The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1890-11-17
SOUTH CAROLrNA AND CONNnC.

Miller, the congressman-eIect from the
Seventh district Of South Carolina. u par
ticulariy obnoxious to the chivalry Of thst
section because he has faint tinse- one-
sixty -fourth-of colored blood In his veins.
Thersfors they are going to deny him his
certificate Of election. A large majority cf
the legal voters Of the district cast their
ballots for him. That Is not denied. But
the most or ali Of these ballots were too
short and too narrow By hairs breadth
to mest the legal requirements, they were
Of : slightly different shade, but worst Of
ali "For'' hefors the title Of the ONCE for
which he Vas candidate, and the law
says It must contain nothing but the title
Of the Office and the natne Of the person
voted for.
A contemporary tries to establish rela-
ton between such an outrageous case
% this and the course which prevails In
Connecticut, strictly in accordance with
the constitution and the law, that il. in .
general election, no candidate for Governor
shall receive . majority of all the votes
cast. then the legislature from the two
highest shall choose the Governor.
In several instances it has happened that
the Democratic candidate for Governor
had plurality over has Republican COM
petitor, but not majority. while the Re-
publicans would secure majority in the
legislature, and choose their Bipartisan for
Governor. The worst that can BE- said Of
this course IL that the legislators give their
party the benefit Of every doubt in judging
how the scattering vote would have been
cast if there had been but two candidates
in the field. II for their candidate they
would have elected him. They were not
cast for the opposition candidate. As to
how they would have been cast leaves room
for reasonable doubt. II the legislature
gives the opposition candidate none Of the
benefit of that doubt, they treat him no
worse than the scattering voters did.
1t is safe to say that under such circum-
stances there has never been in the United
States. and never win be. political party
20 constituted that its representatives,
being in majority, would not choose
their co-partisan. It would not be con-
sistent for those who voted for the consti-
tuition Of Washington, which makes . plu-
rality elect, to contend that the Connecti-
cut rule IL the best It IL not Circum-
stances are conceivable under which it
would lead to serious difficulties. But it il
the law Of that state. and every voter in
the state voted with full knowledge of
the fact. and it bears equally on Ill par
ties.
In South Carolina. on the contrary, &C
cording to law plurality elects. Its not
disputed that Miller had not only plur-
atty, but round majority Of all the votes
cast. That those who voted for him i'm
tended to do % b not denied. That the
ballots clearly conveyed their intention il
not denied. But because the ballots varied
by sixteenth Of an inch. and contained
the evolutionary word "For," the ma
jority-a clear and undisputed majority
Of the voters of that district are to be
boldly and 6agrantly disfranchished. And
It IL party accustomed to such deeds that
the people have entrusted with control Of
the lower branch Of congress.
But there will b an awakening, and the
country will not have to wait two years be-
fore being made aware of the fact