1876 Chicago mayoral elections

Content sourced from Wikipedia, licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.

In 1876, Chicago had two mayoral elections in one year. The first, held in April, was disputed and eventually declared illegitimate, leading to a special election in July.

Background
- A 1872 law moved municipal elections to April in odd-numbered years and extended mayoral terms to two years. Chicago voters chose to operate under this Act in 1875.
- Because of the change, incumbent Harvey Doolittle Colvin believed his term ran until 1877, and no mayoral election should be held in 1876. The city council also did not schedule an election, so neither party initially put forward mayoral candidates.
- Thomas Hoyne, then president of the Chicago Public Library board, decided to run. He appeared on ballots as an Independent Democrat and was backed by both major parties on election day.

April 1876 election
- Thomas Hoyne won a landslide in the municipal election held April 16, 1876, with 33,064 votes (about 97.59%).
- Harvey Doolittle Colvin had been the mayor before the election.
- The result was disputed, and on June 5, 1876, the Circuit Court of Cook County ruled that the April election had been illegitimate. Hoyne’s tenure as mayor was annulled, and Colvin could stay in office until a special election was held.

Special election
- A special mayoral election was held on July 12, 1876.
- Monroe Heath (Republican, endorsed as a reform candidate) won decisively with 19,248 votes (63.90%).
- He defeated Mark Kimball (Democrat, 7,509 votes or 24.93%) and James J. McGrath (Independent Democrat aligned with Colvin, 3,363 votes or 11.17%).
- Heath became mayor after the special election.

Outcome and notes
- This is one of only two Chicago mayoral elections later declared invalid (the other being in 1844). The April election’s results were voided, and the July election determined the true mayor.
- The April vote was counted publicly, but the city council did not accept it as official.
- The dispute included questions about pay for Hoyne and his appointees; a later opinion held that Hoyne had served as mayor de facto and could receive payment for the time he acted.