travesties on religion as the scenes in John Allen's dance-hall.
Nor let the Association, in adding fresh advertisements to newspapers, overlook the task of reforming those already there. These are mostly so full of lies, obscenity, and all sorts of evil, that it would be an Augean labor to cleanse the columns. Suppose the "Advertising Association" should be formed of men pledged never to say anything but the exact and literal truth in their own business advertisements—how would that do, to start with? Suppose they should unite to put down the custom of puffing quack medicines on alleged religious grounds, in editorial columns? Suppose they should consider that habit which some papers have of dividing themselves into a secular and a Sabbath moiety, but putting secular advertisements in both departments? One begins, in fine, to see how the uses of the Association open, and therefore to hope that it will not degenerate into becoming a mere instrument for paying sundry advertising agents a living out of "commissions," and "percentages off."
PRESIDENTS AND PRESIDENT MAKING.
The Presidential contest has resulted in the choice of a majority of electors constructively pledged to cast their official votes for General Grant. Upward of five millions ballots were thrown, whereof the Grant electors received about a quarter of a million majority. This November vote makes Grant's election in due time morally sure, because the Republican electors have no reason to be dissatisfied with him—although, should they for any cause become so, they would of course have the power to ignore the expressed will of the people, and elect another man.
What names for President have we heard, this tumultuous autumn, but Grant and Seymour; what for Vice-President but Blair and Colfax? There was not a "scattering" vote in a million; nor in 1864 was a ballot thrown except for Lincoln or McClellan.
This election points a fresh moral for the political subject discussed in the October "Driftwood," and illustrates all that was then said. At this writing, the following is a fair approximate table of results:
 | A table should appear at this position in the text. See Help:Table for formatting instructions. |
FOR GRANT.
States. Electors. Popular Maj. Maine 7 28,000 New Hampshire... 5 7,000 jNIassachusetts 12 70,000 Rhode Island 4 6,400 Connecticut 6 3,000 Vermont 5 31,000 Pennsylvania 26 20,000 West Virginia 5 8,000 Ohio 21 35iOoo Indiana 13 10,000 Illinois 16 50,000 Michigan 8 30,000 Wisconsin 8 i5>5oo Iowa 8 50,000 Nebraska 3 4,000 Tennessee 10 3°>°oo California 5 1,000 Nevada 3 1,000 Missouri 11 20,000 Kansas 3 5,000 North Carolina (?). . 9 3,000 Minnesota 4 10,000 South Carolina 6 5,000 Florida 3 (By Leg) Arkansas(?) 5 1,000 Alabama (?) 8 .. 2,000 26 States 214 445,900
FOR SEYMOUR.
New York 33 8,000 New Jersey 7 2,700 Delaware 3 2,500 Maryland 7 35, 000 Kentucky 11 70,000 Georgia 9 35, 000 Louisiana 6 30,000 Oregon(') 3 1,000 8 States .. 79 184,200
Here, reckoning the total vote roundly at 5,000,000 (which it exceeds), Grant's popular majority is seen to be one-twentieth part of the whole vote; but his electoral majority (135) will be no less than nine- twentieths of the whole electoral vote (294). Again, suppose these changes from Grant to Seymour:
Penns'lvania 10,000 26 Indiana 5,000 13 California 500 S Nevada 500 3 North Carolina 1,500 9 Connecticut 1,500 6 Alabama 1,000 8 Total 20,000 70
These 70 electoral votes, added to Seymour's 79, would make him President—and
