The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-03-04
EDITORS CORRESPONDENCE.
From oar new York Correspondent.
Nrv yonx March 4

Foreign Nstos.-D omeSlie.-NeW YORK Legislature
A Good Dsed-ShoUeiIing Of The Saow.
The Union of Thursday last contained article,
tracted from the Columbia State Rights Republican OF
South Carolina commenting upon the late presidential
election in France, with view to prove that the returns
OF the vote thrown upon that occasion grossly fall
sied by the provisional government OF Louis Napoleon
The subject as you justly remark, Is an interesting one
and the process by which the writer arrived at his
clusion, may be added is certainly ingenious one
but we must be permitted Notwithstanding to express
doubts whether ii will bear the test of examination and
having heretofore only formed but expressed very
dlhereR opinion in relation TO The matter, will, with
your permission, briefly state why feel inclined 10 adj
here to Impressions, and discard those attempted
TO be conveyed by the article in the Republican.
The main why the Republican discredits the
turns OF the election in question is that they indicate
that so very large proportion OF the registered voters OF
France to the polls and exercised their Junction. and
few comparatively stayed at home RETAINED As
Stunning the whole number OF voters at s,50o0o0, ii as
sers that 372 600, the estimated number of those who
absaned, is not enough to account for those who, from
illness, absence from home inability to leave their bust
ness and other causes would fail decline TO vote and
hence deduces the inference which considers iresst
ible, that the whole returns fraudulent, and that
the government must have falsfed them Now there is
one answer 10 this hypothesis, which, IN the absence OF
any direct evidence OF unfaness the part OF the pro-
vsiona government. would seem completely TO overset
it, In 1S4S when the contest between Louis Napo.
leon and Cavaignac the number OF votes thrown was
very nearly the same and making allowance for one very
palpabe cause the proportion between those exercising
their franchise and those absainng the same
also We have not the statistics al hand but that
Louis Napoleon from that time known all over the
world the elect of sic millions" and that he received
considerably than that number OF votes, is fact
familiar 10 every 1t equally well known that Ca
vaignac and other opponents, received in The neghbor
If mi half If andth at tha hola
number throwR was about 100000. Now, allowing
for the natural increase of the population three years.
say and for the adheents of the Orleans dynasty
which had but Just been overthrown, and which then had
hosts Of friends who would not vote at ALL hree or four
hundred thousand more the result will not vary mater
ally from that OF the election OF December last and the
proportions will be just about the same. But the election
of s4S took place under the auspices of Cavagnac,
against whose integrity not whisper heard,
and Louis Napoleon had neither place power nor
moneys so that it impossible to draw the inference from
the proportion OF those who abstaned from voting in
1851, that the returns tempered with by the provs-
ional government, without subecng the republic under
Cavaignac to the mputaton and the result of the
contest if nothing else efectuay clears his skirts Z
The Republican attempts TO strengthen its position BY
comparing the proportion OF those exercising their fran
chse those refainng TO VOTE according to the
of the French election of December last with that which
existed between The parties in ancient Athens,
/ exists
a case in point. 1t was small community of some
IS 900 voters OF whom, said. not above one fourth
ever exercised their franchise Their for alb
staining must be to US, al this remote period, purely
matter OF conjecture and the fact, if it be fact is
which can have bearing upon the present question.
| Nor do we think that comparison OF the proportions
existing between the voters the absaners and the whole
population of France, and the like classes in our own
country, will materially strengthen the inference that the
Republican draws in the premises We shall not be far
wrong in assuming that the number of votes thrown
both sides the election Of Gen. TAYLOR in Is4s was
about 100000 Now, what the representative pop
uation of this country at that tmei By the census Of
1850 il is stated al 81 000, 900 and fraction Perhaps
20, 900 900 may be fair estimate for ls4s Now from
this number deduct for foreigners not natural
lied, and 100000 for free negroes moi allowed voe
and have total OF II 500, 000 just half the popu
lalion OF France from which there are no such deduc
tons TO be made The conclusion arrived from this is
that if the proportion OF voters in this country TO the
whole population is the exists in France, one.
fourth OF them occasions of such interest the odi-
nary election of Pesidest refrain from exercising their
right; and this all know is not far from The iruth-a
vastly greater proportion, il is true, than is presented BY
the OF the French election; but not greater BY
any means, than be very readily accounted for by
natural and prominent causes which will suggest them.
| selves TO the examiner upon moments reflection In
the first place. there is comparison between the import
last election its momentous character and the intensity
OF the interest calculated excite and that upon
which called upon 10 decide every four years. with
systematic regularity. In France, upon that OCCASION
the question between government and govern
ment Should society continue TO exist, be resolved
into its original elements Should there be security for
life, and liberty, and property or should all protection
and safeguard for either be withdrawn With Us who
are in the undsurbed, and we may say unmenaced,
enjoyment Of firm and well-es,ablished government OF
our own choice il is merely shall or b. both good men
and true both admitted lovers OF their country, and
defenders OF its constitution, though differing in minor
points OF policy preside her destnes in accordance
to the law for brief aad limited period Is here not
difference enough, in the exgeney OF the two cases. 10
more than account for the difference OF interest and
cilemeui exhibited and the difference in the proportion
OF those who voted and who stayed at homer Is it, in
fact not rather matter OF surprise under the circum.
stances thai there any abstcntans in France. who
could drag themselves be carried the polls vote
upon question of ssch vital, such nestimabe import
ance Then, again, consider tina, this was only the
second or third time that the present generation in
France bad been permitted the exercise OF their franchise
that the privilege OF voting had scatcey been accorded
half dozen times in that country in the last half
fury while every American has the unrestricted right to
vote once, twice, and sometimes ofene every year
Compare The statistics of the domain and population OF
the two countries see the one with Eve and thirty mil.
lions crowded into proporiionay small territorial space,
every OF whom is probably within musketshot OF
voting place, and the other with two thirds that number
Of people scattered surface OF len times larger