New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1878-02-28
ELECTORAL DISPUTES.
PLANS TO PREVENT A REPETITION OF THE PUBLIC
.,,x,rrrrc np YFIr.

ANXIETIES OF LAST YEAE.
iBy TELEGRAPH TO THE TRIBUNEl
WASHINGTON Feb. 27.-Thc House Committee or
the Revision of the Laws regulating the counting OF
the electoral votes for President ard NcePresldent
has under consideration several plans for prevent
ing the occurrence of controversy like that which
preceded the Inauguration of President Hayes
One of them, which seems TO meet with some
favor proposes to provide by constitutional amend
ment that all disputes as to which of two or more
persons of persons has been legally chosen to
the Electoral College III any State, or which IN
yoved the eligibility of an elecor, shall be passed
upon by the highest judicial tribunal i'll the
State, the decision of which shall be sent
TO the President of the Senate, TO be
kent with the electoral votes and opened at
the same time that they are opened Another Sec
ton of the amendment proposes to make IL neces-
sary to have the concurrent vote of both Houses of
Congress in order to reject the vote of any State
unless contest has taken place. In that case, if
the highest tribunal in the State has passed upon
the question at is ne then it is proposed that the
concurrent vote of both Houses of Congress shall be
required TO reverse it, But if no decision has been
made and two OF more returns are received from
the same State, then, by this plan, the concurrent
vote Of both Houses Will be required to authorize
the counting of any vote of the State in question.
The objection to this plan which Immediately sug-
gests itself is that it leaves open the door for Just
such dispute as that which it seeks to prevent, and
without supplying an adequate remedy. The cleo
toral controversy of 1S7G-lS77 disclosed how easy
it is TO get up duplicate electoral votes from State,
or to raise questions touching the eligibility of cleo
tors aud as the proposed amendment seems TO con-
template the possibility that these questions may
not be settled by State tribunals, it NAV be that
they will be brought to Washington and give rise to
serious trouble. Suppose. for instance. that the
State of Vermont Should as it did in ''76,
choose an elector whose eligibility should dis
puted and the question whether he was eligible or
not should not be passed upon by the State Courts.
The very fact that question was raised would
enable one House Of Congress TO prevent his vote
from being counted without any regard to the
eauities of the case. The man might be actually
eligible, and yet because this was questioned his
vote might be rejected and the scale
of a Presidential election turned from one side
to the other. The same trouble might arise
from the existence of contesting Electoral College
What is needed is machinery that will make it i'm
possible to raise troublesome questions here In
Washington after the counting of the votes begins.
the subject comes 10 be discussed by the full com,
mittee however, amendments may DO proposed
that will supply these DEFICIENCIES.
Another plan that has been talked OF somewhat, ID
to divide the electoral vote of each State among the
Presidential candidates III proportion TO the roslec-
tive popular votes they received IN the state, car
rying the division into decimal fractions OF three
places The general details of this plan are similar
to those of the well known systems which have Tor
their object minority representations.