The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1871-10-03
What is O. MAJORITY ?

The Richmond correspondent Of the Nor
folk Jc"lnal. In his letter Of the Goth ult..
SAYS:
"Whilc there Is no doubt that Messrs. |
Nynnc and Connolly, the Conservative can
dsdatcs for the State Senate from this city, |
would have received the nomination from |
The convention under any rule OF arriving |!
al e:u!,s, yet there is much discussion |
here ~ 10 the fact whether either of them
really received a majority OF the votes east |
rs required under the rule actually adopt
81. Mc. WSnne received "a votes, Mr.. |
Connolly 90, Mr.. Daniel -. Mr.. Darlington |
T., and Mr.. Page l0--or $50 votes in all. |
There were 80 delegates voting. each one |
Voting Tor two men. MIR. I>aacs. chairman
al he convention, decided that As was Il
III )",ly. because that number was more
ihan halt OF the delegates voting, and that
therefore Mes>rs. Wynne, Connolly, aud
Daniel received majOrities; but inasmuch
- MrsSrs. Wynue and Connolly received
n'uralltlcs as well as majorities, he pro-
!tnunccd them the nominees. This decision
II supported not only because Az Is really n
majority Of the delegates voting, but be-
cause the joint votes of Messrs. Wynne ana
Connolly make 110-a majority Of the whole
nunlher OF votes cast; and, 'further, De.
cause it was utterly impossible for any one
candidate to receive majority OF lsO votes
gwen, as each delegate had to vote for TWO
men. The decision is questioned on these
grounds: LIST, That three men received
more than 4G is redtctio at dbsurdum OF
the proposition that that number is a ma
jority under the circumstances and IDLY,
that the very object Of the majority rule is
defeat ed by the decision, because the vote
of either Mr.. Wynne or Connolly could
have been overcome by new combnat on
of the votes distributed between Messrs.
Daniel. burlington, and Page. 1t is held
that where two men are to be nominated ut
once, each delegate obliged under the rule
TO cast two votes for different men, that if
only two ,ue voted for then each is unani-
mously elected, each receiving 80 votes, if
that be the number of delegates, as in the
case under consideration but Ii there be
more than two candidates voted for-say
\ ihree-then each may receive 60 votes.
3 Here II is manifest that neither receives
even plurality, and 1t Is therefore maui
testify absurd to say that that num-
Der or less is majority. But 81 IL held to
be II majority because no combination OF
the other votes cast under the rule can give
either of the ether candidates, whether
they number two or dozen, SO great s
vote. i have thus given fair statement o
the case rs it Is argued pro and con, and il
Will be well II the matter be fully inyestiga
ted and settled before a difficulty arises.
am happy to say that although the question
bias arisen here in the way stnted, yet there
is no dissatisfaction with the nominees be.
yond that which Is always inevitable
Messrs Wynne and Connolly are the two
most popular men that could have been
chosen. and they will undoubtedly defeat
their Radical opponents"
and In his letter of the Both he says:
"In stating the case In favor of 81 as the
majority where 80 men vote to nominate
two men at once, each OF the so Obliged
10 vote for two men, yesterday should
have said that only too men could receive
81 rotes, or a greater number, no matter
how many were voted for. The mistake
is mine, and is due to the haste with which
wrote yesterday. 1t is proper to say that
in the case out Of which this discussion
grew the decision of the chairman was
questioned by only one delegate, and that
tic nominations were ratified subsequently
BY unanimous vote Of the Convention.
So that there can be no question as 10 the
nomination OF the candidates. The uues.
tlon is only Of consequence as 1t NAV
affect future nominations, &C., and for that
reason 1t ought TO be fully understood and
properly decided. Those who favor 46 as
tue mujority say that all precedents sus.
tain their views. 1t Is certain that if 80
men have to vote for q joint ticket com.
posed OF A and B, or of Z and d, then 46
as mujorlty."
This is very interesting question, and
the discussion of it in the spirit manifested
by "ELMA" can do no harm, and may
prevent future conventions from falling
into the error which 1t is the object OF the
discussion to correct.
What is the difference between plu.
rality and d majority II q candidate is to
be nominated by q plurality he needs to re-.
ceive only higher number of votes than
any other eandldate-asy 80 out Of 90, for