The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1875-04-10
AN UNIFORM ELECTION DAY.

| the republican party, or against one OF all
of these-and each theory is advanced, we
have only to pay our money and take our
choice--there is one result that every one,
no matter what may be his political pro-
clivities, who believes in government of
the people, by the people and for the
people, must rejoice at. 1t is understood
that the amendment to the state constitu-
ton has been approved by the people,
providing that, hereafter, all general cleo
tions shall be holden on the Tuesday after
the first Monday of November of each
year. 1t is another step toward the adop-
ton of an uniform day for all elections.
Congress set the example, in 1916, by en-
electors should occur on the same day in
all the states of the Union, and followed 1t
up, two years ago, by further providing
that, commencing in 1876, members OF
congress should be elected on the Tuesday
after the first Monday of November in
every second year. Last year, Pennsyl-
Nulllu bO dtlltuutkl HtI COuStltutlOu tudt uCl
elections are now held on the day of the con-
gressional elections, and on day uniform
with those of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida,
Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Massa-
chusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi,
Missouri Nevada, New Jersey, New York,
South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia
and Wicnnpo;p wit rpnpoot;o,,t to
two states in all
1t is to be hoped that the remaining
states will soon wheel into line, so that, mot
only once in four years, but every year,
but one day may be set apart for political
elections. The arguments in favor of an
uniform day are many and obvious, while
those for scattering" elections may be
simmcrcd down into one-namely, custom.
Aside from the selfish argument of econ
omy, based upon the fact that every state
must hold an election on the Monday after
the first Tuesday of November every two
years, and that time and much money
would be saved by holding but one cleo
tion year, it is evident that fairer, more
unbiased expression of the popular will
could be obtained if all the states voted
simultaneously. AS it is now, the general
election is too often carried by that which
we are pleased to term the ''moral force
of previous state election. 1t is, and has
been for years, an admitted fact that, in
closely contested presidential elections, the
fall elections in Pennsylvania, Ohio and
Indiana determine the result. And this,
too, without regard to principles We had
an illustration of this in 1856, in the cleo
ton of James Buchanan. Pennsylvania,
by fraud, was counted for the democracy
in October, and the floating vote, always
anxious to be on the winning side. hast
ened to array itself against the republicans,
and Buchanan became president. On a
smaller scale, this "moral force" was
brought into play in New Hampshire, in
March, by telegraphing to the doubtful
towns the increased vote and republican
gains in other parts of the state. To be
sure, New Hampshire tactics could still
be followed, but one state could not act or
react on another state. This "moral
force is,perhaps, not very bad dose when
1t happens to favor our side, but it is not
always in one direction; it creates "tldal
wave" that first sweeps one party from
power, and then turns around and pulls
down that which it has set up.
We desire, above all things, a pure poll
tics, and pure men in office and these re-
suits can only be obtained where the indi
vidual voter has settled opinions, and will
not hesitate to bolt improper nominations.
The floating vote will remain, but it will
be diminished in numbers and shorn of its
strength. The "moral force will come
from home, and will be formed by discus
sion of principles and a consideration of
The honesty and capacity of candidates.
The voter cannot determine in advance
whether his vote will be on the winning or
osing side. He will not be called upon to
consider whether or not his vote will add
10 or take from the prestige of the party, or
Upon its effect elsewhere. The men and
he principles will be before him, and he
can and must decide and act accordingly.
Vermont cannot affect Maine, nor Maine |
Pennsylvania, nor Pennsylvania the Union,
and the voter will not be entreated, urged,
1riyen to vote for an obnoxious candidate |
n Vermont because, forsooth, a rousing
majority will encourage Maine. If the
people are to govern the people, if the gov
,rment is to be for the people. then we |
must have our elections decided upon prin-
'iples, and our offices filled by men selected |
or their fitness not by the success of q
'iven party in another part of the Union. a
uccess too often secured by fraud nor by
Ioters governed only by the desire to be on
he winning side, no matter which side
hat may be. This we shall never obtain
Except by an uniform election day-and the
probability of attaining this ought to out
weigh all other arguments and be alone suf.
lcient to decide the matter.