The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1893-04-26


courteous criticism OF my proposal to IN
Iroduce proportional representation as a
principle OF legislative reform. am far
from holding that there is anywhere
single pRracea or nostrum for legislative
ills. Other reforms which seem 10 me 10
be necessary ara the election of L. s. SEN
ators by popular vote, and civil service re-
form, and tenure OF Office for all appoint
i've offices. These reforms would take
national politics out OF state politics and
leave the people free to divide squarelV on
state questions. There should be a legal
regulation OF primaries and party conven-
tions. the reference OF most local and pri-
vate bills to q semi-judicial tribunal, as is
done by the English parliament, and the
appointment OF legislative committees
not by the speaker and the lieutenant
governor, but by the votes OF the legisla-
tors themselves. But ! believe the pro.
porti0na scheme is fundamental aud
would result in such able and respon-
sihle body OF legislators that these other
reforms would speedily follow.
The essential idea of proportional
representation is not that it defeats the
gerrymander and gives equality among
parties. though that il enough highly to
recommend IL, but that ii substitutes an
election at large for an election by
Districts and wou Is thereby tend to the
election of ADLER and more representative
men, The leaders of politics and political
thought throughout the state, and would
give them lie long service instead of cut
ting them off at the end OF one term.
Your appeal TO history TO show that
representative government under cur svs-
tenn does not mean the representation of
Individuals, or parties, or interests, is I'M
doubtedlv valid and has its place. But
tile problems of government today are
very different from those which the de.
vice OF representation was originally con-
trived to meet. The original problem
was one of federation-how 10 unite into
a single stable government distantly sep
hrated localities and communities. The
counties in England were independent
municipalities. They had no highways,
no commerce., no intercommunication
and were unaccuslOmed TO polit-
lea cooperation. Hence. when they
were united into one kingdom the mon
arch would have had them at his mercy,
ust as Rome robbed her provinces. had
not the people in these localities Joined
together TO send their local representatives
for common appeal. petition, resistance
and finally domin ion. Moreover, the in
terssts of all localities were practically
identical, being altogether rural and agri-
cultural communities. and representa-
tive from one could well stand for the
others. These conditions have held fairly
true in our own country until the time OF
the civil war. But today federation,
t.
resentation solved that matter. The evils
which government must remedy now are
very different from those which our fore
fathers attacked when they protested that
taxation without representation is tyr
amy" There are especially two new
conditions which have Anticipated the old
idea OF representation, namely: the rise
of national political parties with powerful
machinery and the growth OF national and
worldwide private corporations with fab
ulous resources. These two factors in our
country are less than fifty years old, and
only since the late war have they really
become significant. They furnish sufii-
cient cause Tor the degradation
OF legislatures and the suprem-
scy OF the lobby. The old
plan of district representation is crum-
bling beneath them. 1t is too arbitrary,
restricted and cumbersome. Parties are
not divided on county Questions. but on
state and national questions. Corpora
tions select their lobby from the state at
large and the people need to selec, their
represen tatives from the state at large.
Representation is becoming representa-
ton of interests and classes. such as
farmers. labcrers, manufacturers, mer-
chants and corporations. and these are
not divided on county lines, but are scat
tered throughout he state. Proportional
representation enables them to combine,
no matter bow far apart they live, and
send az many of their ables: spokesman
to the legislature as their numbers entitle
than to.
You ask, ''if il be safe to trust he peo-
pie in the whole state why not trust them
in the counliesY 1t il not question of
trusting the people. They can be trusted.
But il il a question OF giving them greater
powers OF selection according to their
needs and wishes. 1t in a question of
selecting men who will not subordinate
state and general questions 10 local and
private questions. The lobby gains inn
mense power through the present exces-
sive log-rolling by playing localities and
local representatives against each other.
1t is q universal principle of our system
OF elections that the wider the area of
choice the ADLER the candidates on all
sides.
And instead of Tightening the control
OF party on the representative by making
his highest obligation to the power that
dominates and elects him." it emanci
pates both candidates and voters from the
tyranny Of the party machine. Under the
present syetem the votor has practically
only two candidates to choose between.
If he does not vote for ore whom his
party dominates hr must vote for the OPP
position or else throw his vote away.
Most men will stand by their party nomi-
nee. But under the proportional scheme
each voter votes for the entire number of
represen tatiyes to be elected for the whole
state. And as there would probably be
three or four full tickets nominated he
would have three or four times as many
candidates to choose from as could be
elected. This feature OF the scheme can
perhaps only be fully understood by TAX
ing an actual example. Presidential cleo
tors are elected on a general ticket, and
the application Of the proportional device