion candidate has the best chance of election this time, as the combined vote exceeds the republican vote, and the independent populist candidate is understood to have but a small following. MISSISSIPPI. ‘There is no fight in Mississ: delegation democrat ne candidates are: Allen, Tupelo, renominated. W. V. Sullivan, Oxford. Thi C. Catehings, _ Vicksburg, Fourth—Dem., A. F. Fox. E. er Yazoi pi. The solid is practically conceded to the First—Dem., Jno. M. Second—Dem., |\—Dem., Thos. renominated. Fifth—Rep., J. 4 Wm. _ Stinson. Sixth—Rep.. Henry y Griffin; F. S. D., @. W. F. Love; pop., N. C. Hathhorn. Sev- enth—Rep., J. B. Yellowby; F. S. D., Pat Henry, Rankin. MISSOURI. Tte republicens are making a fight for Missouri. Old majorities tell no story there. More than half the districts are in doubt. By the landslide of the last election the re- publicans got eleven of the fifteen Congress- men, and they bid fair to hold several of them in this election. There is no fusion on Congress between the democrats and popu- sts. First: Candidates—Rep., Chas. N. Clark, Hannibal, renominated; dem., Richard P. Glies, Shelbina; pop., J. W. Long, Kirks- ville; pro., J. F. McMurray, Shelbyville. This district has before been democratic, but Clark was elected to the present Con- gress by a vote of 1 democrat and 4 The chances are in favor of its going demo- cratic this time. Second: Candidates—Rep., Charles A. ‘or the populist. Foomis, Chillicothe; dem., Robert N. Bo- dine, Monroe; pop., Dr. Polson. This is a close district, with a strong sound money sentiment. The present mem- a democrat, who is for gold. The which he was: Dem. The republi- strict. . H. G. Orton, jexander M. Dockery, d; pop., Hardin Steel, cans expect to carry the Third Princeton; Gallatin, renomina Polo. The democrats will probably hold this dis- trict. It is now represented by Mr. Dock- ery, who is a pretty shrewd politician. Through the slump of I8M4 he held on by a Vote of 16,230, against 15,8) for Orton, his present republican antagonist, and 4,053 ie the populist, and 258 for the prohibition- it. Fourth: Candidates—Rep., Geo. C. Crow- ther, St. Joseph, renominated; dem., Chas. F. Cochran, Joseph, indorsed by popu- lists; pro., Willis Weaver, Elm Grove. The democrats had this district by but about a thousand plurality in the Fifty- third Congress. In the present Congress the republicans have it by about 1,500. The last vote was: Rep., 15,695; dem., 14,- G4; pop., 2910. The democrats expect to Candidates—Rep., Jay H. Neff, Ss WwW. S._Cowherd, as City; pop., Geo. Wilson, Lexington. The republicans turned this district over the last time. Tarsney (dem.) represented it during the Fifty-first, Fifty-second and Fifty-third Congresses. years ago was nearly ago the rality. dem His plurality four 000, but tw: icans carried it by : Rep., F The republicans republ: t to carry the district Candidates—Re Frank V. Ham- a David A. DeArmond, renomina pop., H. L. Linton, enfield; pro.. ¥ . Godwin. The democrats held this district through the ISH slump by less than 100 plurality. Before that their plurality was more than s two years ago was 643 for the republican or the populist. The ent here. Candi —Rep., Jno. P. Tra- Springfield, renominated; . Jas. Marshall; pop., J. R. Thomas, Mt. eonard: pro.. R. T. Bond, Fayette. o i} The republi carried this district two years ago by a vote of 17,7%8 to 17,400 -ratic and populist. The demo- had nearly 4.000 plurality two years The result is doubtful. Candidates—Rep., Joel D. Hub- berd, Versailles, renominated; dem., R. P. Bland. Lebanon; pop., John H. Stinecipher, Buffalo. This Bland’s district. He was defeated by Hubbard two years ago by a vote of 16.885 to 16,815. resented Before that Bland had rep- the district during eleven Con- Bland’s majority four years ago The democrats expect to Candidates—Rep., Wm. M. Tre- Mexico, renominated; dem., Champ . Bowling Green; pop, M. O. Sims, republicans carried this district two by less than 20) plurality. Before 954: pop., The democrats are confide: Tenth. Candidates—Rep., Richard Bar- tholdt, Louis, renominaied; dem., Le Grand Atwood, Ferguson. The republicans did not have to wait for the slump of 1894 to capture this district. Mr. Bartholdt was a member of the Fifty- Fifty-third and the Fifty-fourth . His vote two years ago was .SST_for the democrat, 686 socialist, 25 for the populist’ and pnist. The district will an. Candidates—Rep., C. F. Joy, ; dem., Jno. T. Hunt, St. Louis. for some time been a closely district, but seems to properly republicans. Joy was turned out of the Fifty-third Congress on a con- test, &nd was elected to the Fifty-fourth of 15,175 populis a vote and S# prohibitionist. lates—Rep., Maj. C. EL ; Robert H. Kern, silver The Cobb, during his vote was: 1,004. Thirteenth. Candidates—Rep., Geo. Steel, Hillsboro’; dem., Edward Dobb; pop., Henry is represented by Seth W. been a sound money man eer in Congress. The last Dem., 16,005; rep., 7,469; pop., It will probably go republican. distric who ha: Be This district is represented now by a re- publican. At the last election the republi- cans carried the district by a vote of 16,849 overcoming a normal democratic of nearly five thousand. It will n. ‘andidates —Rep., Jno. A. r, Jackson; dem., Prof. W. D. Van- » Cape Girardeau; pop., A. H. Living- . West Plains. the election four years ago the demo- eratic majority in this district was nearly four thousand. At the last election the rée- publicans carried it by 16,184 to 15,007 dem. and 5.501 pop. The republicans are confi- dent. Fiftee Burton, vote two years ago wa: . 14,06 5,741; pro. sult ts doubtful. Rep., 16,620; 387. The re- MONTANA. Montana Chas. S. Hartman, the pres- Representative in Congress, ndidate of all the silver forces in state, and has the silver republican tion. O. F. Goddard, a gold repub- ‘s running against him. Hartman's generally conceded. At the last In Nebraska party lines are divided even More perhaps than in most other places. It is the home of the free silver presidential co date. Both parties are putting forth extra effort to carry the state, and both are claiming it. It is usually regarded as Likely to go to Bryan. If it does go for Bryan that will mean that the s'lver senul- ment js strong among a certain class of republicans, and the same influence will operate in the congressional districts. Nothing there can be calculated upon wita certainty. Where figur: from past elec- tions show that the combined vote of the Gemocrats and populists exceeds the re- vublican vote, there has still to be taken into consideration the fact that the an- tagonism between the gold democrats and the Bryan demcerats 1s intense, and that the gold democratic vote is strong. The Populists and democrats have made a com- Dlete fusion. First. Candidates—Rep., Jesse B. Strode, Lincoln, renominated; fus, J. H. Broay, Lincoln. In the Fifty-second and Fifty-third Con- gresses Mr. William Jennings Bryan rep- resented this district. His first vote was 32,376,. against 25,663, rep.; 13,068, inde- pendent, and 1,679, prohibition. He next carried ‘the district by a vote of 13,784, against 13,644, rep.; 863, pop., and 2,409, ind. At the last election Strode, the republican, carried the district by a vote of 18,185, against 12,728 for the dem.-pop. candidate, and 1,078 for the prohibitionist. The result is doubtful. Second. Cand!dates—Rep., David H. Mer- cer, Omaha, renominated; dem., E. R. Duf- fle, Omaha. There is a hard fight In this district, and Mercer's re-election is held to be doubtful. He had a plurality of 1,100 for the Fifty- third Congress, and the vote which elected him to the Fifty-fourth was: Rep., 12,9465; dem., 8,165; pop., 3,962, and pro., 393. Third. Candidates—Rep., Ross L. Ham- mond, Fremont; fus., Samuel Maxwell, Fre ment. The vote four years ago was: Rep., 1 635; dem., 10,630; indep., 9,636. Two yea ago it was: Rep., 16,531; dem., 8,019; 11,738, and pro., 851. the district. Fourth. Candidates—Rep. Eugene J. Hainer, Aurora, renominated; fus., W. L. Stark, Aurora. The A. P. A. fs strong kere, and Hain rong with that order. The vote in 648; dem., 8,085; pop., 11,486, In 1894 the vote. was: Re pop.-free silver, dem., 2,763; pro., 905. ‘The result is doubtful. Fifth. Candidates—Rep., Wm. An- drews, Hastings, renominated; fus., R. D. Sutherland. In 1892 the district was carried by the independent-populist by a vote of 17,490, against 14,230, rep., and 838, pop. At the last election the present republican candi- dite carried it by a vote of 16,410, against 50, fusion; S75, straight democrat, and 651, prohibition. The republicans claim the district. Sixth. Candidates—Rep., A. E. Cady, St. Paul; fus., W. L. Green, Kearney. Kern, a populist, has represented this dstrict during the past three Congresscs. Th ote at the last election was: Pop. against 14,676, rep., and 891, pro. The democrats expect to carry the district. pop., The democrats claim is At large—Rep., Dr. Davis; pop., J. C. Deughty, Elko, and Francis G. Newlands, free silver. Newlands’ election is regarded as pretty certain, as he draws votes from the repub- licans, the populists and the democrats. The vote in "04 was: Newlands, 4,581; rep., 2, The republican then was silver man, who is now supporting Bryan, NEW HAMPSHIRE. Bota districts are conceded to the repub- licans. First. Candidates—Rep., Cyrus A. Sullo- way, Manchester, renominated; dem., J. B. Nash. Second. Candidates—Rep. Frank G. Clarke, Peterboro; dem., Gen. D. M. White, Bae oe eae ee Drury, Bath; AsWe WarkeiLancaster’ ato Sulloway is a silver republican, but is a perty man. NEW JERSEY. The democrats and populisis have fused in every district in New. Jersey, buenit is thought that there is very little prospect of their electing any candi‘ate. The re- publicans hold all the districts in the Pres- ent Congress. In the Fifty-third Congress the democrats held six of the eight dis- tricts, the republicans having only the first and the second. ‘The maforities at the last election were all very large for the republicans, except the eighth district, where the vote was:” Repah an, 23,500; democrat, 23,207. First—Candidates: Repudlican, Henry C. Loudenslager, Paulsboro, renominated: democrat and populist, John W. Wright, Camden. Vote in 1894: Repubdliean, 24, crat, 12,082; prohibitien, 1,641; social labor, 194. Second—Candidate: Gardner, Atlantic Cit: 462; 1,751; demo- populist, Republican, John J. reaominated; S. M. D., Dr. Arthur E. Conroy; prohibition, Rev. J. Bailey Adams, Elwood; soc., Geo. Yard- ley, Trenton. Republican, : Howell, New Brunswizk, renominated; soc, Patrick Henry, New Brunswick; F. §. D., Rev. John A. Wells, Lib2zty Corner, S. M. D., Wm. Strother Jone: Vote in 1804: Republican, 18,403; demo- crat, 14,427; populist, 412; social labor, 265; prohibition, 791... ~ Fourth—Candidates: Republican, Mahlon Pitney, Morristown, rénominated, indcrsed by S. M. D.; democrat 2nd populist, Au- gustus Cutler, Morris:own. Vote in 1894: Republican, 16,116; demo- crat, 14,709; populist, 507; prohibition, 1,586. Fifth—Candidates: Republican, Jas. F. Stewart, Paterson, renomiaaied; F. S. D., Harvey W. Banks; S. M. D., Addlison Ely. Vote in 1894: Republi 16,731; demo- crat, 10,459; soeial-tabor, 2,512; prohibition, 489, xth—Candidatés: Republican, Richard Parker, Newark, renomina:ed; demo- crat, Jos. A. Beecher; soc., Jas. P. Billings. Vote in 1894: Repmblican, 23,219; demo- crat, 14,746; populist, 798; social labor, 836; prohibition, 503. Seventh—Candid@ates: Republican, Thomas McEwan, jr., Jersey City, renominated; F. S. D., Alexander C. Young, Hoboken; S. M. D., Rymier J. Worteadyke; soc. Frank Campbell, Jersey Cit in_ 1894: Republican, 22,500; dem opulist and social labor, 1,193; », idates: Republican, Fowler, Elizabeth, renominat crat, Freeman 0. Willey, Oran; Wm. J. Campbell, Elizabeth; 8. Alexander D. Noyes. Vote in 1894: Repuoli: crat, 12,805; populist, 1 prohibition, 518. n, 19,041; demo- social labor, 648; NEW YORK. The republicans expect to have nearly everything their own way in New York, on account of the gold sentiment in the state and the division in the democratic ranks. It is doubted whether the demo- crats will do as well as they did at the last election, when they had five Congressmen out of thirty-four. They may get the eighth, tenth and twelfth districts this elec- tion. First. Candidates—Rep., Jos. M. Belford, Riverhead; F. 8. D., W. D. Maxwell. The vote at last election was rep., 20,861; dem., 14,961; labor, 598; pop., 223. Second. Candidates—Rep., Denis M. Hur- ley, Brooklyn, renominated; F. 8. D., Jno. M. Clancy, Brooklyn; S. M. D., Wm. C. Redfield, Brooklyn. e vote at the last election was: Rep., 7; dem., 13,194; ind. dem., 3,924. Third. Candidates—Rep., Francis H. Wil- son, Brooklyn, renominated; F. 8S. D., Charles F. Brandt, Brooklyn; S. M. D., John A. Hennessy, Brooklyn. he vote at the last election was: y ; dem., 14,215; reform dem., 3,741. At the election before Hendrix, democrat, had a majority of 5,700. Fourth. Candidates—Rep., Israel F. Fischer, Brooklyn, renominated 8. D., Thomas J. Larkin, Brooklyn; S. M. D., Theodore S. Nye, Brooklyn. he vote in 1804 was: Rep., 19,802; dem., 4. Fifth. Candidates—Rep., Charles nett, Brooklyn, renominate: Thomas D. Delaney, Brooklyn; Jacob S. Van Wyck, Brooklyn. The vote in 1894 was: Rep., 11,525; socialist, 1, pop., 2 Sixth. Candidates—Rep., James R. Howe, Brooklyn, renominated; S. M. D., Daniel J: Walsh, Brooklyn. Che vote in 1804 was: Rep., 14,427; dem., 25; socialist, 682; pro., 118; pop., 68. Seventh. Candidates—Rep. and S. M. D., Franklin Bartlett, New York, renominated; Tammany, John G. H. Vehslage, New York. The vote at the last election was: Dem 4, + ind. dem., 2,159; pro., 287; st, 198. Eighth. Candidates—Rep., John Murray Mitchell, New York (indorsed by 8S. M. D.); Tammany, James J. Walsh, New York. The vote at the last election was: Dem., rep., 9,090, Ninth. Candidates—Rep. and S. M. D., Timothy J. Campbell, New York: ‘Tam. many, Thomas J. Bradley, New York: soc. lab., Daniel DeLeon, New York. The democrats carried the district 1894—dem., 8,088; ind. dem., 7,084; Pe; 5,214. Tenth. in Des a Clarence W. ro! Meade, New Tammany, Amos J. Cummings, New York; S. M. D., Calvin Tompkins, New York. The vote In 1894 was: 2E: 15,295; rep., 19,223; state dem., 862; Hist, 450; pro., 186; pop., 70. Eleventh. Candidates—Rep., Ferdinand Eidman, New York; Tammany, William Sulzer, New York, reno. 3 8. Thos. O’Connor, New York; soc. lab., Henry Miller, New York. The vote in 1894 was: Dem., 11,208; rep., 10,524. Twelfth. Candidates—Rep., Charles A. Hess, New York; Tammany, Geo. B. Mc- Clellan, New -Yerk; renominated (indorsed by 8S. M. D.); ind. Bryan clubs and peo. party, Dr. M. M. Miller, New York. The vote in 1804 was: Dem., 10,933; rep., 9,592; state dem., 2,042; socialist, 270; pop., 118; pro., 93. Thirteenth. Candidates—Rep., Richard C. Shannon, New York, renominated; Tam- many, Thomas W. Smith, New York; ind. Bryan clubs and peo. party, John J. Mur- phy, New York; S. M. D., Abraham Somen- thal, New York. The vote in 1894 was: Rep., 13,555; dem., 13,089; state dem., 1,943; socialist, 464; pop, 108; pro., 100. Fourteenth. Candidates—Rep., Lemuel E. Quigg, New York, renominated; Tammany, John Quincy Adams, New York; S. M. D., Charles V. Fornes, New York; soc., Rich- ard Morton, New York. The vote in 1894 was: Rep., 24,332; dem., 18, mitt Philip’ B. Fifteenth. Candidates—Rep., Low, New York, renominated (indorsed by S. M._D.); Tammany, William H. Burke, New York; ind. Bryan clubs and peo. party, A. C. Fisk, New Yerk. The vote in 1804 was: 17,028; ind. dem., 4,827. Sixteenth. Candidates—Rep., Ben. L. Fairchild, Pelham He'ghts; rep., William L. Ward, Portchester; 8. M. D., James V. Lawrence, Yonkers; F. S. D., Eugene B. Travis, Peekskill. The vote in 1804 was: Rep., 24,853; dem., 19,204; nop., 362; pro., 624. Seventeenth. Candidates—Rep., Benjamin B. Odell, jr. Newburg, renominated; F. §. D., D. A. Morrison, Newburg; S. M.'D., R. A. Weldemann. The vote in 1894 was: 18,520; pro., 781. a Eighteenth. Candidates—Rep., Gen. John Henry Ketcham; S. M. D., Henry Metcalf, Cold ‘Spring; F.'S. D., Richard E. Connell. The vote at the last election was: Rep., 22,169; dem., 16,640; pro., 529. Nineteenth. Candidates—Rep., A. V. Cochran, Hudson; F. 8. D., Hugh W. M Rep., 21,562; dem., Rep., 19,327; dem., s. Clellan, | Chatham; S. M.D., Elmer T. Haines, Kinderhook; pro., N. B. Powers. ‘The vote at the last election was: Rep. 20,054; dem., 17,514; pro., 595. ‘Twentieth. Candidates—Rep., George N. Southwick, Albany, renominated The vote in 1804 was:* Rep., 19,199; dem., ); pro., 367; soc., 241; pop., 198. Twenty-first. Candidates—Rep., David T. Wilbur, Oneonta, renominated; S. M. D., L. Pell Clark, Springfield Center; dem., John H. Bagley, Catskill. he vote in 18)4 was: pro., 1,254. Twenty-second. Candidates—Rep., Lucien L. Littauer, Gloversvill . John Greene, Mechanicsville; Dr. J. S. Sweetman, Saratoga. The vote in 1894 was: Rep., 22,383; dem., } pro., 1,228; pop., 316. Twenty-third. Candidates—Rep., Wallace T. Foote, jr., Port Henry, renominated; dem., W. A. Huppuch, Sandy Hil The vote in 1894 was: Rep., 25,526; dem., 11,148; pop., 318. Twenty-fourth. Rep., 24, ; dem., S. M. pro., Candidates—Rep., Chas A. Chickering, Copenhagen, renominated; dem., O. M. Wood. The vote in 18M was: Rep., 23,320; dem., 13,4 1,23 ‘andidates—Rep., Jas. § Sherman, Utica, renominated (indorsed by D.); ind., rep., S. G. Heacock; F. S. Cornelius Haley, Utica. two years ago was B9; pro., 1,006: pop. it xth. Candidates—Rep., George Norwich, renominated; S. M. D., Binghamto: eS. os, Wales, Binghamton. : Rep., 29,149; dem., Alexande ‘The vote in 1894 w D. 31. venth, Candidates—Rep., Theo. L. Poole, Syracuse, renominated; James Belden, Syracuse, rep., renominated by 5. M. D. and McKinley League; pro., Herniah D, Fuller, Skaneateies. The vote in 1804 was: Rep., 24,46 pop., 220; socialist, Candidates—Rep., Sereno E. Payne, Auburn, renominated; F. S. D., Robert L. Drummond; 8. M. D.,'F. 0. Ma- son, Geneva. inhe vote in 1804 was: Rep., 29, 28; dém:, t : ates—Rep., Charles W. Gillett, Addison, renominated; F. 8. I Henry W. Bowes, Bath; S. M. D., Demel- ville Page, Cornellsville The vote in 1804 wa: 16,510: pro., 1,745; pop. Thirtieth. Candidates—Rep., Wadsworth, Geneseo, renominated; F. D., L. B. Cummings; S. M. D., George A. Sweet, Dansville: pro. Charles Freeman Williams, Middleport. ‘The vote in 1804 was: Rep., 24,541; dem, 13.950; pro., 1,648; pop., SST. Thirty-first. Candidates—Rep., Henry C. Brewster, Rochester, renominated; de Wm. E. Ryan; S. M. D., Wm. Henry Da , Wm. J. McPherson; peo., Howard Rep., 21,498; dem:, 15,530; pro., 588; pop., 663; soc., 41 Rep., 22,051; dem., 471. James W. Thirty-second. Candidates—Rep., Row- land B. Mahany, Buffalo, renominated; F. S. D., Chas. Rung; S. M. D., Mark b. Moore. The vote in 1894 was: Rep., 15,548; dem 1 prop., 376; soc., 3 Thirty-third. Candidates—Rep., Col. Alva S. Alexander; F. S. D., Henry W. Richard- son, Hamburg. The vote in 1894 was: Rep., 23,595; dem., 11,695; pro., 532; pop. 3 89C., 203. Thirty-fourth. Candidates—Rep arren B. Hooker, Fredonia, renominated; F. S. D., David F. Allen, Richburg; S. M. D., Si N. Wood. The vote in 1894 w 10,674; pro., 2,181; pop. ley Rep., 25,596; dem., 1, NORTH CAR@LINA, In Nerth Carolina the republicans and pepulists are generally working together, ard in some of the districts they have a direct fusion. First. Candidates—Dem., W. H. Lucas, Swan Quarter; pop., Harry Skinner, Green- ville, renominated. Skinner, the populist, is the present Rep- resentative, and is likely to be re-elected. In the House he will co-operate with the silver men. He was a delegate to the pop- ulist national convention, and is a supporter of Bryan and Watson. The vote at the last election was: Pop., 16,510; dem., 13,456. Second. Candidates—Rep., Geo. H. White, Tarboro’; dem., Fred. A. Woodward, Wil- scn, renominated; pop., —- Hoover. Woodward was elected to the present Congress by a vote of 14,721 to 9,413 repub- lican and $14 populist. The democrats expect to re-elect him. Third. Candidates—Dem., Frank Thomp- scn; pop., Frank E. Fowler, Clinton. ‘The republicans are supporting the pop- ulist. The vote last election was: Dem., 10,- 699; rep., 6,966; pop., 9,705. The populist has a good chance of eiection. Fourth. Candidates—Rep., Patrick T. Massey, Smithfield; dem., E. W. Pou; pop., William F. Strowd, Pittsboro’. Strowd carried this district at the last election and expects to carry it again. The vote w: Pop., 18,€ dem., 14,335. ‘The presence of a republican candidate in the field at this time is more favorable to the democrats. Fifth. Candidates—Rep., Thomas Settl Reidsville, renominated; dem., W. W. Kit- chin, Rocksboro’, indorsed by part of pops. pro., A. J. Dalby, Oxford. ‘ There is a hard fight in this district, the pepulists here having joined with the dem- ocrats | The district is nominally republi- cen. Settle carried it at the last election by a vote of 16,882 to 14,030 dem., 2,069 pop. id 252 pro. Si Candidates—Dem., James A.Lock- hart, Wadesboro’, renominated; pop., Rev. Charles H. Martin, indorsed by rep. This is a.close district and the indors2- ment of the populist by the republicans sives him a fair chance of election. Lock- hart, the democrat, is the present Repre- sentative. The vote on which he was elect- ed stood: Dem., 13,996; pop., 13,552. Seventh. Candidates—Dem., Samuel J. Pembertcn, Albemarle; pop., Alonzo C. Shuford, Newton, renominated. This district is now held by the populists and Shuford is now supported by the repub- licans. The vot? last year was: Shuford, pep., 15,371, against dem., 13,124. Eighth. Candidates—Rep., Romulus Z. Linney, Taylorsville, renominated, indorsed by pops.; dem., R. A. Doughton, The republicans now hold this district, and this candidate, who is the sitting member, is now indorsed by the populists. The vote by which he was elected two years ago was: Rep., 18,775; dem., 15,491, and 109 scattering. The republicans expect to carry the district. Ninth. ° Candidates—Rep., Richmond Pear- son, Asheville, renominated; dem., J. §. Adams, Asheville. The last vote in this district was close, and the democrats expect to recover it at this- election. Pearson was elected to the present Congress by a vote of 16,869 to 16,734 for the democrat. NORTH DAKOTA, The candidates-at-large are: Rep., Martin N. Johnson, renominated, and John Burke, dem., who ts indorsed by the populists. It is a close fight involved in the presidential contest. At the last election Johnson had 21,615 votes, against 19,660, dem.; 1,283, ind., and 439, pro. Thi time there is a straight fight on the silver question, which may pos- Grow, Glenwood, renommated; rep., Sam- uel A. Davenport, Erie, 8. M. D., Benja- min C. Potts; 8. M. D., Hay Walker, jr., Allegheny City; dem., DeWitt C. DeWitt, Bradford; dem’ and pop. Jerome T. Ail- ran, Juniata; pop., John P. Correll. The republican majority was over 200,000 sibly change the fesult. at the last election for each Congressman- Sao RIOGe at-large. They will both be elected this OHIO. time. The democrats and populists have fused First—Cancidates: Rep., Henry H. Bing- in nearly all the districts, and there are re-] ham, Philadelphia, renominated; dem., Horace E. James, Philadelphia; pro., J. Lewis Jenkins, Philadelphia. This district is surely republican: Rep., 26,957; dem., 10,995; pro., 171. . Seconé—Candidates: Rep., Robert Adams, Jt., Philadelphia, rcnominated; F. 8. D., P. F. Mullen, Philadelphia; pro., Edward B. Cooper, Philadelphia. ‘This district is surely republican: Rep., 17,550; dem., 5,488; pro., 148. " Talrd—Candidates: Rep., Frederick Hal- terman, Philadelphia, renominated; S. M. D., William McAleer, Philadelphia; soc. labor, Fred G. Haech, Philadelphia; pro., Charles Roades, Philadelphia; F. 8. D., Sam Hudson, Philadelphia. This ts the old Randall district. Halter- man, rep., was elected last time through a division in the democratic ranks. Fourth—Candidates: Rep., James Rankin Young, Philadelphia; F. 8. D., Mark D. Cunningham, Philadelphia; pro., A. Evanson, Philadelphia. The election cf James Rankin Young is conceded: Rep., 13,443; dem., 6,980. Fifth—Candidates: Rep., Alfred C. Har- mer, Philadelphia, renominated; F. S. D., Frank D. Wright, Philadelphia; pro., Sam- uel Christian, Philadelphia. The election of Harmer is coaceded: Rep., 42,461; dem., 16,056; pro., 624. Sixth—Candidates: Rep., John B, Robin- son, Media, renominated; rep., Thomas S. Butler, Chester; F. S. D., William H. Ber- ry, Chester. In this district the democrats stand a chance of success, through the fact that the republicans are divided between two ports of strong silver sentiment in the agri- cultural sections. A hot fight is being made, and there i§ #0 much smoke that a clear view of the situation is difficult to get. Two years ago the -républicans carried all but two of the twenty-one districts. They hope to hold as many this time, but the democrats claim that they will elect seven or eight members. First—Candidates: Rep., Gen. William B. pop. and F. 8. D., Shattue, Cincinna: Thos. J. Donnall¥y, Cincinnatt. Here the populists and democrats have fused, but the district is strongly repub- lican. The vote in 1894 was: Rep., 19,315; dem., 10,378; pop., 1,679; pro., 279. Second—Candidates: Rep.,Jacob H. Brom- well, Wyoming, renominated; F. S. D. and pop., D. S. Oliver, Cincinnati. The populists and democrats have fused, but the republican vote last election was largely in excess of their combined vote. ‘The vote stood: Rep., 22,247; dem., 10,709; pop., 2,448; pro., 239. ‘The republicans clatm the district. Third—Candidates: Rep.,Robert M. Nevin, Dayton; dem. and pop., John L. Brenner, Dayton. This is a democratic district, but it_was carried by Sorg two years ago by only a slender plurality, and the republicans think they mz y capture it. The vote last election Dem., 22,520; rep., 22,324; pop., 1,369; (0. The populists and democrats have this time. The result is doubtful. Fourth—Candidates: Rep., Rev. J. P. Mc- Lean, Allen county; dem. and pop., George A. Marshall, Sidney. Here the democrats and populists have} candidates. The vote last election was: combined, and the -district is democratic | Rep., 20 dem., 9,803; pro., 1,513. without the combination. The vote last] Seventh—Candidates: Rev., Irving P. election was: Dem., 15,388; rep., 13,910; pro., | Wagner, Norristown, renominated; dem., 1,002; pop., the district. 23. The democrats now claim | Chas. S. Vandegrift, Bensalem; pro., D. F. G. Barker. Fifth—Candidates: Rep., Francis B. De- The vote at last election was: Rep., Witt, Paulding, renominated; F. 8. D. and | 22; dem., 18,087. ‘: pop., David Meekison, Napoleon. Highth—Candidates: Rep., William 5S. ‘The democrats and populists have fused, and on the basis of the last vote this would sive them a small majority. In the Fifty- third Congress the district was represented by a democrat. DeWitt, the republican candidate, was elected to the present Con- Ss by a vote of 16,546 to 14,899, dem.; Kirkpatri:k, Easton; F. 8S. D., Laird K. Barber. This district is normally democratic, but there is trouble in the democratic ranks. Two democrats were nominated by a split convention, and while one candidate with- drew there is still bad feeling. The last 15, pop., and 16, pro. The democrats | vote was: Dem., 14,762; against 14,565 rep. claim the district. Ninth—Candidates: Rep., Oliver Wil- Sixth—Candidates: Rep., Seth Brown,]| liams, Catasauqua; dem., Daniel Ermen- Lebanon; dem. and pop., Harry Paxton, P- ©., Cincinnati, On the bases of the last two elections this district is too strongly republican to be car- ried by the combined democrat and populist vote. The vote last election was: 20,283, rep.; 12,505, dem.; 1,183, pop., and 1,419, pro. Seven ndidates: Republican, Walter L. Weaver, Springfield; democrat and pop- ulist, Dr. Francis M. Hunt, Piqua. The vote at the last election was: Repub- lican, 18,021; democrat, 11,731; populist, 1,- 3; prohibition, 1,459. "The republicans claim the district. Eighth—Candidates: Republican, Archi- bald Lybrand, Delaware; democrat and populist, McE, Dunn, Bellefontaine. At the last election the republican vote Was" 21,730, dgainst 11,740 democrat, 2,045 pcpulist, 1,645. prohibition. The district is probably republican, in spite of democrat and. populist-fusion. isi 1. 5 Ninth—Candidates: Republican, James H. Southard, Toledo (renominated); democrat and populist, Stephen Brophy, Toledo. The republican vote at the last election 15; democrat, 14,109; populist, 2,- M4. ‘The republicans claim the district. Tenth—Candidates: Republican, Lucien J. ‘Fenton, Winchester (renominated); demo- crat and populist; T. S. Hogan, Wellston. The democrats and populists "have -fused in this district, but their combined vote is far short of the normal republican vote. The last vote was 19,768, republican; 9,4 democrat; 1,49, populist, and 878, prohib uon. je Eleventh — Candidates: Republican. Charles H. Grosvenor; Athens (renomi- nated); democrat and populist, William: E, Finck, jr., New Lexington, The fusion of the silver forces does not! on the basis of former votes, overcome the republican majority. The last vote was: Republican, 20,731; democrat, 11,601; popu- list, 3,115; prohibitiontst, 1,000. Twelfth—Candidates: ‘Republican, David K. Watson, Columbus «renominated); dem- ocrat, John J. Lentz, Columbus; populist, Rev. ‘L. E. Finleys. This is a close district, represented dur- ing five Congresses up to the Fifty-fourth by Mr. Outhwaite, who has bolted the reg- ular democratic ticket. Shere is a strong gold sentiment in the disfiict, which is ex- pected to insure the election of a republi; can. Watson, the republican, carried it last time. Republican, 18,953; democrat, 362; populist, 2,015, Thirteenth—Candidates: Republican, Ste- phen R. Harris, Bucyrus (renominated); democrat, James A. Norton, Tiffin, Seneca county. This is a doubtful district. It is normally democratic, but was carried at the last eleetion-by the republicans. The republican vote was 19,131; democrat, 18,453; populist, 2,088; prohibition, 1,022. aay Fourteenth — Candidates: Republican, ‘Winfield 8. "Kerr, Mansfield REA democrat, John B. Coffinberry, Norwalk. The vote last election was: Republican, 21,302; de: rat, 14,261; populist, 1,930; pro- hilitian, .. This district was represent+ ed by Harter, democrat, in the Fifty-sec- ond and Fifty-third Congresses. “It is al strong gold district, and may go republi- can. = Fifteenth—Candidates: Henry C. Van Voorhis, Zanesville (renominated); demo- erat and populist, J. B. Tannehill,’McCon- nelsville. trout: pro., Isa1c P. Meikel. This is an old democratic district, but was carried at the last election by the republicans The vcte was: Rep., 21,278; dem., 19,325; pop., 518 The democrats claim the district now. Tenth—Candidates: Rep., Marriott Bro- sius, Laacaster, renominated; dem., Ed- ward D. Reilly, Lancaster. This is a solidly republican district, and there is little doubt of the election of Bro- sius for the fifth time. In 1804 the vote was: Rep., 19,266; dem., 7,181; pro., 723. Eleventh—Candidates: Rep., William Con- nell, Scranton; F. S. D., E. W. Merrifield; peo., John S. Zlupas. 5 This district frequently alternates be- tween the two parties, and a hot fight is now in progress. The last vote was: Hep., 14,104; dem.. 12,027; pro., 1,009; pop., 487. ‘Twelfth. Candidates—Rep., Morgan B. Williams, Wilkesbarre; F. S. D., John M. Garman. This district is regarded as in doubt, though the last vote was: Rep., 18,114: dem., 12,644. The democrats carried the district four years ago by over 1,000. Thirteenth. Candidates—Rep., Chas. N. Brumm, Minersville, renominated; F. S. D., Watson’ F. Shepard. This is another doubtful district, with the chances for the republicans. Brumm car- ried it last time by a vote of 13,949 against 11,718 for the democrat. Fourteenth. Candidates—Rep., Marlin E. Olmstead, Harrisburg; F. S. D., Jacob F. Klugh, Highspire. It is not thought that the democrats have any chance in this district. The republi- cons carried it last time by a vote of more than two to one. Fifteenth. Candidates—Rep., Codding, Towanda, Chas. P! Shaw. This is a solidly republican district by a vote of more than two to one on the last election. Sixteenth. Candidates—Rep., Horace B. Packer, Wellsboro’; peo., Luther B. Siebert. This district 1s republican by 5,000 plu- rality. Seventeenth. Candidates—Rep., Monroe H. Kulp, Shamokin, renominated; dem., Al- phonsus Walsh; pro., M. P. Lutz, Blooms- burg. ‘This is a close and doubtful district, with a tendency favorable to the democrats. The vote last election was: Rep., 12,677; dem., 11,683. Before that the democrats carried it. Kighteenth. Candidates—Rep., Thaddeus M. Mahon, Chambersburg, renominated; F. 8. D., Wm. E. Kearns. This district is republican by nearly 8,000 majority. ___Nineteenth. Candidates—Rep., Frank E. Hollar, Carlisle; ind. rep., James A. Stahle, Emigsville, withdrawn in favor of Hollar: F. 8. D., George J. Benner; 8. M. D., Charles A. Hawkins, York. The democrats have a fair chance of carrying this district on account of a di- vision among the republicans. The last vote was: Rep., 21,138; dem., 8,754. ‘Twentieth. Candidates—Rep., contest; F. S. D., R. C. McNamara, Bedford; soc. labor, Clarence Pieth. In this district there is a contest between Hicks and Kooser, republicans. The repub- lican majority last time was over 11,000. Twenty-first. Candidates—Rep., E. E. Robbins, Greensburg; F. 8. D., Samuel 8. James H. renominated; dem., i Blyholder. he vote last election was: Republican, : 19,201; democrat, 12.010; prohibition, 1,234; | part og erie ces,., Ante nee, Lae, vote: populist, 1,508. The republicans claim’ the Dev eis FE ee areas Twenty-second. Candidates—Rep., John Daizell, Pittsburg, renqgminated; 8. M. D., Elwin Z. Smith; F. 8. D., John Miller, Pittsburg. This is a republican district by almost three to one. Twenty-third. Candidates—Rep., William district. Sixteenth—Candidates: Republican, Lo- renzo Danford, St. Clairsville (renomi- nated); democrat and populist, N. H. Mc- Fadden, Steubenville. The yote last election was: Republican, 17,481; democrat, 10,300; populist, 1,977; pro- inated; 8. M. D., hibition, 1, The democrats carried the | A- Stone, Allegheny, renominated; a district in 1892 by a plurality of less than | J- J. Brooks; F. 8. ie, Bicramn Foster.” 100. Least) congressional vote: Rep., 13,721; venteenth—Candidates: Republican, Ad- | 2gainst 3,420 dem. i dison §. McClure, Wooster (renominatea); | _Twenty-fourth—Candidates: Republican, Ernest F. Acheson, Washington, renomi- nated; F. S. and populist, John Purman; prohibition, B. C. McGrew. The election of the republican is general- ty conceded. The vote two years ago w: Republican, 27,538; democrat, 17,304; popu- list, 2,221; prohibition, 995. Twenty-tifth — Candidates: Republican, James J. Davidson, Beaver; F. 8S. and peo- ple’s, John G. McConahy, New Castle. This district is republican by from 8,000 to 11,000. Twenty-sixth—Candidates: Republican, J. C. Sturtevant, Conneautsville; democrat and populist, Jos. C. Sibley. There is a hot fight in this district, with the result uncertain. The democrats claim the election of Sibley, who represented it in the Fifty-third Congress. At the last election the vote was: Republican, 15,729; democrat, 13,265; populists voting with the democrats. Twenty-seventh—Candidates: Republican, Charles W. Stone, Warren, renominated F. S. and people's, William J. Breene, democrat ‘and populist, Millersburg. There is a peculiar situation in the sev- enteenth district. The republican candi- date is a well-known free silver man, and is, therefore, distasteful to many republi- cans. The democrats and populists are united, and it is believed that they may elect their candidate. The vote last elec- tion was: Republican, 19,061; democrat, 17,- 403; populist, 3 prohibition, 343. Highteenth—Candidates: Republican, Rob- ert W. Taylor, New Lisbon (renominated); democrat and populist, Isaac R. Sherwood, Canton. The democrats are claiming that they have a chance to elect Sherwood, the fusion candidate. The vote at last election was: Republican, 20,803; democrat, 11,051; popu- list, 8,912; prohibition, 1,679. Nineteenth—Candidates: Republican, Ste- phen A. Northway, Jefferson (renominat- ed); democrat, W. S. Sawyer, Akron; popu- list, fusion, 8S. C. Thayer, Newton Falls. This is a strongly republican district. The J. A. McDowell, vote last election was;Republican, 22,361; | Venango. democrat, 7,164; populist, 4,492; prohibition, Republicans have a safe majority in this 1,530. c district. ‘Twentleth—Candidate§? Republican, Clif- ton B. Beach, Clevelénd (renominated): ‘democrat and popillist,’‘A. T. Van Tassel, Cleveland. nea The vote last eftctio¥¥ was: Republican, 327; democrat, #351;'Hopulist, 2,456; pro- hibition, 931; labér, -268. The ‘republicans claim the district. Twenty-first — Canditates: Republican, Theodore E. Burton, Cleveland (renominat- ed); democrat, Lé#muel'A, Russell, Cleve- land; populist, Dré L. 8. Tuckerman; so- cialist, Walter GiRett; Prohibition, John C. McDonough. ‘The vote in this Aistrit Republican, 17,968* denticrat, 13,260; popu- list, 1,804; socialist, 139; prohibition’ 480. The democrats are, hopéful in this distric:. ‘Twenty-eighth—Candidates: Republican, William C. Arnold, Dubois, renominated: fusion silver democrat, Jack L. Spangler, Bellefonte. This district is naturally democratic, but was carried by Arnold, republican, two years ago. The vote then was: Republican, 16,991; derfocrat, 15,197. RHODE ISLAND. Both districts are regarded as safely re- publican. First—Candidates: Republican, Melville Bull, Newport, renominated; sound money democrat, George T. Briggs; democrat, Geo. Brown, Providence. Second—Candidates: Republican, Adin B. Capron, Stillwater; democrat, Dr. Lucius F. C. Garvin; populist, E. 8. Pierce. last election was: In this state the congressional elections were held last June, with the following result: _ First. Thomas H. Tongue, rep., elected by a plurality of 94 votes, Second. Williqm R. Ellis, re-elected by a plurality of 432 votes. SOUTH CAROLINA. ‘The only district regarded as in doubt is the first. ‘The republicans occasionally carry this first district, and there is usually a con- test when the certificate is given to a dem- ocrat. The populists are united with the ‘The democrats elected but two members democrats. to the. preser.t Congress. These were in First—Candidates: Republican, G. W. the eighth and ninth districts. They are "3 . Murray, Charleston; democrat, William claiming that’ they will elect several this | Eiiott’ Beauport, renominated. time cn account of the alleged silver senti- ment in the mining and agricultural sev- tions. “The popvlists have a. candidate of their own for Congressman-at-large, but ‘The vote in 1894 was: Republican, 3,913; democrat, 5,650. : Second—Candidates: Republican, B. P. i Chatfield, Aiken; democrat, Jasper Talbott. are generally supporting the democrats in'|’° The vote in 1894 was: Democrat, 5,042; the’ several districts. y scattering, 31. ): At large—Candidates: Rep. Galusha A.'|\ Third—Candidates: Republican, Anson C, Merrick, Walhalla; democrat, Asbury C. Latimer, renominated. The vote in 1804 was; Republican, 985; democrat, 5,778; independent, 342. : Republican, Pratt 8. For Super, Laurens; democrat, Stanyarns Wil- Spartani 3 son, The vote in 1894 was: Republican, 2,771; dem 8,425. Firth Candidates: Republican, John F. Jones, = democrat, Thomas J. Strait, Lancaster, renominated. The vote im 1894 was; Republican, 1,545; |- democrat, 6,141; independent democrat, 1,163; scattering, 237. Sixth—Candidates: Republican, J. E. Wil- son, Florence; democrat, John L. Mc- Laurin, Marlboro county. The vote in 1894 was: Republican, 2,452; democrat, 8,171. Seventh—Candidates: Republican, T. B. Johnston, Sumter; democrat, J. William Stoks, Orangeburg. ‘The vote in 1894 was: Independent repub- lican, 2.656; regular republican, 56; demo- crat, 7,358; independent democrat, 4. SOUTH DAKOTA, In this state the result turns on the presidential contest. The Congressmen are elected at large, and both parties claim the election. The democrats and populists have fused. At. large—Candidates: Rep., I. Crawford, Pierre; pop., Freeman Knowles. Vote _in 1894: Rep., 40,623; dem., 8,040; Pop., 27,354; pro., 823. At large—Candidates: Rep., Robt. J. Gam- ble, Yankton, renominated; pop. J. E. Kelley. Vote in 1804: Rep., 40,388; dem., 8,102; Pop., 27,383; pro., 872. TENNESSER. There is no fusion between the demo- crats and populists. First—Candidates: Rep., Walter P. Brown- low, Jonesboro’; ind. rep., W. H. Nelson; dem., L. L. Lawrence, Greenville; pro., S. R. Chever, Untcoi City. This is a republican district. The last yote was: Rep., 18017; dem., &542; pop., "Second—Can¢idates: Rep., Henry R. Gib- son, Knoxville, renominated. This is a republican district. The last vote was: Rep., 16, dem., 13,191. Third—Candidate: Rep.. W. J. Clift, Chattanooga; dem., John A. Moon, Chatta- nooga; pop., —— Farris, Chattanooga. The republicans carried this district two years ago by a vote of 17,019 to 13,947. The democrats will have a hot fight to get it_back. Fourth—Candidates: Rep., Charles H. Whitney, Cookeville; dem., Benton McMil- lin, Carthage, renominated. ed is a democratic district by about 1,300. Fifth—Candidates: Rep., Dr, Sydney Hous- ton, Wartrace; dem., James D. Richardson, Murfreesboro’, renominated; pop., W. W. Erwin. The vote in the last election was: Dem., 11,440; Erwin vop., 9,543; rep., 320. It is re- garded as safely democratic. Sixth—Candidates: Rep. G. Q. Boyd, Clarksville; F. 8. D., John Wesley Gaines, Nashvill There is a strong gold sentiment in this district, but the reports from there state that Gaines will probably be elected. The Antyee was: Dem., 11,234; rep., 4,798; pop., 4,783. Seventh—Candidates: Rep., A. M. Hughes ir., Columbia; dem., N. N. Cox; pop., J. P, Blackburn. The district is reported as safe for any one the democrats nominate. The last pa was: Dem., 9,008; rep., 6,366; pop., B44. Eighth—Candidates: Rep., John E. Mc- Call, Lexington, renominated; dem., con- test. There is a close fight, with a fair chance of McCall's return from this district. Mc- Call got 13,071 votes at the last election, agains? 12,11 for the democrat. Ninth—Candidates: F. S. D., Rice A. Pierce; pop., John H. McDowell. The republicans are trying to help elect McDowell. Tne last vote was: Dem., 10,- G4; pop., 7,983. Tenth—Candidates: Dem., Josiah Patter- son, Memphis, renominated; F. S. D., E. W. Carmack. There is a strong gold sentiment in this district, and the result is doubtful. Pat- terson is a gold democrat. UTAH. At large—Candidates: F. 8. R., Lafayette Holbrook, Provo; dem., J. W. King, Provo. The free silver republican is expected to be elected. VERMONT. The delegation has been elected. The Representatives are: First—Rep., H. Henry Powers, Morrisville. Second—Rep., William W. Grout, Barton. TEXAS. In this state there are some peculiar con- ditions, brovght about by combinations be- tween the republicans, gold democrats and populists on the congressional ticket. The outcome is doubtful in several districts. First—Candidates;, Rep., H. C. Tompkins; F.S. D., Thos. Ball; pop., J. H. Eagle. Vote in 1894: Dem., 14,920; pop., 10,097, rep., 2,164. Second—Candidates: Rep., Jno. M. Clai- borne; F. 8, D., S. B. Cooper; pop., Benj. A. Calhoun, Vote in 1894: Dem., 23,292; pop., 16,223. Third—Canddates: F. S. D., R. De Gra fenreid; pop., W. E. Farmer Vote in 1894: Dem., 15,462; pop., 12,411. Fourth—Candidates: F. 8S. D., Judge Crawford; pop., J. A. (Cyclone) Davis; rep., M. W. Johnson. Vote in 1804: Rep., 1,726; dem., 15,873; pop., 14,515. Fifth—Candidates; F. 8. D., Joseph W. Bailey; pop., don. Vote in 1894: Rep., 13,540; dem., 1: Pop., 1,517. Sixth—Candidates: F. S. D., E. A. Burke; pop., Barnett Gibbs. Vote in 1894: Rep., 968; dem., 19,965; pop., 19,621. Seventh—Candidates: F. DB RL Henry; 8. M. D., E. Anthony; pop., W. A. Douthiit; rep., Dr. F. A. Pope. Vote in 1894: Rep., 17,092; dem., 18,822. Eighth—Candidates: F. S. D., S. Lanham; 8. M. D., J. Peter Smith; pop., C. H. Jen- kins. Vote in 1894: Dem., 16,480; pop., 16,104. Ninth—Candidates: F. S. D., Joseph D. Sayres; pop., Rev. Reddin Andrews; rep., W. K. Makenson. Vote in 1894: Dem., 18,460; pop., 16,591. Tenth—Candidates: F. S. D., J. H. Shel- burne; pop., Noah Allen; rep., R. B. Haw- ley. Vote in 1894: Dem., 12,177; pop., 7,874; rep., 10,870. Eleventh—Candidates: F. 8. D., R. Kle- berg; S. M. D., Dr. T. W. Moore; pop., J. M. Smith; rep., H. Grass. Vote in 1894: Dem., 17,946; pop., 16,089. Twelfth—Candidates: F. 8. D., J. L. Slay- don; Rep., Geo. H. Noonan; pop., Taylor McRae. Vote in 1894: Rep., 11,958; dem., 11,045; Pop., 4,213. Thirteenth—Candidates: F. S. D., J. A. Stevens; pop., H. L. Bentle: Vote in 1894: Rep., 1,566 dem., 13,687; Pop., 13,321; ind. dem., 5,788. VIRGINIA, In this state the republicans are fighting energetically for Congressmen, counting upon the aid of the gold democrats to les- sen the free silver vote. First. Candidates—Rep., Walter B. Tyler, Fredericksburg; dem., W. A. Jones, War- saw. Vote in 1894—Dem., 11,598; rep., 6,944; pep., 461. In this district the free silver democratic candidate, W. A. Jones, will probably be elected. The district is more completely agricultural than any in the state, Fred- ericksburg being the only town of con- siderable size in the district. The senti- ment of the majority of the white people in the district is for free silver. There is a very strong sound money sentiment in Accomac county on the eastern shore, and in Fredericksburg, as well as throughout a large part of Caroline county. A large number of disaffected democrats in the district will support Tyler for currency views. The district has been twice car- ried by the republicans. Second. Candidates—Rep., R. A. Wise, Williamsburg; dem., William A. Young, Norfolk; 8S. M. D., William Whaley, Nor- folk. Vote in 1894—Dem., 12,375; rep., 8,868. There is a very hot fight on, and the re- sult is hard to ict. This is the only district in the state that sent a gold i ard delegation to Chicago. There is a very strong sound money sentiment in Norfolk and Portsmouth, and in the counties in the district there are more sound money voters than will be found in any like number of counties in any district in the state. . Third. Candidates—Rep., Lunsford L. Lewis, Richmond; dem., John B. Lamb, Richmond; pro., J. O. Alwood, Richmond. ‘Vote <in’ 1894—Dem., 11,745; rep., 4,653; pop., 1, ‘The fight in the third district is to be one of stiffest in the state. Captain John Lamb, the free silver democratic can- didate, is a confcderat: an man. fe soldicr, get some strength for this reason. He is original free silver and will The trict includes the city of Richmond, which is the stronghold in money democrats, who will heaviest vote in the city. doubtful. Fourth. Candidates—Rep., the state of ‘the sound poll their The result is R. T. Thorp, Boydton; dem., Sydney P_ Epes; pop., J. Thomas Goode, Skipwith, Vote -in 18M—Dem:, 8.773 pop., 1,116. 3 Republicans are rep., 990; claiming this district. RT. Thorp is making a vigorous fight tor election on the republican t retirement of J. Thomas Goode, the list nomince, has. thrown m midable competitor. Martinsville; dem., Claude ‘hatham, renominated. A. Swanson, nominee for ri the republican candidate, r. Brown defeated date in 1886. Since the WwW. democratic nominee, ine crats claim the disirict by s Sand votes. The district equally divided. There and perfect harmony cans. Sixth. Candidates—Dem., Pe: Lynchburg, renominated; 8. M. ford, Bedford. Vote in 1894—Dem 550. free among 10,602; pop. The result is doubtful. populist leaders will for Otey will, pers majorit Seventh. Candidate Walker, Mt. Jackson: dem., Madison C. H.; J. S. Harnsber; Vote in 18M—Dem., 11,041; pop., 248. It is claimed by ih will be elected. Eighth. Candidates—Re Caull, Brandy station; dem. Culpeper. Vote in 1894—Dem. Pop., G28. The result is i: doubt. stamp 10,801; jams, Wytheville. Vote in 1894—Rep., 14,287; Pop., 271. Republicans expect to hold tory. General Walker was on the ground that what was now. tument in this district. appears now to be <i Whi ubtful Jority. Tenth. Candfdates—Ren., Staunton; dem., 11. D. Flood, mattox. Vote in 1894—Dem., 12,422; 6. most certain on account of th ment. WASHINGTON. The democrats and popu! are elected at large. In 1894 was elected by a vote of 45,81 2. It is now claimed that t gold faction in the help out the republicaas. Doolittle, Tacoma, renominate: J. H. Lewis, Seattle. crat, 14,602; populist, 26,128. At large—Candidates: C. Jones, Spokane. Vote in 1894: Republiean, ond ticket), 25,643. in all but the fourth district. doubtful in all districts. First—Candidates: Republica crat, W. W. Arnett, Wheeling W. Stone, New Martinsvitle. crat, 17,390. Second—Candidates: wood. Vote in 1894: Reritfblic crat, 21,387; populist, 336; Third—Candidates: Republic P. E. W. Wilsen, Gharies:on: Vote in 1894: crat, 19,538; populist, S41. Fourth—Candidates: Republi: and populist, Vote in 1894: Repy i crat, 1 > populist, 1,418. WISCONSIN. this state, not expect much from it. demcecrats. First—Candidates: Republi Cooper, Racine, renominated populist, J. L. Mahoney, Jam Vote in 1804: Republican, erat, 12,334; populist, 2,528. oa hering, Mayville, renominated pop., 455; pro., 1,433. cock, Necedah, renominated; pop., Alfred J. Davis, Bernevel Vote in 1894: Rep., 2 Fourtl—Candidate: Schilling, Milwaukee, indorsed crats; nat. sil., James L. Gai Vote — Rep., 17,95 11 ney, Vote in 1894: Rey pop., 3,794. Oshkosh. W. W. O'Keefe, Ashland. Pop., 2,187. Tenth—Candidates: Rep., F, 8. Parker, West Superior. Vote in 1894: Rep., 19.836; Pop., 3,855. WYOMING. populist. Fifth. Candidates—Rep., John R. free silver tection, and J. BR. will be close. the democratic i rn. Populist candidate, retired from the and went on the stump for the fro. is is great enthusiasm The result is altogether dou democrats have one of the recognized silver leaders as their candidates in Peter Jacob P-» z Republicans regard this district in Washington. The two Rep be carried for silver, »ut there democratic At large—Candidates: Republican, Vote in 1894: Republican, 35,9 Republic Hyde, Spokane, renominated; democ Republican, G. Dayton, Phillippi, réenominate crat and populist, Willian G. Bro; Republican, 23, 18,197; dem., 1 Third—Candidates: Rep., Joseph W. Bab- Minor, Sturgeon Bay, renominated. 9,002; dem. : Rep., Alexan art, Wausau, renominated; dem. and pop., ‘icket. The popu- ost of his strength for Epes. While ‘the free silver- ites do not concede Mr Thorp's el they do acknowledge that he is a for- tion Rrown, A. Swanson; Vote in 180i—Dem., 10,750; rep., S417; Pop., 1, Republicans claim this district. The fight in the fifth district between Claude nai- silver silver demo- everal thou- erdinarily the republi- tful. ‘Otey, r J. . D., D. Rade rep., 8,288; silver a free J. Otey. Since J. Hampton Moze, the re- publican candidate, has been taken down Otey has a stronger show to win. ‘The sixth district was the populist stronghold of Virginia, having poiled in 1 SH) pop= ulist votes.” The practical fusion of the free silver democrats and populis’s, and the fact that J. Haskins Hobson, chairman of the populist staie committe other Jam: ‘ger, re e democrats that Hay. P., Patrick H. Me- Ww . F. Rixey, rep. 84505 Ninth. Candidates—Rep., James A. Wale ker, Wytheville, dem., Samuel W. Will- dem., 13,331; this district, Both sides are g!ready claiming the vic- elected two years ago on a free silver platform, but the free silver democrats are claiming that many republicans will vote for Williams good enough for Walker then is good enough for them There {3 a strong sound mon y sen- le the result the chances are in favor of Walker by a small-ma- Yost, West Appo- ¢ . Tep., 11,530; e gold have fused ntatives 4 republican ainst 14,- State will a strorg party to . mocrat, a; ; demo- &. c ‘at, W. demo- crat, 14,503; also democrat (second ticket), 14,602: populist, 26,285; also populist, (sec- WEST VIRGINIA. The populists and democrats hi fused The result is n, Blackburn B. Dovener, Wheeling, renomina‘ed; demo- 3 populist, E. Vote in 188: Republizan, 21,845; demo- Alston demo- » Kang- an, 2444; dem Charles Dorr, :.eddison;(democrat and populist, demo- can, Warren Miller, Huntington, renominated; democrat Walter Pendieton, populist, G. Warren Hayes, Spencer. Hamlin; ; demo- The gold sentiment is strong throughout and the fusion democrats do There is fusion in every district between the populisis and nm, Henry A, sv Second—Candidates: Rep., Edward Sauer- ; dem. and 325 dem. and ld. 364; dem., 14,68. Rep., Theobold Ot- jen, Milwaukee, renominated; pop., Robert by demo- Milwaukee. dem., 12,375; Pop., 7,110. Fifth—Candidates: Rep., Samvel 8. Bar- West Bend, renominated; dem. and pop., G. M. Winans, Waukesha. 18,681; dem., 13,057; Sixth—Candidates: Rep., J. H. Davidson, Oshkosh; dem. and pop., W. F. Greenwald, Vote in 1894: Rep., 21,718; dem., 14,919; pop., 320. Seventh—Candidates: Rep., Michael Grif- fin, Eau Claire, renominated; pop. C. M. Hiivara. ‘ Vote in 1804: Rep., 17,489; dem., 9,996; Pop., 1,620. Eighth—Candidates: Rep., Edward 8. n22, ler Stew- Vote in 1894: Rep., 22,741; dem., 14,910; John J. Jen- kirs, Chippewa Falls, renominated; pop. dem., 9,034; In 1894 the republicans carried Wyomi: by 10,068, to 6,151 democratic and 2; At large: Candidates—Rep., F. W. Mon- dell, New Castle, renominated; dem., Jno. E. Osborne, Rawlins; pop., William Brown, Big Horn City. While it is true that the democrats and Populists have fused this year, it is not be- lieved that the combined vote will overcome the republican majority. ARIZONA. In 1894 the vote for delegate nae: dem., 4,772; pop., 2,902. t dem., M. A. Smit! NEW MEXICO, In 1894 the vote for delegate 18,113; dem., 15,351; pop., 1,835. At large: Candidates—Rep. Catron, Santa Fe, renominat Bradford Prince. OKLAHOMA, In 1894 the vote for delegate 21,892; dem., 12,074; pop., 15,894. Candidates—Rep. Rep., Candidates—Rep., A. J. Doran; ; pop., W. O'Neil. was: Rep., Thos. B. ; pop., i. was: Rep. Dennis dem. and