The Learning Communities Guide to

Improving Reading Instruction Valerie

Hastings Gregory
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-learning-communities-guide-to-improving-reading-
instruction-valerie-hastings-gregory/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Communities and Cultural Heritage 1st Edition Valerie

Higgins

https://ebookmeta.com/product/communities-and-cultural-
heritage-1st-edition-valerie-higgins/

An Introductory Sanskrit Reader Improving Reading

Fluency Antonia M. Ruppel

https://ebookmeta.com/product/an-introductory-sanskrit-reader-
improving-reading-fluency-antonia-m-ruppel/

Word by Word 101 Ways to Inspire and Engage Students by

Building Vocabulary Improving Spelling and Enriching
Reading Writing and Learning 1st Edition Larry Swartz

https://ebookmeta.com/product/word-by-word-101-ways-to-inspire-
and-engage-students-by-building-vocabulary-improving-spelling-
and-enriching-reading-writing-and-learning-1st-edition-larry-
swartz/

The Princeton Field Guide to Dinosaurs Second Edition

Gregory S. Paul

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-princeton-field-guide-to-
dinosaurs-second-edition-gregory-s-paul/
The Princeton Field Guide to Dinosaurs 2nd Edition
Gregory S. Paul

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-princeton-field-guide-to-
dinosaurs-2nd-edition-gregory-s-paul/

Reading Weather The Field Guide to Forecasting the

Weather Jim Woodmencey

https://ebookmeta.com/product/reading-weather-the-field-guide-to-
forecasting-the-weather-jim-woodmencey/

Inquiry Based Learning Designing Instruction to Promote

Higher Level Thinking 3rd Edition Teresa Coffman

https://ebookmeta.com/product/inquiry-based-learning-designing-
instruction-to-promote-higher-level-thinking-3rd-edition-teresa-
coffman/

Cakewalk (The Busy Bean #3) 1st Edition Claire Hastings

& Heart Eyes Press [Hastings

https://ebookmeta.com/product/cakewalk-the-busy-bean-3-1st-
edition-claire-hastings-heart-eyes-press-hastings/

A JUDEO CHRISTIAN GUIDE TO HEALING FROM COMPLEX TRAUM

1st Edition Valerie Stephens

https://ebookmeta.com/product/a-judeo-christian-guide-to-healing-
from-complex-trauma-1st-edition-valerie-stephens/
butuh lengkap hub
sharmilacantiqa@gmail.com
This book is dedicated to our husbands, Arlen Gregory and Peter Nikas, who
have supported our passion for reading, writing, and leading. This book also
is dedicated to the thousands of leaders and teachers who are committed to
creating professional learning communities where teaching and learning for
literacy thrive.
Copyright © 2005 by Corwin Press.

First Skyhorse Publishing edition 2017

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without the
express written consent of the publisher, except in the case of brief excerpts in critical
reviews or articles. All inquiries should be addressed to Skyhorse Publishing, 307 West
36th Street, 11th Floor, New York, NY 10018.

Skyhorse Publishing books may be purchased in bulk at special discounts for sales
promotion, corporate gifts, fund-raising, or educational purposes. Special editions can also
be created to specifications. For details, contact the Special Sales Department, Sky Pony
Press, 307 West 36th Street, 11th Floor, New York, NY 10018 or
info@skyhorsepublishing.com.

Skyhorse® and Skyhorse Publishing® are registered trademark of Skyhorse Publishing,

Inc.®, a Delaware corporation.

Visit our website at www.skyhorsepublishing.com.

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available on file.

Cover design by Michael Dubowe

Print ISBN: 978-1-63450-781-3

Ebook ISBN: 978-1-63450-792-9

Printed in the United States of America

 CONTENTS
Foreword
Preface
About the Authors
1. Considering How to Lead Schoolwide Improvement in Reading
Constructive Reflections
2. Personalizing Reading Instruction
What Should We Consider When Planning to Differentiate Literacy
Instruction?
How Can We Get to Know Students’ Interests?
What Is the Link Between Student Motivation, Attitude, Efficacy, and
Reading Materials?
How Can We Match Students to Text?
How Can We Use Assessments to Personalize Reading Instruction?
What Are Some Additional Ways to Personalize Reading Instruction?
What Were the Big Ideas in This Chapter?
Constructive Reflection
3. Managing Environments for Literacy
What Do Students Need from a Literacy Learning Environment?
What Types of Texts Support Rich Literacy Environments?
How Do We Group Students for Reading and Writing at High Levels?
How Is Time Used to Promote High Levels of Reading and Writing?
What Routines Can Be Established for Independent and Small Group
Work?
How Is Classroom Space Organized to Promote High Levels of Reading
and Writing?
What Were the Big Ideas in This Chapter?
 Constructive Reflection
4. Ensuring Student Engagement
Why Are Time, Text, Talk, and Task Important to Ensuring Student
Engagement?
What Characterizes Student Engagement?
What Instructional Frameworks Promote Engagement?
What Can We Do to Promote Higher Level Thinking and Talk About
Text?
How Can We Engage Students in Writing and Thinking About Their
Reading?
What Were the Big Ideas in This Chapter?
Constructive Reflection
5. Emphasizing Active Teaching
What Characterizes Exemplary Classrooms?
How Can We Increase Learner-Scaffolded Versus Teacher-Controlled
Instruction?
How Can We Organize Literacy Instruction that Reflects the Teaching-
Learning Zone?
What Should Collaborative Teams Consider in Planning Effective
Instruction?
What Were the Big Ideas in This Chapter?
Constructive Reflection
6. Targeting Comprehension
How Are the Dimensions of Reading Linked?
What Is the Reading Process and What Are Implications for Instruction?
Why Should Reading Instruction Focus on Comprehension and
Vocabulary?
What Is the Difference Between Skills and Strategies Instruction?
What Comprehension Strategies Do Good Readers Use and How Can
We Teach These Strategies?
How Can We Teach Vocabulary to Improve Comprehension?
What Were the Big Ideas in This Chapter?
Constructive Reflections
7. Creating Professional Learning Communities for Literacy
What Are Professional Learning Communities for Literacy?
 Why Should We Collect Data About Current Literacy Practices?
What Should We Look for When Examining Current Literacy Practices?
How Can the Reading Reflection Survey Be Introduced to Teachers?
How Is the Survey Used in Classroom Observations and for Self-
Reflection?
How Are the Data Summarized?
How Can the Survey Results Be Used to Plan Professional
Development?
How Do We Create a Supportive Environment for School and
Classroom Change?
What Types of School-Based Professional Development Work?
What Were the Big Ideas in This Chapter?
Constructive Reflection
References
Index
 FOREWORD
ith the enactment of the educational reform legislation titled No Child
W Left Behind (NCLB), the United States has, in effect, boldly
proclaimed that all children will learn—or else. The motivation behind
NCLB legislation has been widely debated. Proponents portray the initiative
as a sincere attempt to guarantee that every child, particularly poor and
minority students, receive an education that leads to high levels of learning.
Opponents contend the legislation is unrealistic and simplistic at best or a
thinly veiled attempt to dismantle the public system of education at worst.
Regardless of the motivation, contemporary public schools in the United
States are being called upon to achieve a standard that goes far beyond the
goals of any previous generation—high levels of learning for all students.
Furthermore, NCLB threatens schools and the educators within them with
escalating sanctions if they fail to meet newly imposed standards. The
rationale behind this approach suggests that educators have always known
how to help all kids learn but have been too disinterested in the welfare of
their students or too lazy to put forth the necessary effort. Fear is needed to
provide the necessary motivation—either perform or risk closing your school
and/or losing your job.
In The Learning Communities Guide to Improving Reading Instruction,
Valerie Gregory and Jan Rozzelle Nikas embrace the premise that schools
and the educators within them must be committed to the learning of each
child entrusted to them. They make a compelling argument that helping each
student develop the ability to read with high levels of comprehension is an
absolute prerequisite if the concept of “learning for all” is to move from
politically correct hyperbole to reality in our nation’s schools. They make it
clear, however, that they honor teachers and teaching, that they believe
educators have the best interests of their students at heart, and most
importantly, that training and support are more effective than threats in
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
misguided friends of temperance have urged that the government
should not use the money derived from the tax on whiskey. My reply
that the tax on whiskey by the Federal Government, with its
suppression of all illicit distillation and consequent enhancement of
price, has been a powerful agent in the temperance reform by putting
it beyond the reach of so many. The amount of whiskey consumed in
the United States per capita to-day is not more than 40 per cent. of
that consumed thirty years ago.”
After a few moments’ silence Mr. Blaine added that in his
judgment the whiskey tax should be so modified as to permit all who
use pure alcohol in the arts or mechanical pursuits to have it free
from tax. In all such cases the tax should be remitted without danger
of fraud, just as now the tax on spirits exported is remitted.
“Besides your general and sweeping opposition to the President’s
recommendation have you any further specific objection?”
“Yes,” answered Mr. Blaine; “I should seriously object to the repeal
of the duty on wool. To repeal that would work great injustice to
many interests and would seriously discourage what we should
encourage, namely, the sheep culture among farmers throughout the
Union. To break wool-growing and be dependent on foreign
countries for the blanket under which we sleep and the coat that
covers our back is not a wise policy for the National Government to
enforce.”
“Do you think if the President’s recommendation were adopted it
would increase our export trade?”
“Possibly in some articles of peculiar construction it might, but it
would increase our import trade tenfold as much in the great staple
fabrics, in woollen and cotton goods, in iron, in steel, in all the
thousand and one shapes in which they are wrought. How are we to
export staple fabrics to the markets of Europe unless we make them
cheaper than they do in Europe, and how are we to manufacture
them cheaper than they do in Europe unless we get cheaper labor
than they have in Europe?”
“Then you think that the question of labor underlies the whole
subject?”
“Of course it does,” replied Mr. Blaine. “It is, in fact, the entire
question. Whenever we can force carpenters, masons, ironworkers,
and mechanics in every department to work as cheaply and live as
poorly in the United States as similar workmen in Europe, we can, of
course, manufacture just as cheaply as they do in England and
France. But I am totally opposed to a policy that would entail such
results. To attempt it is equivalent to a social and financial
revolution, one that would bring untold distress.”
“Yes, but might not the great farming class be benefited by
importing articles from Europe instead of buying them at higher
prices at home?”
“The moment,” answered Mr. Blaine, “you begin to import freely
from Europe you drive our own workmen from mechanical and
manufacturing pursuits. In the same proportion they become tillers
of the soil, increasing steadily the agricultural products and
decreasing steadily the large home demand which is constantly
enlarging as home manufactures enlarge. That, of course, works
great injury to the farmer, glutting the market with his products and
tending constantly to lower prices.”
“Yes, but the foreign demand for farm products would be
increased in like ratio, would it not?”
“Even suppose it were,” said Mr. Blaine, “do you know the source
from which it will be supplied? The tendency in Russia to-day, and in
the Asiatic possessions of England, is toward a large increase of the
grain supply, the grain being raised by the cheapest possible labor.
Manufacturing countries will buy their breadstuffs where they can
get them the cheapest, and the enlarging of the home market for the
American farmer being checked, he would search in vain for one of
the same value. His foreign sales are already checked by the great
competition abroad. There never was a time when the increase of a
large home market was so valuable to him. The best proof is that the
farmers are prosperous in proportion to the nearness of
manufacturing centres, and a protective tariff tends to spread
manufactures. In Ohio and Indiana, for example, though not classed
as manufacturing States, the annual value of fabrics is larger than the
annual value of agricultural products.”
“But those holding the President’s views,” remarked the reporter,
“are always quoting the great prosperity of the country under the
tariff of 1846.”
 “That tariff did not involve the one destructive point
recommended by the President, namely, the retaining of direct
internal taxes in order to abolish indirect taxes levied on foreign
fabrics. But the country had peculiar advantages under it by the
Crimean War involving England, France, and Russia, and largely
impairing their trade. All these incidents, or accidents, if you choose,
were immensely stimulating to the trade in the United States,
regardless to the nature of our tariff. But mark the end of this
European experience with the tariff of 1846, which for a time gave an
illusory and deceptive show of prosperity. Its enactment was
immediately followed by the Mexican War; then, in 1848, by the
great convulsions of Europe; then, in 1849 and succeeding years, by
the enormous gold yield in California. The powers made peace in
1856, and at the same time the output of gold in California fell off.
Immediately the financial panic of 1857 came upon the country with
disastrous force. Though we had in these years mined a vast amount
of gold in California, every bank in New York was compelled to
suspend specie payment. Four hundred millions in gold had been
carried out of the country in eight years to pay for foreign goods that
should have been manufactured at home, and we had years of
depression and distress as an atonement for our folly.”
“Then do you mean to imply that there should be no reduction of
the national revenue?”
“No; what I have said implies the reverse. I would reduce it by a
prompt repeal of the tobacco tax, and would make here and there
some changes in the tariff, not to reduce protection, but wisely foster
it.”
“Would you explain your meaning more fully?”
“I mean,” said Mr. Blaine, “that no great system of revenue, like
our tariff, can operate with efficiency and equity unless the changes
of trade be closely watched and the law promptly adapted to those
changes. But I would make no change that should impair the
protective character of the whole body of the tariff laws. Four years
ago, in the act of 1883, we made changes of the character I have tried
to indicate. If such changes were made, and the fortifying of our sea
coast thus undertaken at a very moderate annual outlay, no surplus
would be found after that already accumulated had been disposed of.
The outlay of money on fortifications, while doing great service to the
country, would give good work to many men.”
“But what about the existing surplus?”
“The abstract of the message I have seen,” replied Mr. Blaine,
“contains no reference to that point. I, therefore, make no comment
further that to endorse Mr. Fred. Grant’s remark, that a surplus is
always easier to handle than a deficit.”
The reporter repeated the question whether the President’s
recommendation would not, if adopted, give us the advantage of a
large increase in exports.
“I only repeat,” answered Mr. Blaine, “it would vastly increase our
imports while the only export it would seriously increase would be
our gold and silver. That would flow out bounteously, just as it did
under the tariff of 1846. The President’s recommendation enacted
into law would result, as did an experiment in drainage of a man who
wished to turn a swamp into a productive field. He dug a drain to a
neighboring river, but it happened, unfortunately, that the level of
the river was higher than the level of the swamp. The consequence
need not be told. A parallel would be found when the President’s
policy in attempting to open a channel for an increase of exports
should simply succeed in making way for a deluging inflow of fabrics
to the destruction of home industry.”
“But don’t you think it important to increase our export trade?”
“Undoubtedly; but it is vastly more important not to lose our own
great market or our own people in vain effort to reach the
impossible. It is not our foreign trade that has caused the wonderful
growth and expansion of the republic. It is the vast domestic trade
between thirty-eight States and eight Territories, with their
population of, perhaps, 62,000,000 to-day. The whole amount of our
export and import trade together has never, I think, reached
$1,900,000,000 any one year. Our internal home trade on 130,000
miles of railway, along 15,000 miles of ocean coast, over the five
great lakes and along 20,000 miles of navigable rivers, reaches the
enormous annual aggregate of more than $40,000,000,000, and
perhaps this year $50,000,000,000.
“It is into this illimitable trade, even now in its infancy and
destined to attain a magnitude not dreamed of twenty years ago, that
the Europeans are struggling to enter. It is the heritage of the
American people, of their children, and of their children’s children. It
gives an absolutely free trade over a territory nearly as large as all
Europe, and the profit is all our own. The genuine Free-trader
appears unable to see or comprehend that this continental trade—
not our exchanges with Europe—is the great source of our prosperity.
President Cleveland now plainly proposes a policy that will admit
Europe to a share of this trade.”
“But you are in favor of extending our foreign trade, are you not?”
“Certainly I am, in all practical and advantageous ways, but not on
the principle of the Free-traders, by which we shall be constantly
exchanging dollar for dime. Moreover, the foreign trade is often very
delusive. Cotton is manufactured in the city of my residence. If a box
of cotton goods is sent 200 miles to the province Of New Brunswick,
it is foreign trade. If shipped 17,000 miles round Cape Horn to
Washington Territory it is domestic trade. The magnitude of the
Union and the immensity of its internal trade require a new political
economy. The treatises written for European States do not grasp our
peculiar situation.”
“How will the President’s message be received in the South?”
“I don’t dare to answer that question. The truth has been so long
obscured by certain local questions of unreasoning prejudice that
nobody can hope for industrial enlightenment among the leaders just
yet. But in my view the South above all sections of the Union needs a
protective tariff. The two Virginias, North Carolina, Kentucky,
Missouri, Tennessee, Alabama, and Georgia have enormous
resources and facilities for developing and handling manufactures.
They cannot do anything without protection. Even progress so vast
as some of those States have made will be checked if the President’s
message is enacted into law. Their Senators and Representatives can
prevent it, but they are so used to following anything labelled
‘democratic’ that very probably they will follow the President and the
progress already made. By the time some of the Southern States get
free iron ore and coal, while tobacco is taxed, they may have occasion
to sit down and calculate the value of democratic free trade to their
local interests.,”
“Will not the President’s recommendation to admit raw material
find strong support?”
 “Not by wise Protectionists in our time. Perhaps some greedy
manufacturers may think that with free coal or free iron ore they can
do great things, but if they should succeed in trying will, as the boys
say, catch it on the rebound. If the home trade in raw materials is
destroyed or seriously injured railroads will be the first to feel it. If
that interest is crippled in any direction the financial fabric of the
whole country will feel it quickly and seriously. If any man can give a
reason why we should arrange the tariff to favor the raw material of
other countries in a competition against our material of the same
kind, I should like to hear it. Should that recommendation of the
President be approved it would turn 100,000 American laborers out
of employment before it had been a year in operation.”
“What must be the marked and general effect of the President’s
message?”
“It will bring the country where it ought to be brought—to a full
and fair contest on the question of protection. The President himself
makes the one issue by presenting no other in his message. I think it
well to have the question settled. The democratic party in power is a
standing menace to the industrial prosperity of the country. That
menace should be removed or the policy it foreshadows should be
made certain. Nothing is so mischievous to business as uncertainty,
nothing so paralyzing as doubt.”

G. W. Smalley.
THE NATIONAL CONVENTIONS OF 1888.
 The Democratic Convention.

The Democratic party, being in power, assumed the customary

rôle of the majority party, and after a close struggle its National
Committee called its Convention at St. Louis, June 5th, two weeks in
advance of the time fixed by the Republicans. The sessions continued
throughout three days, being somewhat prolonged by the differences
of opinion upon the platform, the immediate friends of the Cleveland
administration desiring an unqualified endorsement of the
Presidential message relating to the tariff, and as well to the Mills
bill, the measure supported in the lower House of Congress by all of
the Democrats save those led by Samuel J. Randall, who stood upon
the platform “straddle” of 1884. Finally the differences were partially
adjusted by a reaffirmation of the platform of 1884, and very decided
endorsements of both the President’s message and the Mills bill. The
result was not satisfactory to the Protective-Tariff Democrats, but
they were without large or courageous representation, and the
platform was adopted with but one dissenting vote. (For platform
and comparison of platforms of the Conventions of the two great
parties, see Book II.)
On the third day Grover Cleveland, of New York, was nominated
for President by acclamation. A ballot was started for Vice-President,
between Allen G.Thurman, of Ohio, and Governor Gray, of Indiana,
but before it closed Thurman’s nomination was so apparent that
Gray was withdrawn, and the nomination made unanimous. In the
midst of the applause which followed, the California delegation
presented to the Convention thousands of the “red bandana” worn by
the “old Roman” Thurman, and it was immediately placed upon the
standard of every State, and accepted as the emblem of the
Democratic party.
 The Republican Convention.

The National Convention of the Republican party met in Chicago,

June 19th, and continued its sessions until the evening of the 25th.
Major McKinley, of Ohio, was the Chairman of the Committee on
Platform, and on the second day made a unanimous report, which
was adopted with great enthusiasm.
The platforms of the two great parties, better than anything else,
illustrate the lines of difference between them. One of the lines was
plainly drawn by President Cleveland’s message to Congress. This
paper plainly advocated a reduction of tariff duties with a view to
reduce to the actual requirements of an economic administration of
governmental affairs, the surplus in the treasury, then
approximating $80,000,000. He opposed the repeal or reduction of
the internal revenue taxes, upon the ground that they were placed
upon luxuries. Mr. Blaine answered this message for the Republican
party, and opposed any system of tariff reduction which tended to
free trade, and favored the repeal of the internal revenue taxes upon
tobacco and upon all liquors used in the arts. So that the truthful and
probably the most compact statement of the position of the two great
parties is this: The Democratic party in the campaign of 1888 favors
an established tendency to free trade; the Republican party opposes
any such tendency, and rather than promote it in any way, would
repeal all of the internal revenue taxes and enlarge the pension list—
in this way disposing of the treasury surplus. The platform of the
Republican party not only followed, but went beyond the expressed
views of Mr. Blaine, and accepted in the plainest way the issue thrust
upon the country by Mr. Cleveland’s message. The position of the
two great parties had been anticipated by their respective leaders,
and both Conventions advanced beyond the lines laid down by these
leaders, and entered upon the campaign in this shape.
 During the ballotings of the Republican Convention Mr. Blaine
was upon all save the last solidly supported by the California
delegation and by scattering votes. On the last day Hon. Charles A.
Boutelle, Chairman of the Maine delegation, read two cablegrams
from Mr. Blaine, who was then in Edinboro, Scotland, asking his
friends to respect his Paris letter of declination. It was at any time
within the power of his friends to nominate him, but his final refusal
led nearly all of them to vote for General Benjamin Harrison, of
Indiana, at all times one of the leading candidates before the
Convention. There was no general combination, but the nomination
was largely traceable to the expediency of selecting both of the
candidates from pivotal States.
Summary of the Ballots.

Friday. Saturday. Monday.

1st 2d 3d 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th
Sherman, 229 249 244 235 224 244 231 119
Gresham, 111 108 123 98 87 91 91 59
Depew, 99 99 91 Withdrawn.
Alger, 84 116 122 135 142 137 120 100
Harrison, 80 91 94 217 213 231 278 544
Allison, 72 75 88 88 99 73 76
Ingalls, 28 16 Withdrawn.
Phelps, 25 18 5
Rusk, 25 20 16
Fitler, 24 Withdrawn.
Hawley, 13 Withdrawn.
Lincoln, 3 2 2 1 2
McKinley, 2 3 8 11 14 12 16 4
Miller, 2
Douglas, 1
Foraker, 1 1 1
Grant, 1
Haymond, 1
Blaine, 35 33 35 42 48 40 15 5
Total, 830 830 830 829 827 829 832 831
Mr. Griggs, of New Jersey, presented the name of William Walter
Phelps, of New Jersey, for Vice-President, which was seconded by
Mr. Gibson, of Ohio, Mr. Eagan, of Nebraska, and Mr. Oliver, of
Iowa, and others.
Senator Warner Miller, of New York, presented the name of Hon.
Levi P. Morton, of New York, which was seconded by Mr. Sage, of
California, Governor Foster, of Ohio, Mr. Oliver, of South Carolina,
General Hastings, of Pennsylvania, and others.
Mr. McElwee, of Tennessee, presented the name of William R.
Moore, of that State.
One ballot was taken, resulting as follows:

Morton 591
Phelps 119
Bradly 103
Bruce 11
Thomas 1

The nomination was then made unanimous.

Mr. Boutelle, of Maine, then addressed the Chair and stated that
he desired to offer a resolution to be added to the platform, as
follows:
“The first concern of all good government is the virtue and sobriety
of the people and the purity of the home. The Republican party
cordially sympathizes with all wise and well-directed efforts for the
promotion of temperance and morality.”
As soon as this was read there was a rush from the various States
to second the motion, and, after some time, the question was put and
the resolution adopted by a rising vote, only one delegate from
Maryland recording himself in the negative. In this way the above
temperance sentiment was made part of the platform. It was due
largely to the attitude of the Republican party within many of the
States, where in the current and previous year it favored high license
laws and the submission to a vote of the people prohibitory
constitutional amendments.
 THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF 1888.

Shortly after the adjournment of the National Conventions, the

National Committees of the two great parties opened headquarters in
New York City, Senator M. S. Quay being Chairman of the
Republican National and Executive committees, with full authority
in one head, while ex-Senator Barnum headed the Democratic
National, and Calvin Brice its Executive Committee. Both
Committees devoted themselves to practical political work, and the
result was a greater expenditure of money than was ever previously
known. From information gathered by the writer, it can be safely
stated that the Democratic National Committee, with its drafts upon
the Federal office-holders, raised two millions of dollars, while the
Republican business men and manufacturers contributed one
million three hundred thousand to their National Committee. It was
a business battle, largely waged between the manufacturing and
importing interests, the smaller farmers being allies of the
manufacturers, the planters adhering to their support of the Free
Trade tendencies of the Democratic party. The literary and oratorical
features of the canvass were not neglected, and tariff discussion was
the order of the day and the night throughout the entire country. The
pivotal States were, in the order of their importance, New York,
Indiana, Connecticut, New Jersey, West Virginia, and California.
From the day of General Harrison’s nomination, Indiana became,
and continued, the scene of the most intense political excitement.
Visiting delegations called upon the nominee from every town and
hamlet in the State, and the fever extended to adjacent States. The
ordeal was a most trying one for a candidate, and, for a time, there
was grave fear that a mistake might be made, or a trap sprung, like
that of Burchard’s upon Blaine in 1884; but General Harrison was
singularly fortunate in all of his remarks, and yet so earnest and able
that his own work soon began to be recognized as the best of the
campaign. President Cleveland was compelled by his official duties,
and probably by inclination, to keep out of even the speaking part of
the campaign.
Senator Quay regarded New York as the sole key to the contest,
and his determination to carry that State, even at the risk of all
others, was maintained with the greatest firmness. The usual appeals
came from hopeful States, like Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee,
and even Delaware and Maryland, while alarming predictions as to
Michigan, Wisconsin, and Iowa flew thick and fast; but the
Republican National Chairman, wisely clothed with absolute
authority as general of the battle, kept up his steady assault upon
New York, and organized so closely that the usual frauds in New
York City and Brooklyn became impossible. The wisdom of this
policy was confirmed by the result, and to it is directly traceable the
Republican victory which followed. General Harrison carried New
York by 14,000 plurality, while Governor Hill, the Democratic
candidate for reëlection, carried it by 18,000. This apparent political
phenomenon finds its explanation in the liquor issue, which
attracted wide attention throughout the State. Warner Miller, the
Republican candidate, favored high license, while Governor Hill
opposed it.
The Northwest, always before believed to be inclined to Free
Trade, gave surprising tariff majorities, while Kansas proved the
banner Republican State, giving over 80,000 for Harrison in a
territory made up mostly by farmers. Indeed, the farming excelled
many of the manufacturing sections in showing tariff or Republican
gains.
Results proved to be very close in Connecticut, the two Virginias,
Maryland, and Tennessee, and for a time the attitude of the lower
House of Congress was in doubt. At this writing the Republican
majority is estimated at seven, and the new Congress will have to
consider more than a dozen contested seats. The Republicans made a
net gain of one in the Senate by their success in the counties of
Sussex and Kent, in Delaware. This was due to a quarrel between the
Bayard and Saulsbury factions of the State. New Jersey remained
with the Democrats, and the Republicans elected General Goff for
Governor of West Virginia, with three Labor men holding the balance
of power in the Legislature.
 ELECTORAL VOTE.

Harrison. Cleveland.
California 8 Alabama 10
Colorado 3 Arkansas 7
Illinois 22 Connecticut 6
Indiana 15 Delaware 3
Iowa 13 Florida 4
Kansas 9 Georgia 12
Maine 6 Kentucky 13
Massachusetts 14 Louisiana 8
Michigan 13 Maryland 8
Minnesota 7 Mississippi 9
Nebraska 5 Missouri 16
Nevada 3 New Jersey 9
New Hampshire 4 North Carolina 12
New York 36 South Carolina 9
Ohio 23 Tennessee 11
Oregon 3 Texas 13
Pennsylvania 30 Virginia 12
Rhode Island 4 West Virginia 6
Vermont 4
Wisconsin 11 168

233
168

Harrison’s majority 65

Here is a majority of 65 electors, and yet less than 3000 votes in

New York, cast for Cleveland, would have reëlected him, but with
grave danger to the country, because of disputed results in the two
Virginias.
 THE POPULAR VOTE—1888.

Rep. Dem. Pro. Labor.

Alabama 57,197 117,320 583
Arkansas 58,752 85,962 614 10,613
California 124,809 117,899 5,761 1,591
Colorado 50,831 37,345 2,490 1,287
Connecticut 74,584 74,920 4,234 240
Delaware 12,950 16,414 400 1
Florida 26,659 39,561 403
Georgia 40,413 100,742 1,802 136
Illinois 370,241 348,360 21,562 8,556
Indiana 263,361 261,013 9,881 2,694
Iowa 211,598 179,877 3,550 9,105
Kansas 182,610 102,580 6,452 36,236
Kentucky 155,154 183,800 5,225 622
Louisiana 30,181 84,941 130
Maine 73,734 50,482 2,690 1,345
Maryland 99,761 106,172 5,358 1,241
Massachusetts 183,447 151,990 8,641
Michigan 236,307 213,404 20,942 4,542
Minnesota 142,492 104,385 15,341 1,097
Mississippi 30,096 85,476 218 22
Missouri 236,325 261,957 4,954 15,853
Nebraska 108,425 80,552 9,429 4,226
Nevada 7,088 5,149 41
N. Hampshire 45,728 43,457 1,570 13
New Jersey 144,344 151,493 7,904
New York 650,337 635,965 30,321 5,362
N. Carolina 134,784 147,902 2,788
Ohio 416,054 396,455 24,356 3,496
Oregon 33,293 26,524 1,677 363
Pennsylvania 526,223 446,934 20,758 3,873
Rhode Island 21,960 17,533 1,281
South Carolina 13,740 65,825
Tennessee 138,988 158,779 5,969 48
Texas 88,422 234,883 4,749 29,459
Vermont 45,192 16,788 1,459
Virginia 150,442 151,977 1,678
West Virginia 75,052 75,558 669 1,064
Wisconsin 176,553 155,232 14,277 8,552
Totals 5,438,157 5,535,626 250,157 150,624
 ANALYSIS OF THE POPULAR VOTE.

In the following tables the vote is arranged according to sections:

The Northern States, the Middle or Border States, and the Gulf
States.
 THE NORTHERN STATES.

1884. 1888.
Rep. Dem. Rep. Dem.
Maine 72,209 52,140 72,659 49,730
N. Hampsh’e 43,249 39,183 45,728 43,444
Vermont 39,514 17,331 45,192 16,788
Massachus’ts 146,724 122,352 183,447 151,990
Rhode Island 19,030 12,391 21,960 17,533
Connecticut 65,923 67,199 74,584 74,920
New York 562,005 563,154 649,114 635,715
New Jersey 123,366 127,778 144,426 151,154
Penna. 473,804 392,785 526,223 446,934
Ohio 400,082 368,280 416,054 396,455
Indiana 238,463 244,990 263,361 261,013
Illinois 337,469 312,351 370,241 348,360
Michigan 192,669 149,835 236,307 213,404
Wisconsin 161,157 146,459 176,553 155,232
Iowa 197,089 177,316 211,592 177,899
Minnesota 111,685 70,065 136,359 99,664
Colorado 36,166 27,603 51,796 37,610
California 102,416 89,288 124,809 117,729
Kansas 154,406 90,132 182,610 102,580
Nebraska 76,912 54,391 108,425 80,552
Nevada 7,193 5,578 7,238 5,326
Oregon 26,860 24,604 33,293 26,524
Totals 3,608,965 3,153,912 4,081,971 3,610,556

Republican majority in 1888 471,415

Republican majority in 1884 455,053

Republican gain 16,362

MIDDLE (OR BORDER) STATES.

1884. 1888.
Rep. Dem. Rep. Dem.
Delaware 12,951 16,964 12,950 16,414
Maryland 85,699 96,932 99,761 106,172
Virginia 139,356 145,497 150,442 151,977
W. Virginia 63,096 67,317 75,052 75,588
Kentucky 118,122 152,961 155,154 183,800
Tennessee 124,078 133,258 139,815 159,079
Arkansas 50,895 72,927 58,752 85,962
N. Carolina 125,068 142,950 134,784 147,902
Missouri 202,929 235,988 236,325 261,957
Totals 922,194 1,064,794 1,063,035 1,188,851

Democratic majority in 1884 142,600

Democratic majority in 1888 125,816

Democratic loss 16,784

GULF STATES.

S. Carolina 21,733 69,890 13,740 65,825

Florida 28,031 31,766 26,659 39,561
Georgia 28,617 97,292 40,496 100,499
Alabama 59,444 92,973 56,197 117,320
Mississippi 43,509 76,510 30,096 85,476
Louisiana 46,347 62,540 30,181 84,941
Texas 93,141 225,309 88,442 234,883
Totals 328,822 656,280 285,811 728,505

Democratic majority in 1888 442,698

Democratic majority in 1884 327,458

Democratic gain 115,240

 PRESIDENT HARRISON’S MESSAGE ON
THE CHILEAN TROUBLES.

In October, 1891, directly after the overthrow of Balmaceda by the

Congressionalists of Chile, U. S. Minister Egan sheltered a number of
political refugees, as did other foreign ministers. Both the
government and populace at Valparaiso took special umbrage at the
action of the authorities of the United States, and as a result a mob of
citizens, police and soldiers assaulted American sailors on shore,
killing two and wounding sixteen. President Harrison’s message,
sent to Congress on the 25th of January, 1892, is the strongest state
paper in behalf of the rights of American citizens abroad yet given to
the country. It explains all of the facts as to the Chilean difficulties,
and as well lays down the principles which conduct his course. It was
well received by the American Congress, and compelled Chile to act
promptly in answer to the American demands. We quote its text, for
it will be historically very valuable:
To the Senate and House of Representatives: In my Annual Message,
delivered to Congress at the beginning of the present session, after a brief
statement of the facts then in the possession of this government touching the
assault in the streets of Valparaiso, Chile, upon the sailors of the United States
steamship Baltimore, on the evening of the 16th of October last, I said:
“This government is now awaiting the result of an investigation which has been
conducted by the criminal court at Valparaiso. It is reported unofficially that the
investigation is about completed, and it is expected that the result will soon be
communicated to this government, together with some adequate and satisfactory
response to the note by which the attention of Chile was called to this incident. If
these just expectations should be disappointed, or further needless delay intervene,
I will, by a special message, bring this matter again to the attention of Congress for
such action as may be necessary.”
In my opinion the time has now come when I should lay before the Congress and
the country the correspondence between this government and the government of
Chile from the time of the breaking out of the revolution against Balmaceda,