1890 Minnesota Senate election

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The 1890 Minnesota Senate election was held in the U.S. state of Minnesota on November 4, 1890, to elect members to the Senate of the 27th and 28th Minnesota Legislatures.

Quick facts All 54 seats in the Minnesota Senate 28 seats needed for a majority, Majority party ...
1890 Minnesota Senate election
← 1886
November 4, 1890 (1890-11-04)
1894 â†’
All 54 seats in the Minnesota Senate
28 seats needed for a majority
  Majority party Minority party Third party
 
GOP
DEM
ALL
Party Republican Democratic Alliance
Seats won 26 15 13
Close

The Minnesota Republican Party won a plurality of seats, followed by the Minnesota Democratic Party and the Minnesota Farmers' Alliance. The new Legislature convened on January 6, 1891.

The election resulted in Republicans losing control of the Senate for the first time since 1858 when Minnesota was granted statehood.

Background

In the late 1800s, Minnesota was one of the nation's most consistently Republican states, and conservative dominance extended to the State Senate as well. Since 1860, Republicans were the preeminent caucus in the Senate, not once losing a majority in the chamber.[1]

That being said, in the years leading up to 1890, Minnesota had emerged as a center of the Farmers' Alliance, a progressive agrarian movement. At the 1886 election, two members of the Alliance had taken seats from the Republicans, foreshadowing the 1890 result.

It was not uncommon for local Alliance organizations to endorse members of the two major parties if their values were aligned, though it was more likely for Alliance groups to endorse known Democrats than Republicans. The same is true of the Prohibition Party and other groups.

In St. Paul, a group of 100 local power brokers, 50 from either major party, assembled in August 1890 with the intention of nominating a "Citizens' Ticket" for Ramsey County.[2] The "committee of 100" hoped that local Democratic and Republican organizations would endorse their unity ticket, which they did in most cases.

In western Minnesota, two candidates were endorsed as the "Peoples'" candidates. It is unclear if these endorsements were related as part of a broader organization or if the "Peoples'" designation was only of local significance.

Three Republicans who lost their party's endorsement ran as Independent Republicans and won, then caucused as Republicans in the Senate. Two Democrats, one endorsed and one unendorsed, ran in the 36th District of Scott County. The endorsed candidate, James McHale, won.[3]

Prior to the 1890 election, the Minnesota Senate had 47 seats. A redistricting undertaken in 1889 added 7 seats, bringing the total to 54. In particular, Hennepin and Ramsey Counties as well as western and northern Minnesota gained new seats. Goodhue County lost a seat.[4]

Results

Summary

Republicans won 26 seats, two short of the 28 needed to control the chamber. The Democratic Party and Farmers' Alliance won a combined 28 seats.

Due to the fact that numerous candidates were endorsed by more than one party, it is impossible to calculate how many people voted for each party without counting votes multiple times. It can be said, however, that Republicans had certainly not won such a small percentage of the vote since Minnesota had been granted statehood.

District results

The parties are as follows:   Alliance (All.),   Citizen's Ticket (Cit.),   Democratic (Dem.),   Independent (Ind.),   Labor (Lab.),   People's Ticket (Peo.),   Prohibition (Pro.),   Republican (Rep.)

More information Dis., Incumbent ...
Dis. Incumbent Candidates
Name Party First elected Name Endorsements Votes % Winner

Party

All. Dem. Rep. Other
1 Tosten Johnson[5] Rep. 1886 James C. Kelly[6] ✓ 1,263 42.54 Dem.
Tosten Johnson[7] ✓ 1,232 41.50
John Pendergast[8] ✓ 474 15.97
2 Charles G. Edwards[9]‡ Rep. 1876, 1886† Evin D. Hammer[10] ✓ 2,351 54.25 Rep.
Theodore Tousley[11] ✓ ✓[nb 1] 1,983 45.75
3 Otis W. Gibson[12] Dem. 1886 Oscar Ayers[13] ✓ 1,725 50.31 Rep.
Otis W. Gibson[14][15] ✓ ✓ 1,704 49.69
4 Marcellus Halvorson[16][17]§ Rep. 1886 H. C. Nelson[18][19] ✓ ✓ 1,639 52.26 All.
Thorvald V. Knatvold[17] ✓ 1,497 47.74
5 Vacant[nb 2] N/A N/A Jacob Armel Kiester[20] ✓ 1,893 67.83 Rep.
Charles S. Dunbar ✓ 744 26.66
George E. Francisco Pro. 113 4.05
David H. Morse ✓ 41 1.47
6 Frank Arah Day[21] Rep. 1886 Frank Arah Day[22] ✓ 1,776 58.44 Rep.
James E. Grogan[15] ✓ ✓ 1,224 40.28
James D. McBroom Pro. 39 1.28
7 Warrington B. Brown[23]¶ Rep. 1886 Jay LaDue[24] ✓ 2,342 48.94 All.
Herbert J. Miller[24] ✓ 1,871 39.10
A. M. Becker[25] ✓ 572 11.95
8 John Clark[26]‡ Rep. 1886 Eric Sevatson ✓ ✓[nb 3] 1,666 62.07 All.
T. J. Knox ✓[nb 4] 715 26.64
W. F. Portman[28] ✓ 278 10.36
John I. Wallace[29] Pro. 25 0.09
9 Thomas Evans Bowen[30]‡ Dem. 1886 Samuel D. Peterson[31] ✓ 2,198 45.35 Rep.
Andrew D. Stewart[32] ✓ 1,378 28.43
W. E. Baker[33] ✓ 1,271 26.22
10 Edmund Mann Pope[34][35]§ Dem. 1886 George T. Barr[36] ✓ 2,832 51.21 Rep.
Albert R. Pfau[37] ✓ ✓ 2,698 48.79
11 William G. Ward[38]¶ Rep. 1872, 1886† Robert O. Craig[39] ✓ ✓ 1,292 51.56 Dem.
Cristoph Wagner ✓ 1,214 48.44
12 Charles Schretz Crandall[40] Rep. 1886 Charles Schretz Crandall[41] ✓ 1,285 49.31 Rep.
E. M. Morehouse[42] ✓ 1,253 48.08
D. J. Ames[43] Pro. 68 2.61
13 E. N. Dodge[44]‡ Rep. 1886 Jeremiah Grinnell[45] ✓ 1,091 50.18 Rep.
William H. Edison[46] ✓ 969 44.57
A. R. Cohoon[47] Pro. 114 5.24
14 Milton J. Daniels[48]‡ Rep. 1886 William Worrall Mayo[49] ✓ ✓ 2,131 51.46 Dem.
Alonzo Thomas Stebbins[50] ✓ 1,956 47.24
D. D. Kimball[51] Pro. 52 1.26
P. H. Marsh 2 0.05
15 Thomas Taylor Hayden[52]¶ Dem. 1886 James Albertus Tawney[53] ✓ 3,156 53.30 Rep.
John Ludwig[54] ✓ 2,765 46.70
16 Ole Olson Lende[55]¶ Rep. 1886 Orrin Mott[56] ✓ 1,556 35.49 All.
Hans Lavesson[57] ✓ 1,338 30.52
Henry M. Burchard[58] 1,301 29.68
G. I. Larson[59] Pro. 189 4.31
17 Gideon Sprague Ives[60]‡[nb 5] Rep. 1886 Charles Russell Davis[61] ✓ 1,407 55.72 Rep.
H. C. Randall[62] ✓ ✓ 1,118 44.28
18 Thomas Welch[63]¶ Dem. 1882 Theodore G. Streissguth ✓ 1,251 42.81 Rep.
Patrick Bray[64] ✓ 1,091 37.34
J. A. Solomonson ✓ 580 19.85
19 C. U. Chapman[65]¶ Rep. 1886 Edson R. Smith[15] ✓ 1,814 44.56 Rep.
Dennis Doyle[15] ✓ 1,675 41.15
John Byrnes[15] ✓ 500 12.28
Alex Kenrick[15] Pro. 82 2.01
20 George Weston Wood[66]¶ Rep. 1886 Albert William Stockton[67] ✓ 2,011 44.66 Rep.
S. L. Crocker[68] ✓ 1,761 39.11
Timothy O'Grady[68] ✓ 576 12.79
Royal Plummer[68] Pro. 155 3.44
21 Anders K. Finseth[69]§ Rep. 1874, 1886† John W. Peterson[70] ✓ 2,078 41.27 Rep.
Peter Nelson[nb 6] ✓ 2,043 40.58
A. T. Conley[72][73] ✓ Pro. 912 18.11
T. Wilson 2 0.04
22 Henry Burkhardt[74] Rep. 1886 Henry Burkhardt[75] ✓ 1,776 50.40 Rep.
E. D. Southard[15] ✓ 1,674 47.50
George B. Albertson[15] Pro. 74 2.10
23 Edward White Durant[76]§ Dem. 1886 Jasper N. Searles[77] ✓ 2,115 46.25 Rep.[nb 7]
James S. O'Brien[79] ✓ 2,011 43.98
Andrew Richmond[80] ✓ 447 9.78
24 Albert H. Truax[81] Rep. 1882 Ignatius L. Donnelly[15] ✓ 1,647 41.37 All.
R. C. Libbey[15] ✓ 1,305 32.78
William Hodgson[15] ✓ 951 23.89
C. M. Nichols[15] Pro. 78 1.96
25 New constituency N/A N/A John Benjamin Sanborn[82][83][2] ✓ ✓ Cit. 5,103 90.51 Rep.
John Lindstrom Pro. 535 9.49
26 New constituency N/A N/A Charles H. Lienau[84][2] ✓ Cit. 4,471 100.00 Dem.
27 New constituency N/A N/A William Blake Dean[82][83][2] ✓ ✓ Cit. 4,283 100.00 Rep.
28 New constituency N/A N/A Hiram Fairchild Stevens[82] ✓ 2,327 49.31 Rep.
Charles H. Benedict[83][2] ✓ Cit. 2,243 47.53
John W. Rhines Pro. 149 3.16
29 New constituency N/A N/A Samuel A. March[85] ✓ 4,062 83.94 Dem.
Thomas H. Lucas ✓ 512 10.58
Washington S. Cilley[86] Pro. 265 5.48
30 New constituency N/A N/A Frank G. McMillan[85] ✓ 1,784 52.59 Dem.
Edward M. Johnson[87] ✓ 1,223 36.06
William B. Hammond ✓ 244 7.19
Charles M. Way[86] Pro. 141 4.16
31 New constituency N/A N/A Frank L. Morse[85] ✓ 2,835 50.02 Dem.
Albert J. Boardman[87] ✓ 2,573 45.40
George R. Whitcomb[86] Pro. 260 4.59
32 New constituency N/A N/A Alonzo Phillips[85] ✓ 3,722 55.46 Dem.
J. A. Wolverton[87] ✓ 2,399 35.75
Michael W. Morgan ✓ 318 4.74
W. M. Lawrence[86] Pro. 272 4.05
33 New constituency N/A N/A John W. Bell[85] ✓ 2,992 56.81 Dem.
Sever Ellingson[87] ✓ 1,806 34.29
Edwin B. Miller ✓ 469 8.90
34 New constituency N/A N/A John Day Smith[87] ✓ 2,062 49.18 Rep.
Elbridge S. Barnes[85] ✓ 1,933 46.10
Herman W. Knapp[86] Pro. 198 4.72
35 David Marston Clough‡[nb 8][88] Rep. 1886 Christopher S. Guderian[89] ✓ 1,693 53.95 Rep.
E. L. Reed[90] ✓ Pro. 1,416 45.12
Edward L. Curial 15 0.48
J. W. Steed 14 0.45
36 Mathias Nachbar[91]§ Dem. 1886 James H. McHale[92] ✓ 1,797 63.39 Dem.
Mathias Nachbar 1,038 36.61
37 Andrew G. Anderson‡[93][nb 9] Dem. 1886 Joseph W. Craven[15] ✓ ✓ 1,955 61.83 Dem.
Charles G. Halgren[15] ✓ 1,207 38.17
38 Alcinus Young Eaton§[94] Rep. 1886 Alcinus Young Eaton[95][15] ✓ Peo. 3,044 51.95 Rep.
William H. Houlton[95] ✓ 2,482 42.36
D. Murdock Pro. 333 5.68
39 John S. Shields¶[96][97] All. 1886 Silas W. Leavitt[98] ✓ ✓ 1,566 52.45 Dem.
Peter E. Hanson[15] ✓ 1,334 44.68
S. S. Squire[15] Pro. 86 2.88
40 Elisha Adrian Child¶[99] Dem. 1886 Samuel P. Brown[15] ✓ 1,636 54.52 Dem.
Axel Hayford Reed[15] ✓ 930 30.99
C. N. Perkins[15] ✓ 370 12.33
B. M. Record[15] Pro. 65 2.17
41 Marcus Johnson¶[100] Rep. 1886 Gustavus A. Glader[101][15] ✓ Peo. 1,228 46.46 Rep.
Nels Quam[102] ✓ ✓ 1,204 45.55
Charles E. Johnson[102] Pro. 211 7.98
42 Darwin Scott Hall¶[103] Rep. 1886 Ferdinand Borchert[104] ✓ ✓ 1,423 45.07 All.
J. T. Brooks[105] ✓ 1,289 40.83
Peter F. Walstrom 376 11.91
Morris Bishop Foster 69 2.19
43 Hiram Eugene Hoard¶[106] Rep. 1886 Erick O. Erickson[15] ✓ ✓ 3,479 64.59 All.
Myron F. Barber[15] ✓ 1,907 35.41
44 Otto Alexander Bernhard Wallmark¶[107] Rep. 1886 William S. Dedon[15][108] ✓ ✓ 1,636 51.79 All.
Levi H. McKusick[109] ✓ 1,523 48.21
45 Henry Keller[110] Dem. 1886 Henry Keller[111] ✓ 4,213 57.09 Dem.
Charles A. Gilman[112] [nb 10] 2,173 29.45
J. L. Robbins[113] ✓ 993 13.46
46 Clarence Bennett Buckman¶[114] Rep. 1882 George Geissel[115] ✓ 5,167 72.25 Dem.
James C. Flynn[115] ✓ 1,985 27.75
47 George W. Thacker¶[116] All. 1886 Herman A. Grafe[117] ✓ 2,606 80.71 All.
Hill H. Wilson[117] ✓ 623 19.29
G. A. Kortsch[117] ✓ N/A[nb 11] N/A
48 James Compton¶[118] Rep. 1882 John B. Hompe[119] ✓ ✓ Pro. 3,865 66.76 All.
F. M. Mosher[120] ✓ 1,924 33.24
49 Daniel W. Hixon[121] Rep. 1886 Ole O. Canestorp[15] 2,298 43.80 Rep.
Daniel W. Hixon[15] ✓ ✓ 1,764 33.62
Louis Peterson[15] ✓ 1,095 20.87
Archibald A. Stone[15] Pro. 90 1.72
50 Elon G. Holmes[122] Rep. 1888* Randolph Michael Probstfield[123][15] ✓ ✓ 2,812 54.92 All.
Elon G. Holmes[15] ✓ 2,308 45.08
51 Bernard Sampson¶[124] Rep. 1886 Edwin E. Lommen[15] ✓ 4,790 62.79 All.
John Cromb[125] ✓ 1,443 18.91
Alexander McKinnon[15] ✓ 1,396 18.30
52 New Constituency N/A N/A Lorenzo G. Wood[15] ✓ 1,984 64.10 All.
Hans O. Hanson[15] ✓ 1,111 35.90
53 New Constituency N/A N/A William Prescott Allen[126] ✓ 2,226 52.02 Rep.
H. H. Hawkins[127][15] ✓ ✓ 2,053 47.98
54 Alonzo Jay Whiteman‡[128][nb 12] Dem. 1886 Frank B. Daugherty[129] ✓ 3,572 44.72 Rep.
Charles P. Maginnis[130][131] ✓ Lab. 2,903 36.35
Joseph A. Mannheim ✓ 1,512 18.93
Close
* Elected in a special election.
† Elected to non-consecutive terms.
‡ Retired; did not seek re-election.
§ Lost primary election for party's nomination.
¶ Unclear why this senator was not a candidate for the general election

Aftermath

When the new legislature met in January 1891, a flurry of activity and political dealmaking led to a strange arrangement of power in St. Paul. The 1891 session opened by Republican Lieutenant Governor Gideon Ives, and was swiftly moved to recess for three hours. In this time, Ignatius Donnelly organized the Democratic and Alliance members into a caucus (known as the "Combine") with him as its leader.[132] To the great surprise of Republicans, the caucus was able to topple all their nominations for officers of the Senate.

By custom, Lieutenant Governor Ives would each day pass the president's gavel to Republican Senator John B. Sanborn to serve as president pro tempore (i.e., temporary) of the Senate.[133] The Combine never elected a president of their own, making Sanborn the de facto president of the Senate until the start of the 1895 session.

The result in the 23rd District of Washington County was contested in late January 1891. The originally certified results counted Republican Jasper N. Searles as the winner by 4 votes, but after a tabulation discrepancy was discovered in Marine Township, Democrat James S. O'Brien was awarded the seat by the Senate's vote of 32 to 21 on January 29, 1891.[78] This expanded the Combine's majority to 29 over the Republicans' 25 seats.

See also

Notes

  1. [1]
    The Democratic Party initially endorsed the Alliance ticket when the nominee for state senator was Daniel Currie. Currie then fell into ill health just days before the election and resigned from the ticket."Locals". The Mable Enterprise. October 30, 1890. Retrieved April 2, 2021. The Democratic Party did not reconvene with enough time to nominate their own candidate or endorse Tousley.
  2. [2]
    Previously held by Republican Daniel F. Goodrich, who died in 1889."Goodrich, Daniel F. "D.F." - Legislator Record - Minnesota Legislators Past & Present". www.lrl.mn.gov. Retrieved April 3, 2021.
  3. [3]
    Both Sevatson and Knox claimed to have rightfully earned the Republican nomination. Cottonwood County Republicans endorsed Sevatson and Jackson County Republicans endorsed Knox before the legislative district convention. At that convention, shenanigans ensued, which left neither without the legitimate endorsement of the whole district.[27]
  4. [4]
    Both Sevatson and Knox claimed to have rightfully earned the Republican nomination. Cottonwood County Republicans endorsed Sevatson and Jackson County Republicans endorsed Knox before the legislative district convention. At that convention, shenanigans ensued, which left neither without the legitimate endorsement of the whole district.[27]
  5. [5]
    Ran successfully for Lieutenant Governor.
  6. [6]
    Nelson represented Senate District 22 from 1887-1891, which covered the north half of Goodhue County. During redistricting, Nelson was placed in Senate District 21, which now covered all of Goodhue County. Thus, while Nelson was an incumbent Senator in 1890, he represented a constituency that did not exist for the 1890 election.[71]
  7. [7]
    This result was contested in January 1891 in the opening days of the newly convened legislature. The originally certified results counted Republican Jasper N. Searles as the winner by 104 votes, but after a tabulation discrepancy was discovered in Marine Township, Democrat James S. O'Brien was awarded the seat by the Senate's vote of 32 to 21 on January 29, 1891.[78]
  8. [8]
    Ran unsuccessfully for Lieutenant Governor.
  9. [9]
    Unsuccessfully sought the Democratic nomination for Minnesota Secretary of State.
  10. [10]
    Gilman was a well-known Republican and was only not endorsed as their candidate because he missed the legislative convention."Of Affairs Political". Duluth Evening Herald. October 23, 1890. Retrieved April 27, 2021.
  11. [11]
    For an unknown reason, Kortsch's vote total is not recorded by the 1891 Minnesota Legislative Manual. Presumably, the vote total is recorded in a yet-to-be-archived contemporary newspaper.
  12. [12]
    Ran unsuccessfully for the United States House

References

Related Articles

Wikiwand AI