New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1851-03-14
Our dispatch is as follows:
Election of President by the People.

To tle Editor Of The Tribune:
l am glad to see that you have taken much in.
teres in the reform of the present manner of elect
ing President and Vice President, that the people
NAV more directly control the result. The only
objection l perceive to direct vote for the re-
spectve candidates. is to be found in the fact that
the elective franchise is not equally enjoyed in
the several States. Many States would be forced
by such a system to a change in the electionlaws
or lose large portion of their proportionate voice
in controlling the councils of the nation.
The manner Of proportioning the members OF
Congress among the several States suggests to
me an idea respecting the manner OF choosing
Presidential Electors, which l will briefly ex-
plain.
Divide the entire aggregate vote for electors by
the number of electors to which the State is enti
tled-this will give the number Of voters who are
entitled to one elector. Then divide the number
of votes given for each candidate by the product
mentioned, and il the united products do not pro-
vide for the full number Of electors, then give an
additional elector TO the candidate having trac-
ton over onehalL And if in consequence OF the
multiplicity of candidates, there should still be an
electoral vote unprovided for, let that vote be
thrown blank or give these electors to candidates
having the largest fractions. speak OF electors,
but it is plain that such system would do away
with that Office.
Here, think, is plain and unobjectionabe
mode of bringing down the election of President
and Vice-President to the immediate control OF
the people.
Take the election in this State in ls4s for an il.
lustration. The entire vote Of the State was
453, 400. Taylor's vote was 2ls,5s3; Van Bu'
ren's, l20,s47; CRss's, 1880. Number OF cleo
tors Sc. Divide 453 400 by SO, and it gives 1850
as the number of voters entitled to one electoral
vote. Divide Taylor's vote by this and It gives
him II votes, with fraction OF 3 533; go through
| the same process with Van Buren's vote and 1t
gives him votes anu the large fraction OF o,oiL
| In the same way Cass would have votes, with
| the small fraction Of 40. This provides lor %
electors, while Van Buren's large traction emit,
ties him in either hypothesis, to the additional
vote. This makes the result: Taylor IA an
Buren,, 10; Cass, 9.
How DO you like lit c. J.
Remarks.
We have one fundamental, fatal objec-
ton to the above and sll other schemes
that can only be put in practice by change
in the Federal Constitution-theydre utterly
impracticable. The Constitution may live
thousand years, or it may speedily be
overthrown, but it will never be essen
tally altered in any matter affecting the
distribution of Political Power. Consider
ing that settled point, we shall oppose
the consideration of any project involving
the necessity of such alteration as a mis-
chieyous waste of time and effort which
might be pro6tably devoted to some other
purpose.
What We propose to do involves no
such alteration. What We desire is the
nomination by each party in each State of
an electoral Ticket unpledged to vote for
any individual, but pledged to vote the
choice of their party throughout the Union
as expressed on their ballots-thst is,
pledged to cast their votes in accordance