The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1871-01-03
TIE PROPOSED CONSTITUTE OVAL
CONVHNTTON


will pass a bill at an early day submitting
the question of Constitutional Convention
to vote of the people, and authorizing the
election Of delegates The details of the plan
for attaining constitutional reform have been
generally discussed by the public journals
and public men, and much contrariety of
sentiment has been developed as to the most
practicable method of enabling the people to
be fairly represented in the body that is to
revise their organic law.
While Mr.. Buckalew's method of cumula-
tive voting is approved by many, and espe-
cially his extreme application of the principle
even to fractions of votes, it seems to be
generally conceded that the minorities shall,
in some way, be represented. But two bills
have been prepared in detail and presented
to the public through the press-one by Mr..
Mcclure, an ex-legislator and politician of
ripe experience and another by Mr.. Conuell
who is equally experienced and practical in
dealing with public questions. Both bills
provide for minority representation, but by
entirely different principles. In order that
our readers may comprehend at glance the
difference in the two bills, we give the basis of
representation adopted by each. Mr.. Connell
provides for thirty-two delegates at large,
each voter to vote for but sixteen, thus
giving each political party an equal number;
Mr.. Mcclure provides for thirty delegates at
large to be elected in like manner; but in
the selection of Representative delegates
the bills essentially differ. Mr.. Mcclure
gives each county, whether large or
small, separate representation, on the prin-
ciple that the delegates should come directly
from the people of their respective localities,
as the immediate representatives of the views
of their neighbors, and he proposes to pro-
tect minorities by cumulative voting. In
every county where more than one delegate is
to be chosen, the minority could concentrate
their votes on one or more candidates and
certainly elect. The basis of representation
by Mr.. McClure's bill in O,0OO population,
with an additional delegate for every fraction
over II, 600, and all the counties with less
population than 5000 are allowed one dele
gate each. Thus Forest Elk, Cameron, Full
ton, etc., would each have one delegate, while
the more populous counties would have dele
gates in proportion to their population by the
late census. Mr.. McClure's bill also avoids
all attempts at political advantage, and no
tainty the political complexion of the con-
vention.
Mr. Connell's bill divides the State into
districts, observing the present formation of
the Senatorial districts mainly, and limits the
votes to be cast to number less than the
number of delegates to be elected thus GER
tainly securing minority representation. In
the First district of this city, for instance,
Mr.. Connell provides for five delegates, but
each voter casts but three votes. The Re-
publicans would thus elect two of the dele
gates and the Democrats three. Had the
Legislature remained Republican in both
branches, as it was when Mr.. Connell pub
lished his bill, it might have proved accepta-
BILE, as it makes Republican majority in the
convention inevitable; but now, with the
Senate Democratic, some bill that gives equal
chances to the two parties to control the con-
vention in accordance with the popular vote
will doubtless be adopted.
We subjoin the basis of representation pro-
posed by the two bills-that of Mr.. McClure's
bill being fixed on 10000 population, with an
additional delegate for every fraction over
$4,000, and allowing one delegate to each of
the counties with small population
MR.. CoNNELL's BILL.
At large-16 to be voted for. r................. SO
The ist, I'd, Sd, 4th, 5th, nth, 9Th and 26th
wards-3 to be voted for.
The 9th, 9tn, 10th, 1lth, l2th, 18th, 14th,
18th, 10th, nth, and 18th wards-5 to be
The 18th, Goth, aist, asd, sSd, oath, a5th 9th,
and 2Sth wards-4 to be voted for r...... 6
| Berks-2 to be voted for. or....................
| Schuylkill-2 to be voted for. ............. 3
| Carbon, Monroe, Pike, and Wayne to be
| voted Tor. ..........,..... q
Bradford, susquehanna, and Wyoming-2 to
| be voted for. ........::,:...,......
Tioga, Potter, Mexican, and Clinton-2 to be
Northumberland, Columbia, and MOntour-2
to be voted for. Observation-Disclosures.
| Dauphin and Lebanon-2 to be voted for 80. 3
| York and Cumberland-2 to be voted for. 3
Adams and FTanklin-2 to be voted for.
| Cambria, Indiana, and JeffersOn-2 to be
NOlSQ .................. -
Washington and Beayer-2 to be voted for 3
Lawrence, Butler, and Armstrong; to be
Mercer, Yenango, and Warren-2 to be voted
ior' ,'.'.'.''.';' ....'..,........ 3
Chester, Delaware, and Montgomery-4tob to be
Blair EoeSG Centre t Huntingdon Min Juniata .
and Perry-3 to be voted for. ............ $
Lehigh and NOrthampton-3 to be voted for. 4
LuZeTne-3 to be voted for or................. 4
Lancaster-3 to be voted for................ 4
Westmoreland, Fayette, and Greene-3 to be
voted for. ............,........
Crawford and Erie-S to be voted for ...... 4
Bucks-1 to be voted for r.................... 2
Lycoming Union, and Snyder to be voted
Bedford, Somerset, and Fulton--l to he voted
s..s ....