The Sunday herald. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1866-1887, 1880-04-11
TIE INIT RTLE.

There Is lust now much discussion in both
parties of the propriety of the unit rule as
applied to State delegations to the National
Conventions. In general, 1t may be said
that the unit rule is opposed by those who
fear TO lose. and advocated by those who
expect TO gain by its adoption. As for the
argument, It is held, on the one hand, that
the delegates TO the National Convention
really act for the people of their respective
Congressional districts and should represent
their wishes, and, on the other hand, that
the States are the permanent political units
in our system of government and that there
fore what should be sought is the expression
of the will of the majority of the party in
State. We confess we prefer the latter view
of the subject, because, in this era of central
ization, it is well whenever possible to keep
in view this idea Of the autonomy and inde-
structibility of the States of our Federal Re-
public. If we appoint delegates simply as
representing the shifting bodies composing
for the moment Congressional Districts we
really obliterate the States as political units
a. our National Conventions.
The nature Of the argument against the
unit rule depends good deal on circum-
stances. New York, it is generally expected,
will vote as a unit for Mr.. Tilden, Indiana for
Mr.. Hendricks, Ohio for Mr.. Thurman, and
in general States that have candidate
will indicate that fact by giving him solid
vote. If any lndianian advocates an unin-
:. l..,,t \,
he wants to defeat Mr.. Hendricks. II will
in fact be nearly fatal to any candidate at
all conspicuous not to have the delegation OF
his State vote as a unit in his favor. Sc
when the unit rule is assailed we do moi
need to look far below the surface of the rea.
sons given for it to find that they are not the
true reasons, which will usually be de
sire on the part of those finding themselves
in minority to circumvent the majority o
their party.
But there is far more important reasoi
for the retention of this rule by the large
States. 1t is only by voting as uni
that they can maintain even shadow of tn
influence which belongs to their population
Take the case Of Pennsylvania. With twenty
seven Representatives in Congress, she ha
but two Senators. If her representation il
aNational Convention be compared with tina
of Nevada, Colorado, Oregon, or Delaware
we find that she should have three times n
many votes as she possesses for each
twenty-six Congressional Districts. If tina
rotten pocket borough, Nevada, has six del
egates at Cincinnati, Berks county, to b
equally represented, ought to have six dele
gates instead of two, and the State ought I
have eighty-four votes instead Of fifty y-eigh
This illustrates the precise disproporton thi
Senatorial representation in the Electors
College gives the small States. The un
rule is an imperfect way of equalizing TIL
frightful system of facilitating the domino
ton of minorities, but it is the best way
have, and its maintenance is essential to IL
due influence of the great States in our p
litical system. The obliteration of the Sta
idea is undemocratic and bad, the delibera
throwing away of her due influence by
populous commonwealth like Pennsylvan
or New York is worse.