Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1888-11-15
Is thu Pesssas Electoral CoGlega sys.
tenn the Best THAs CeuiG bs'Dss
Vlsc6? Public Msu
Who Regard fl ss UumbeTson ard Unsas
ncAci0Ty, sud Favor O MCrS Di,ect
Methc cd OF ElGction,

tory. To-day's Commercial Advertiser
has interviews with number OF gentle
men prominent in public affairs,
and the msjority of those whose
views are given favor more
simple and direct method OF electing
q president. Some favor change which,
while permitting the people to vote oil.
rectly for president and vice president,
would retain the relative importance OF
the voices of the stSteg according to their
congres slonal representation, while others
favor the total abolition Of the present
electoral system. The inquiry revealed
also that the present system has its advo-
estes, and the rather surprising fact that
many lawyers and public men have not
thought ct all upon the subject OF o
change or Of remedy for the defects CT
the present system.
THE COLLEGE SHOULD 60.
Oswald Oaendorfer, the editor Of the
Stats Il 3itung, esld:
favor the abolition OF the electoral
college, and q direct vote By the people
for PRECEDENT and ylce-president. Under-
stand me, mean to continue the present
system Of giving each state vote In the
choice Of the president and vice presi-
dent eq1Sl to its representation in the
Senate and House Of Representatives, but
1 would have the vote Of the state certi-
I'd to the president OF the Senate by the
proper state authorities without the
Intervention of the electoral college. The
chance of an elector voting fer any
one besides the man whom he 10
elected to vote for is not great. bu! there
Is q chance for fraud or mistake In the
long list Of names which are voted for In
q state like this. should not favor the
election of president By q msi 0rity Of the
popular vote, because think that would
give some states too much weight In the
determination of the result.
FAvoRs A POPULAR VOTE.
william j. SeWell, eI~United States
senator from New jersey, said:
think the arguments advanced for the
abolition of the useless electoral college
system are unarsHerable. Every think
ing man must acknowledge that It
has long survived It's useiulness-in
fact, hiss been utterly perverted from
the original scope and purpose. There Is
no reason why president Of the United
States should not be selected precisely as
are the governors OF the states-by the
direct SURFACES of the duly qualified
voters. Whether we adopt the system Of
state choice or that Of direct popular
choice is OF secondary consideration.
Either system would be infinitely superior
to hSAof the electoral college. As for
myself, l would III questionEblY prefer The
election CT president by the direct pop
ulAr vote Of the whole country. And this
system will eventually be adopted.
BOUTWELL, AGAINST A CHANGE.
George S. Boutwell,, ex-secretsTy CT
the treasury, said:
lam not in favor OF the abolition OF the
present electoral system uatilsome better
system hiss been evolved. am opposed
to the popular vote system. e., the
election OF the president and vice-preSi-
dent by the SURFACES OF the people en-
mssse-for the reason that II practically
destroys the rights OF the states
IS states to voice in the eelection
of federal chief magistrate. I
Em equally opposed TO the proposition
thst we sbolish the present E!ecto al
College system, but continue to vote by
states, giving each state ss many votes as
II has senators and representatives il
Congress. The so>cGilsd state system,
instead Of doing away With possible evil
incident TO the present system, would
really incresse the evil and danger. l.
would put in the power Of enc m61, the
governor Of stRte, or Gfew men, the state
officials, whist now rests with many men
chosen for this sps cisl purpose.
THE COUNTRY GOULD STAND IT.
Frederick K. CGudert, the well kaown
lawyer, Is thus quore1:
The election, as is is ROW conducted, is
based upon fiction. Toe system is az
tiqueted, cumoerscm9 sad unsatisfactory.
The evil, o. Supposed evil, which is In
tended TO prevent, nSmsly, the popular
excitement which would attend direct
election Of president, exists in ell SIS
force. The possibilities Of fraud and Ct
mistakes axe greatly increased, snd the
complications corresponding multiplied
There would not be any change so far as
cerned, nor shy more excitemen,
or party spirit, If the election
were direct. And, therefore, this useless
machinery is worse than u5eless-it is
mlschievoue and dangerous. Whether in
th5 future, when this country numbers $50,
900 Of inhabitants, which IL probably
will at no very distant date, the country
can stand the strain Of an election for the
CllcI Ab0 vi buSA y H6LlCH is 8
grave question, the solution of which
ought to occupy the minds Of our public
men. There is no precedent to guide ne
in history, and no man can assert the
Affirmative Of that proposition with sbso.
Lutte confidence, for the experiment is
still to De msde.
CONFLICTING OPINIONS.
Everett P. Wheeler said that he doubt.
ed whether the states with small popular
maj critics would be willing to surrender
their present electoral influence in f.vor
OF direct popular vote for president and
vice-president, desirable 81 it would be
in many respects to 90 eWsy with the
present cunorous electoral machinery.
ChsunceY NJ Depew sSid
think the Electoral College hiss out
lived Its usefulness, and should be abol-
isned.
Ex-M1yo- Willism r GfsCa said:
Tho electoral college does not row
perform the functions tor which It YVES
created. ETors may EASILY occu. in the
names Of the electors on the tickets, fol
frequently the electors sra scarcely
known. l believe thSt the names CT the
candidates should be upon the tickets,
but am Eot prepared TO say that The
president should be elected by popular
vote. But there should be some remedy