The New York herald., 1879-12-17

the democrats in many ways. Taking this view Of
the matter should unhesitatingly work against sucn
want to be understood saying that object to
changing certainty OF carrying the state for the
connection. tail to the benefit that change IN
the law would give the Republicans that would not
be more than counterbalanced by the reaction
against the party by the people,"
WHAT THINKS.
Assemblyman James NJ varntm, who
elected member Of the lower branch of the Lcgis-
lature at the recent election. spoke strongly against
the proposition to alter the law. IL do not that
it is at all necessary any such action be taken.
The republicans have the election and
pretty certain of winning next year. What good
would it be. then. to change the law? Do think IL
will be done? Well, that Is hard question to
answer. II those people in Maine persist in their
declared intention to cheat the republican party out
of their hard earned triumph, why can see no OBJ
lection to New York republicans retaliating by
taking only legal measures to protect themselves.
that in New York the Legislature has all the legal
power to change or alter in any way the method
now employed in Presidential elections OF choosing
the body of electors: 1t may leg1siate any way
it pleases. ana its action Will be legal. just and
proper"
be effected?'
II really can't say. 1 have not looked into the
subject; but what is good for republicans in Maine
is equally good for democrats in New York..
Mr.. Elliot G. Cowdin said that he had given the
subject no special consideration in reference to the
effect 1T would have on the approaching Presidential
election. He had long felt that 1t would be more
thoroughly democratic. In the best sense OF the
term, 10 nave tne fresuentlal ekectOfs CHOSEN
the Congressional districts and the electors 1T largo
the general ticket especially in great State like
New York. He was not aware that there had been
any concert OF action among the leading republicans
the subject. but it would not surprise him IL It
brought up in the coming Legislature.
Assembl yman Charles s. Baker. of Rochester said
he knew nothing of the proposition, except what he
had read in the newspapers. 1t appeared to be .
grand opportunity for tho republican party to do
about it liked; but IL there any question
about the right morality of the scheme the party
should be very careful how they made use Of the
int tha,rh hand N v01Y mot raa m
the matter made subject of caucus.
Ex-Judge Dittenhoefer said it was 9 matter Of such
great importance that he would prefer giving it
careful consideration before giving any decided
opinion. At present he was personally opposed to
the policy, but had not committed himself either
way.
Colonel Charles s. Spencer; when asked il he had
heard any talk among the republican leaders as to
the policy OF changing the method Of choosing
Presidential electors, said 81 have. and not one
that have heard speak but has expressed himself n
terms Of the most unqualified disapproval. 1t would
be the ruin of the republican party. 1t would be .
outrage upon the people OF this State and
party which would countenance such an outraga
would deserve defeat forever after"