Odd voting pattern in Alabama in 1900?

[Adem 45]

I've noticed something a little odd with the Alabama county results in 1900. I am using the Wikipedia results and map for pre-1904 elections, assuming they are accurate (are they?). So in 1900 Bryan won Winston (!?), Lawrence, and Colbert counties while McKinley won Franklin, Lauderdale, and Limestone counties. This seems... strange. In the previous election of 1896 It was flipped, with Bryan winning Franklin, Lauderdale, and Limestone while McKinley won Winston, Lawrence and Colbert. Was there a notable reason for this?

I do know that Alabama Democrats fused their tickets with populists in 1896, but did not in 1900, would that have something to do with it? I notice there are some odd swings in a handful of northern and central Alabama counties around the turn of the century for whatever reason(s), but this 1896-1900 swing, particularly in Winston where the GOP nominee won comfortably in 1896 and 1904, seems to really stick out.

To make matters stranger, this  article says that there was a large protest vote against the Democratic Party in the 1900 presidential election among Alabama hill country whites. So if that were the case, why would McKinley lose in Winston of all places?

Any ideas?

[Blow by blow, the passion dies]

Likely clerical errors

[Adem 45]

Likely clerical errors

Oh that's unfortunate. So are the "actual" results may simply be lost to time? I can't find any source, on the internet at least, contradicting the numbers shown on Wikipedia.

[JoeyJoeJoe]

I recall that there were pockets of Republican voters in northern Alabama pretty late in Reconstruction, and were eventually driven out sometime around 1900.  The votes may not be errors.

[Adem 45]

I recall that there were pockets of Republican voters in northern Alabama pretty late in Reconstruction, and were eventually driven out sometime around 1900.  The votes may not be errors.

There were and remained so after 1900, particularly in Winston county. But the 1900 county map seems strange. I wonder if the debate over the new constitution that was adopted in 1901 has something to do with it?

Colbert
1888 50-49 R
1892 56-43 D
1896 49-47 R
1900 53-42 D
1904 80-17 D
1908 67-27 D

I can only find numbers from 1888 onwards, but looking at the map on Wikipedia (assuming its accurate?) Colbert went overwhelmingly Democratic in 1868 and stayed with the Democrats until 1884, with 1880 being a possibly narrow plurality win for Democrats. It looks to have been winnable for Republicans/Populists throughout the 1880s-1890s and arguably competitive in 1900 before going hard D and not looking back after 1900.

Franklin
1888 76-23 D
1892 67-31 D
1896 67-29 D
1900 54-38 R
1904 50-44 D
1908 47.8-47.6 R

Like Colbert, Franklin seems to have been overwhelmingly Democratic in 1868 and was then won by Democrats by varying margins throughout the remainder of the 19th century until flipping Republican by a convincing margin in 1900 and afterwards being competitive, going to Wilson both times by a much smaller margin than most Alabama counties and going Republican in all three 1920s elections.

Lauderdale
1888 59-40 D
1892 64-35 D
1896 67-30 D
1900 50-48 R
1904 79-19 D
1908 71-26 D

Lauderdale was consistently Democratic throughout the 19th century before randomly being a narrow Republican win in 1900 before going back to being consistently Democratic immediately afterwards.

Lawrence
1888 49.8-49.5 R
1892 56-43 P
1896 56-41 R
1900 54-42 D
1904 68-30 D
1908 60-34 D

Lawrence seems to have been flipping back and forth after going to the Democrats solidly in 1868, going Republican in 1872, then to the Democrats by lesser margins than most Alabama counties in 1876 and 1880, and then favoring the Republicans (populists in 1892) for the rest of the 19th century before going Democratic fairly comfortably in 1900 and then consistently going Democratic afterwards.

Limestone
1888 55-43 D
1892 55-43 P
1896 53-44 D
1900 50-46 R
1904 83-14 D
1908 81-16 D

Limestone, after going Democratic by a large margin in 1868, seems to have been competitive and switched back and forth until becoming very solidly Democratic after 1900.

Winston
1888 59-40 R
1892 51-47 P
1896 62-36 R
1900 49-47 D
1904 55-42 R
1908 67-31 R

Winston was pretty Republican from 1868 onwards, but apparently went Democratic in 1880, and then went back to being Republican until randomly going Democratic again in 1900 before becoming solidly Republican afterwards.

There are other northern and central Alabama counties showing some weird swings throughout this period as well, these are just the six I mentioned in the OP.

I can make some educated guesses on some of these. In Colbert, Lauderdale, Lawrence, and Limestone the black population was higher, likely meaning the counties had some plantation agriculture and therefore some element of the extremely Democratic planter class. After the 1901 constitution disenfranchised many poor whites it makes sense these counties shifted solidly Democratic, and this could also explain why these counties went Democratic by large margins in 1868 as the 15th Amendment was not passed until 1870. I don't think this explains why Lauderdale randomly went Republican in 1900 though, as Democrats managed to win throughout the latter 19th century.

In Franklin it seems there was less of a black population and it voted Democratic for all of the latter 19th century elections before going Republican randomly in 1900 and then becoming competitive afterwards. As for the post-1900 elections, wouldn't the 1901 constitution which disenfranchised many poor whites as well as blacks make Democrats improve their margins afterwards? Was this something to do with population change or plantation agriculture diminishing in the 20th century? This county seems to go against the grain and I don't have an explanation for it.

In Winston, as it is known, is one of those poorer white unionist counties with few blacks where Republicans won consistently. But why did it go Democratic in 1900? As well as in 1880. Aside from these two elections it was Republican (or populist) and oftentimes by solid margins. I can't come up with an explanation for this.

In 1900 in particular it seems some of these counties had strange swings in opposite directions, despite them all being in close proximity.