New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1876-11-28


| METHOD RECENTLY MADE PUBLIC.
lFRoM STAFF CORRESPONDENT OF THE TRBUNE.l
WASHINGTON Nov. 27.-If all the excitement,
anxiety, and apprehension occasOned by the dis
puted result of the election should bring the public
mind UP to the point of demanding change in the
system of making President of the country, a sub
stantal good will grow out of what now appears to
be an unmxed evil. That the old machinery is anti
quated, defective and out of accord with the spirit
of the institutions of this country has long been felt
but, on the principle of letting well enough alone it
was not thought worth while to attempt a change
until the strain Of an exceedingly close election has
at last demonstrated how unfit and dangerous the
| clumsy enginery really is. what shall be put in
| its placer is question which all Thought
full men are now asking Probably ninety-nine out
of hundred answer the question themselves almost
as soon as they ask it by saying "a direct popular
vote" but the hundredth man il a politician, aud
begins to point out the effect of such system in
destroying the balance of power possessed by the
! States, diminishing the relative weight of the
smaller ones and demOlsbing the control Of the
large over national politics. As this hundredth
man very likely possesses more influence with tho
Legislature in his State, which must pass upon any
constitutional amendment. than the other ninety
nine, his objection must receive serious considera-
| ton.
Let us examine first the details Of the direct popu-
lar vote plan, which is unquestionaby the one pre-
! ferred by large majority of the people. In every
State the voters would cast their ballots directly for
candidates for President and Yice-President, and
the total vote would be canvassed and returned to
Congress by such officials as the State laws might
ntrust with the duty or better STILL Congress
would pass a law providing uniform system for all
the States. The returns from the States would be
| hula .I 81 tI,a Of tbo ftUn
Houses, and the candidates having the highest num-
Der Of votes would be declared elected. This is as
simple system, it will be seen, that of adding
together county returns at a State capital to
| ascertain the result of an election for Governor;
and il is one, too entirely in accordance with the
new constitutional interpretations and amendments
which fast consolidating our once loose league
of States into a compact, homogeneous nation.
The objections to it grow out Of the linger-
gering remnants Of the old theory Of State
rights. II is maintained that the States should
have the same relative power in the choice OF
President that they possess in Congress, and that
an essential feature in the present system Of govern
ment ia that the Chief Magistrate shall be chosen
10y the States acting such, and not by the people.
popular election would unquestionably bring
about important changes in politics. No party could
afford 10 be sectional Each would shape its policy
so as 10 have n chance TO secure majority OF the
voters in all the States We should have no
concentration Of effort TO obtain just States enough
10 give majority of electoral votes There would
be no electoral votes, and the ballot of citizen Of
Texas would be worth az much as that of citizen
of Indiana. The great States would however, be
shon of the influence they at present possess in
shaping the course of parties. Now 1000 majority
in New-Yorl is worth to a party just seven tunes
as much rs the majority in New-iampsblre, be-
cause in the big State IT secures 30 electors andin the
little one only five. Under the system it would
be worth Just the same. The effect of the change
on the distribution Of Federal patronage would
be important. Politicians from the great states
could 10 longer obtain the lions share OF appoint
mcnts on the plea that il is essential TO carry their
states in order 20 elect the candidate of their party
for the Presidency. The small States however,
would oppose snch a system, because they would
suffer positive loss of power in determining the re-
suit To Observation-Disclosures, with her three cleo
toral votes. is now one-ffth as powerful in making
President as Indiana with her 49, but Delaware
has only l25,OO0 inhabitants, and Indiana has
!. CSC, 900. Indiana has therefore ID times
ns many votes as Delaware, and in
popular election would outweigh her little
sister in just that proportion. mus the
ratio between the two States would Exchanged from
Eve to one the present figures, to thirteen tn one
Is it likely that Delaware would consent' oregon
Nevada, Colorado, and Nebraska would suffer as
much or even more loss by the change hhode
Island Florida New-IIampshre, and Vermont
would also be heavy losers, and many other states
would lose in less degree. II requires the assent
of threefauTths Of the State Legislatures TO ratny
a constitutional amendment. Obviously the assent
could not be obtained in this case, unless puDhc
opinion should demand it in very imPerous way
Turn next to the system advocated by Mr.. Morton
last Winter. The Indiana Senator proposed to re-
tain all the Objectionable machinery of the Eec-
toral Colleges. but TO give the popular will better
chance for expression and partially provide for the
representation of mnorities by having the district
electors chosen as Congressman are now, ana only
the two electors al large in each State elected on
general ticket This plan gives the States the same
relative weight they now possess, but does not en-
able them TO cast that weight into one side OF the
scale. Their electoral vote would be divided IKE
their representation in Congress. Iehhsyl-
yania, for example, gives 30 electoral
votes for Hayes; under the Morton system
the result this year would DO III lor
Hayes and 10 for Tiden. Indiana throws her 10
votes for Tilden were Mr.. Mortons amend
mcnt in force she would give HAYES ana llideh "
The bad features of this plan are these: IL preserves
tbe Electoral College machinery which the country
manfestly wants to break up; II would turkish an
additional incentive to gerrymanderingi 1t would
give rise to fierce fights in close districts IN fresdeh-
tal years and make the State contests minor aalrs
Its only apparent good feature is the Imperfect rep
resentation it would give in the Electoral colleges
to minorties in most States. The objection Oh ue-
stroyng the unity of State action applies 10 IL WIFI
Just as much force as to the popular vote SYSTEM
There is a third plan proposed. 1t is not open to
the objections urged against both the OTHERS Dc
cause it does away with all the clumsy Electoral