THE ELECTIONS: WHERE THE EXPECTED HAPPENED S O widely distributed were the reverses which the Republicans encountered on Election Day this year, November 7, in the States under their control that States like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and California stand up like islands in a sea of Democratic votes. Of course Pennsylvania remained Republican. What swept Republicans out of power in other States was the protest against standpatism. It takes a veritable tidal wave to overthrow the Republican structure in Pennsylvania; but there was no tidal wave there because the Republican party itself had built a firm breakwater by nominating for the Governorship the progressive leader, Gifford Pinchot. In Wisconsin the success of the Republican ticket was mainly nominal. It was really a success, and an overwhelming success at that, of the La Follette machine. There what Mr. John Ballard in his recent special correspondence in The Outlook described as "the revolt against the Yankee" was complete. Not only was La Follette himself sent back to the Senate, but La Follette's candidate for Governor was overwhelmingly elected and La Follette's ally, Victor Berger, was once more elected to Congress. We comment elsewhere on the Republican success in Iowa, as a part of the revolt of the farmers. Substantially the election in that State was a defeat for the Republican machine, which was not heartily for the Brookhart candidacy. In California the Republican candi NEW SENATORS-ELECT dates were generally successful; but elections in California have ceased to be signs of party strength. There nonpartisanship has been erected into a system. Hiram Johnson's triumphant re-election to the Senate is less of a victory for the party than a victory for himself personally and for the policies for which he stands. California sees in Hiram Johnson a man of outstanding personality, of great earnestness, and of devotion to a course which he believes essential to the liberties and rights of the people. This does not mean that all who voted for him always trust his judgment or approve his willingness on occasion to become virtual political partner of Hearst; but it does mean that they trust his general purpose and believe in his sincerity and ability. Like La Follette, Hiram Johnson has the record of remarkable achievement in his State; and in that fact alone may be found one great reason for the indorseIment which the voters of the State have repeatedly given him. The election of Friend W. Richardson, the Republican candidate for Governor, was not by any means merely a party triumph. In fact, the nomination of Mr. Richardson was a most unexpected reversal for the Republican organization. Mr. Richardson made his campaign for the nomination on the issue of economy. He is an old newspaper owner and editor, the only President the California Editorial Association has ever had; and he knew how to get his idea of economy before the voters of the State through the medium of the country press. He made his campaign in his own automobile and was his own chauffeur, and the talking he did was chiefly to business men informally in store and office and to farmers and orchardists in the open. Behind him was a record for economy and efficiency as State Treasurer. With this record and by this means of campaigning he defeated Governor Stephens for renomination. Then he proceeded to carry on a campaign for the Governorship. He placed himself on the "Dry" side of the prohibition issue, and he has again won. California thus, like practically every other State where the Republicans were successful, records not a victory for the Republican organization, but for a progressive group which had secured control of the party organization or gained the party nominations. THE THE ELECTIONS: GAIN AND LOSS HE defeat of ex-Senator Beveridge in Indiana has been on the whole a disappointment to the country at large. Few men have rendered better service in the Senate than he. Mr. Ralston was chosen partly because the people of Indiana have respect for him and regard his record as Governor of the State with approval; but chiefly because he received the votes of those opposed to Mr. Beveridge. As we said last week, Mr. Beveridge's defeat was due in part to his war record, which did not please exservice men; but it was also due to the fact that, in spite of his progressive record, radicals suspected him while conservatives feared him. He encou tered the opposition of those who appealed to race and group prejudice, and at the same time he had at least the passive opposition of the supporters of the Old Guard faction whom he defeated in the primary. A distinct gain of National significance was the defeat of Mr. Pelletier as candidate for District Attorney in Suffolk County, Massachusetts. He had been not only displaced from office but disbarred. It was feared that his appeals to religious prejudice would bring about his re-election. After his disbarment a law was passed making only lawyers eligible for the District Attorneyship, but supporters of Mr. Pelletier had this law submitted to the people for a referendum. To the credit of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and particularly to the people of Boston, the law was sustained and Mr. Pelletier defeated. In Maryland the defeat of Senator France was a gain to the Senate, not because of Senator France's opinions, but because of the fact that his candidacy depended largely upon appeals to prejudice and selfish interests. His successor will be William Cabell Bruce, a Democrat of the Underwood school and one of the best lawyers of Maryland. From Missouri Mr. Reed goes back to the Senate as an anti-Wilson Democrat who has been conspicuous chiefly as a violent irreconcilable both in war and in peace. In the defeat of Senator Sutherland, of West Virginia, the Senate loses a conscientious and useful member. His place will be taken by Matthew Mansfield Neely, a lawyer and a business man of the State. THE ELECTIONS: NEWBERRYISM by Woodbridge N. Ferris was due undoubtedly in part to his defense of his colleague, Senator Newberry. It is a sound instinct which rouses the people against men whom they suspect of buying their way into the United States Senate. In the past the use of money for purchasing seats in the chief legislative body of a nation was the curse of the old English rotten-borough system. It has shown itself in the past in this country. The case of Senator Lorimer, of Illinois, bad as it was, was not the most flagrant in our history. If the people ever became indifferent to such abuses, self-government in America would face disaster. It is because in various sections of the country the people have seized upon the case of Senator Newberry as an example of such misuse of money that, not only in Michigan, but in other States, the defenders of Senator wberry have encountered bitter oppoAt the same time a man like n. Gifford Pinchot has been able to spend That there was danger in demagogic If the people want to keep the Senate free from the control of money power, they must be on their guard, not only against the open use of money for legitimate publicity, but against the use of money in getting political publicity indirectly. A man who controls great organs of public opinion by means of his wealth can advertise his policies and his candidature without having to account for it as political expenditures. The wealthy man who gains publicity by means of commercial advertising, which does not have to be accounted for as political expenditures, has a great political advantage. This issue really is not mainly concerning the amount of money expended; it usually resolves itself into an issue between a man or a group that the people trust and a man or a group that they do not trust. through parts of this territory the stories about local banks and individual business in actual or incipient bankruptcy were so extreme that one hesitated to print them without investigation and verification. Among other things, I was told that in some counties of Montana the schools would not open this fall because the farmers could not meet the taxes to support them. In this wheat and potato territory, and because of this condition, the issue that all the local candidates talked about and that all the people wanted to hear about, was not the tariff, nor prohibition, nor foreign relations, nor any of the other issues that the East talked about and heard about. The issue in this wheat and potato territory was deflation and the Federal Reserve Board-in short, the National system of currency, banking, and credit. The farmers in this territory blame their troubles on the policy of deflation, and that was what they wanted to talk about and hear about. The farmer has come to realize that income is a matter of purchasing power, and not a matter of dollars and cents received. In this respect farmers are better economists than leaders of organized labor-perhaps because farmers have paid more dearly for their education. This understanding of the disadvantages under which they have been laboring, combined with an increased sense of political power and group interest, has brought forward radical farm representatives whose remedies are not always carefully conceived. Perhaps the outstanding Senator of this type who will appear in Washington as a result of farmer dissatisfaction is Smith W. Brookhart, of Iowa. Brookhart has been a teacher in a country school, a farmer who has won prizes for his pigs, apples, and corn, and a man with a splendid record in the war. He was a former National Guard colonel who attained the same rank in the National service. Senator Brookhart is pledged to work for the repeal of the Esch-Cummins Act, the reopening of the Newberry case, and a "real soldier's bonus." Senator Brookhart is in his early fifties and is the father of five children. Less radical than Brookhart is the representative of the farm bloc who will speak for Nebraska in the Senate. Senator Howell was supported by the Non-Partisan League, the German element in the Nebraska electorate, and the prohibitionists. Mr. Howell is bone-dry. Senator-elect Howell is reported to be against the ship subsidy, for a soldier bonus, and for a rational tariff. The meaning of the last phrase is distinctly a matter of definition. The fact that Mr. Howell was a manager of General Leonard Wood's Presidential campaign in Nebraska does not lead one to fear much from the fact that he was supported by the German ele ment. Senator Howell is well known for his management of the municipally owned utilities of the city of Omaha. He is a graduate of Annapolis and is in his fifty-ninth year. Nebraska elected for its Governor Mr. Charles W. Bryan, the brother of William Jennings Bryan. Mr. Bryan has been for many years the publisher of the "Commoner." At first it appeared that the NonPartisan League had failed in its attempt to elect Lynn J. Frazier to the Senate. Later returns, however, indicate that Mr. Frazier has been elected. He represents an extreme phase of the agricultural unrest which has been behind the Socialistic policies of the NonPartisan League. Another new Senator who will belong to the farm bloc is Dr. Henrik Shipstead, a St. Paul dentist, who will represent Minnesota. Dr. Shipstead is in his Keystone Paul Thompson Keystone B. K. WHEELER, OF MONTANA Democrat NEW SENATORS-ELECT historical difference between France and Switzerland than it is to comprehend the subtler distinctions which differentiate the character of our individual States. There is a tendency for Americans to think of State rights as artificial when they prevent them from doing what they wish. Perhaps for this reason we do not give them credit enough for the advantages which they afford us. We object to State barriers when they prevent us from protecting the children of the Nation as we believe they should be protected. We do not remember at the same time that our compartment system of Government permits us to try out political experiments by a laboratory method which would be impossible under any other form of government. To the foreigner our multitudinous divorce laws often seem nothing less than ridiculous. To the American, who understands the spirit of his Govern C. C. DILL, OF WASHINGTON STATE Democrat ment, these divorce laws are an indication of diverse public opinions which could not be harmonized without a moral sacrifice on the part of large portions of our population. This diversity of State opinion is well illustrated by the popular referendums at the last election. We have not seen the text of many of these amendments, but their purport seems clear enough from newspaper accounts of the votes. In the social field we find that South Dakota voted two to one for a strict ban on all Sunday festivities. Montana, on the other hand, authorized the adoption of a pari-mutuel system of betting on horse-races. Nevada, by popular vote, has refused to change its divorce laws. Massachusetts declines to censor her motion pictures. Massachusetts rejected the measure providing for more stringent State prohibition enforcement, but California took |