Owen sought adherents from the ranks of the Douglas Democrats, using as his argument the fact that the Democratic party was divided against itself and that their party leaders had injured the reputation of the party beyond recovery.^' Not many Democrats, however, appear to have joined the RepubHcans in San Jose at this time. On the contrary, their dual elements seem to have been drawn somewhat closer together. Owen mentioned some evidences of fusion in the Democratic state nominations. He bitterly denounced the Douglas Democrats in this connection, in an editorial which appeared in the July 25 issue of the Mercury ^ taking them to task for assuming to be with the Republicans in sentiment and at the same time striving to maintain their identity as Democrats.^^
The Douglas Democrats answered these charges by calling a mass meeting of all local Democrats who were opposed to fusing with the secessionists.^^
The editor of the San Jose Tribune held out very little hope for the Republicans in the pending state election.^* Owen, for his part, saw^ all the issues and platforms of the various parties boiled down to the fact that the only question before California was whether or not the war policy of the Administration would be wholeheartedly supported.^^
The elections were held on September 4. The Mercury announced the results on the twelfth. Owen estimated Stanford's county majority over the Douglas Democrat, John Conness, and the "Compromise" Democrat, John R. McConnell, as "about 570." The Santa Clara County tabulation was as follows: Stanford, 756; Conness, 113; and McConnell, 357. These are Owen's figures, which apparently are wrong because his own figures indicate Stanford's majority as only 386.^^ It is interesting to note that the county Democrats voted about three to one in favor of the Compromise Democratic candidate, McConnell, over Conness. This is indicative of the relatively large number of secessionist sympathizers in and about San Jose. A total of 1,195 votes wer€ cast in San Jose. The Mercury gave the total for the state as: Stanford, 56,038; Conness, 30,944; and McConnell, 32,751.^^ Davis verifies the report of the Mercury}^ The state Democrats, it will be noticed, slightly favored McConnell over Conness.
Owen viewed the election results as fortunate and stated that had the Republicans not gained a victory, California would have been in serious economic difficulties because "Capitalists became frightened . . . for all their wealth was at stake." He accused the previous Democratic administrations of overtaxing the people of California.^^
George O'Daugherty, the editor of the Tribune^ in reference to the split in the Democratic vote, wrote that he hoped this election would prove "to be a never to be forgotten lesson to the Democrats of California."^^
The Democrats gained minor successes in the Congressional elections of 1862. Owen rationalized these gains by writing that the Democratic party
