New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1875-01-27


A special to the New York Times, from
Washington, January 81, says:
In the Senate to-day the Joint resolution
proposing an amendment 20 the constitution
changing the method of electipg the Pres
ident and Vice President of the United
States was taken up. The proposed amend
ment provides that the electoral vote of
each Statesehall be equal to its representa-
ton in Congress, including the two Sena-
tors. A majority of the voters of each con-
gressional district shall choose the elector,
and the party polling majority Of the
aggregate vote of the State shall be
entitled to the two electors from the
State as whole. Mr.. Morton made
an able argument in support of the
resolution. He analysed the present
system Of electing the President; showed it
to be fraught with danger; that violence
and insurrection had not resulted from it
was due to the fact that the presidential
elections had always been carried by the
successful party with majorities in the Elec.
t0ral College, which rendered any question
as to the vote of any one State unimportant
as affecting the result. The present system
is vote by States, far removed from the
people, and is anti-democratic. He would
prefer to elect by the community vote, but
that may not be entirely practicable. To
ClOOV W OOA&ACSoAOAOA uA6C1 lCto lb tu0 utdT-
est approach we can get TO the people, and
the safer and more equitable plan. Under
the present system fraud perpetrated in the
large cities affected the aggregate vote of
the State, and it is possible for the vote of
one State to decide who shall be President.
By the system now proposed fraud prac.
ticed in one congressional district could not
faint any other district. The present svs-
tenn requires the existence of q party or.
a.
campaign in 1856 there were thousands of
electors in the Southern States who would
have voted. for Fremont, but who were
prevented by the non-existence of the
partisan prerequisite of the present sys-
TEN. There was no organization to select
presidential electors to be voted for, and
in consequence many people were disfran.
chised. He referred to the counting of the
vote in presence of both houses of Con-
gress when Buchanan was declared elected.
A technical objection was raised to counting
the vote of one of the States. Suppose the
objection had been to New York, with it's
large number of electors, and the rejection
of the vote of that State would have altered
the result, might not such transaction
produce bloody revolution Under a
joint rule, which Mr.. Morton held to be un-
constitutional, when objection is raised to
receiving the vote Of State the Senate
must retire to it's chamber, and
each house determine the objection
raised without debate, and both houses
must agree before the vote of the State OBJ
iected to can be counted. The effect of that,
it followed out to its possibility, would be
to enable either party to throw the election
into the House OF Representatives, and thus
defeat the will of the people. Take case
where the House is Democratic and the
Senate Republican. First the House OBJ
jects to counting State, and the Senate
insists on having it counted. The vote of
that State is lost under the rule. Next the
Senate objects to Democratic State, and
the House insists. Such programme could
be carried out until all the States would
be thrown out, and the House of Rep
resentati7es would then name Pres.
ident and Vice President. Mr.. Nor
ton argued that the present manner of
electing the President was the weakest part
OF our national system, and proper regard
for the future stability of the government
demands change. At the counting of the
last electoral vote objections were made to
receiving the votes Of Arkansas, Louisiana
and Texas. Fortq nately the votes of those
three States, whether counted or rejected,
would not have affected the result, but
who can tell what revolutionary scenes
might have followed had the naming of the
President depended on the votes of those
three States. The subject is attracting
wide attention, and there is such manifest
danger in allowing the present system to
stand unchanged that there is a prospect of
the e6CntiOn of Mr. M0rton,c rocn1utiop