New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-07-26
Cumulative Voting.

The commission ON the revision of the
statutes in Connecticut has recently made q
report on the subject of minority represen-
tation to the Legislature of that State. The
commission, after careful consideration
of the different methods for facilitating
minority representation, reports in favor of
the plan of cumulative voting. The report
speaks a. follows on the subject:
"The three principal methods of securing
minority representation are those respect
lively known as the Hare plan, the limited
vote and the cumulative free vote. Oh these
the commission are of the opinion that the
Hare plan, though perhaps the most exact
in securing to the minority their due, and
only their due, proportion Of offices, and
though it has been in successful use in
Denmark for twenty years in the election
more complicated processes of counting
than it is expedient to introduce into our
elective system The limited vote is
that in use already in the election
of our school officers and registrars
of voters, and in the most of our city
governments. Its defects consist in often
giving the minority more, and sometimes
less, than their proportion OF offices. When
five officers are to be elected, and the party
having the majority numbers nearly, but
not quite, four times as many as the minor
candidates out of the five. the minority will
get two officers when they are not fairly
entitled to more than one, unless by precon-
certed division Of their forces part of the
majority vote for three candidates, and the
rest for three other candidates, in which
case the minority may lose all representa-
ton. The cumulative or free vote avoids
this difficulty. 1t allows every voter to
vote for as many candidates as there are
1. lo 6 L.
prefers, to give all or as many as he likes
of his votes to any particular candidate or
candidates; that is to cumulate his votes
on the nominees of his party. This to
illustrate: Suppose there is q town
having SOL votes, of whom 400 belong to
one party and 10l to another, and that
it has to elect five assessors. Evidently the
minority, about one fifth of the voters,
ought to have not more than one of the
board Under the limited vote, as no one
could vote for more than three assessors, if
each party voted in the usual way, there
would be 400 votes for three men of the
from the minority party, and the board
would stand three to two. This would give
the minority one taO many, and the next
year the leaders of the majority would be
very apt to divide them into two sections,
each of which, by previous arrangement,
would vote for three candidates, giving
each of the six thus voted for 200
votes, which, as the majority could only poll
l0l votes, would exclude them entirely
from the board. Under the cumulative vote
neither of these things could happen. Each
voter of the minority having the five votes
to give, and being at liberty to cumulate
them at his pleasure, would give them
all to one candidate, who would, therefore,
receive sos votes and so certainly be elect
ed, while the majority, with equal certainty,
would elect four men, or precisely their
due proportion. This cumulative system
has been successful in Pennsylvania for
four years in the election of borough Off
GERS, in London for three years in the cleo
ton Of school officers, and in Illinois for
two years in the election of members Of the
Legislature. 1t is pronounced by those
who are familiar with it to prove in practice
to be easily comprehended by the voters,
and to involve no more trouble in counting
the ballots than the old method.