The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-07-19
202,859
Majority.


Majority. ...,............ IL ,439
Ratio OF votes for Represen-
tative, according to votes
POHeu'''''"''.''.'''..'' .....A $50
"Now, sir, what is the result? Judging by the
actual votes polled at that Congressional cleo
ton, there should have been an equal division
OF Representatives in the House, standing II to
IL; or, II a Representative should be assigned to
the majority interest on account OF the excess
OF its vote, the mum bers would stand l3 TO H.
But In point OF fact, under your single district
system, the result in that state Is that
the delegation stands Is to 6, instead of being
equally divided according to the real votes
which were polled at the election. But under
this system of cumulative voting what would
take place? AS each political interest in the
State knows that its vote is about the same as
thatof the opposing one, and that if 1t attempts
TO obtain more than It's fair share of represen-
tatioD 1t may actually lose, instead of gaining it
will be forced to concentrate its vote upon
twelve candidates, or upon thirteen at most,
and IL is impossible that by any ingenuity or
device whatever IL can increase its representa-
tion in Congress above about what Its actual
numbers enutle 1t to. If IL should make the
attempt, the opposite party would gain an ad-
vantage as the result Of the sharp practice at
tempted upon them."
We cannot withhold a just tribute to the
felicity of these selected Illustrations, nor to
their apparent force as arguments. But their
great plausibility must not exempt them from
the searching scrutiny due to the great inte-
rest of the subject. Many schemes which are
plausible in theory miscarry in practicable
plan of the trainers of the Constitution, for ex-
ample, for electing the President by a body of
electors chosen for that purpose, totally dis
appointed their expectations. We by no
means assert that the system of cumulative
voting would equally disappoint the intentions
of its advocates; but this is certainly fair
point of inquiry.
Proposed reforms in methods of election
need to be considered in reference to the action
of political parties, as well as in regard to
their intrinsic merits. 1t is the nominating
system and party discipline which prevail in
this country which have thwarted and null-
fed the expected operation of the system of
Presidential Electors, making the Electors
mere passive tools for enforcing the behests of
nominating conventions = bodies wholly
unknown to the Constitution and laws. And
yet party action, exerted through such bodies,
is the very life of our politics. Assuming, as
Mr.. Buckalew does-an assumption warranted
by our whole past history-that there will
generally be two great rival parties in the
country, what guarantee can be given that
party discipline will not be as strict and con-
trolling under the new system as under any
other? The nominations for Congress would
continue to be made by party conventions,
and every citizen not wishing to lose his votes,
would cast them for some of the candi-
dates thus put in nomination. In all
closely contested States, each party would be
likely to nominate full list of members,
since failure to do so would be a confession
of weakness of which its opponents would
take prompt and triumphant advantage. A
party which nominated less than the full
number would thereby acknowledge and ad-
vertise its inability to elect the Governor and
other State officers to be chosen in the same
election. 1t is the foible of all parties going
into an election to be sanguine and hopeful;
1t is their practice and part of their
tactics to swagger and boast and never to
make voluntary confessions of weakness. In
all States, therefore, where parties were at
all balanced, each would put into the field
full ticket for members of Congress, and
party spirit and discipline would cause it to
be generally voted for. The practical result
would be simply a restoration of the old
general ticket system. The successful party
though succeeding by less than a hundred
votes, would have all the members; and half
the citizens of the State would be unrepre-
sented.
In such State as Vermont, aptly selected
by Mr.. Buckalew for illustration, the Demo-
cratic Convention might nominate only one
member, and the Republican Convention two,
and each party get the equitable representa-
tion which he describes. But the cases would
be rare in which, in State entitled to three
members, the minority would happen TO have
just votes enough to elect their one candi-
date. If they had too few, they would be no
more represented than under the present
system.
The freedom with which we discuss Mr..
Buckalew's proposition must be regarded as a
proof OF our sympathy with his general views.
he did not broach it with any expectation of
its immediate adoption, but for the purpose of
eiciting discussion. The subject is most inte-
resting; the end sought to be attained most
equitable; and at this stage of the inquiry
more Is perhaps to be gained by general
sitting Of the various propositions and the ex-
posure OF their weak points, than by advocacy
OF any OF them. What we wish to see is the
successful solution of problem which, well
started, and confessed 10 be important, is by
no means to be abandoned as beyond the COM
pass Of human ingenuity because none Of the