The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1893-03-29

OFFICIALS 10 NheA VI SmNcih JoAiet
penitentiary.
This and the Tweed frauds are the resul OF plu-
rality elections ana so far as may, shall do what
can To save the state OF Rhode Island from It's
The Democracy for years loudly call ed for b-
spanst thai propslton m @ and deearea and wosea
| against II al the polls. They have been equally
| OF ProyideLce and will probably act just con-
sstenty in relation 70 this measure Tor curing that
dlfiuty m the other case.
our constitution has some defects, but they may
racy desire, however a, with the curing OF each
| OF constitutional convention, aud without that
they cannot hope TO wipe out the
Property Qualification
which have alluded toand which is the goal they
are striving for, III thus measure Is submitted To
| the people they will have IL In their
power to terminate the repeated elections
In The city & Of proyIdsnee ,I, M ~ne which have nave
tons IL will be almost W tain the power OF the
voters OF that city 70 do u themselves and The vote
there as been In the complaints against the exist
us today within the power OF the general as
semby 10 provide for the election of members OF
congress and OF all city aud town officers by plu-
is necessary IA those cases bgt the election OF the
wi-,ly connded by tine constitution 20 the major
ity, and there, in my opinion, II should remain.
Mr.. Brown said ne was not a prophet
rs was Mr.. Wilson. but he predicted that
three-ftths il not seven-elgnths of the
people OF this state would vote against
the law. The chairman of the commit
tee had said this was question Of MAORI
ties. MAORI ies, defined ~ Cushing in
Law auu Practice" mea I the one Of
multitude of caud.d tss receiving the
most votes, and correspo lded exac ly to
the present idea of plurality. Majority
rs now expounded by Mr.. jerks origi-
mated with the Massachusetts, Bay CON-
pany, n private corporation, aud vas
then used by that company. 1t was not
from this law that Roger Williams drew
the original law. Sin; the legisla, ure
of Massacn usetts had provided that all
civil officers should be elected by plur-
ality, that law was changed in the coAsti-
tution OF 1S45, and they were changed AS
the r. suit OF the
Great Dorr War.
Since that time the present majority
system had prevailed.
Mr.. Brown then reviewed the slow
| growth of votes in the state. In
| 1891 only 900 votes defeated au
| election where 100 votes had been cast.
| The plurality rule is not new. IL had
| long since been adopted by Massachu
setts and Maine. In Connectic ut aud
| New Hampshire. only the state officers
| are elected by majorities. La all states
| organized under the constitution pu-
| rality elections are the law, and in every
| general election for national offices plu-
| rality law rules. Mr.. Blo1gett said Tn e
| committee had in its substitute elm
| related to the election of gen
eial officers 1t related simply
| to the members of the general assembly.
| On these elections IL added nothing TO
| the rights of the voters IL detracted
from them and limited the rights or the
| voters TO two elections only. Then further
| OF where the clauses related to IN election
| where no oldover was possible the sa-
| cred principle of majority rule was
| thrown TO the winds aud plurality law
| was substituted. III plurality was right
| in one case why not ia ALP lie thought
| the proposed substitute was almost silly.
| Charles A. Wilson said the essence of
| this question was not the question OF
| pluraIty or majority elections The
point is, simply, shall the people be
allowed to vote upon this question oil
| plurality elections This substi-
tute aid not allow the people
TO vote on that question at ali.
| lie was n Republican,, always had been
and ho ell To die so, and ne was sorry to
lind himself arrayed against those with
whom he had been accustom d TO act.
lie b lieved that the senate bill should
| be
Submitted to the People,
as il was equitable and right that i,
should.
w. G.. Baker said Mr. Wilson had
asked why substitute A shou d not be
submitted to the people. He would
answer, il was because few short
sighted politicians did not want that
bill submit ed To the pc elple. Toe truth
of the matter is that tnis action is but
one in "A long series of oOstruc i've tactics
| .h ha Ram hfipa q Ia al nrapti igpd
Tor years. Year after year they had put
out bait To the people, but TO every bait
they had "a strinH, aud before the people
could get il the bait was withdrawn. a
few years ago they claimed that they
were the authors of the bill enfranchs
ing foreign vo.rrs. But in the mex
year the party enacted law undec which
Mr. Blodgett was nov acting, aud under
which they had hoped TO deprive the
foreign voter OF the ri sht which the party
mad pretended to grant. H. nae
seen tue lead r OF the house silent |!
Sucking Satisfaction
through the straw OF hope" and conf
deutly believing that this suprvisor'
w iuld deprive the people OF their votes
But he was mistaken. The righteous m
digua.io OF the people had ben arc used
ana very few names had been taken Iron
the voting lists.
l.. w. X Allen replied TO Mr. Bloda
It's statement that plurality election
had been alvocaJei 10y the people as
matter of convenience and "a means of re
aucing the number OF elections. Blu tb
most rece e u .terance Of the people ha
teen agalnsC that prime pie. Biennia
elections had been disapproyeu Dy tn
people and they refused TO be r. Level o
the annual electioi.
nad ecu said IN Z the people wanted
this plurality la present TO them be
cause the senate had pass,d IL. But lht
vas not conclusive The house ha jus
ns much right To assert that the psOpl
didn't want IL as the senate had TO asser
that they DID want 10.
: The Vote.
Tie vote was fually reached on th
! u,s ion Of passage Of substitute "B" a
2.45 o'clock.
/ iesulted: Ayes. 30; nais. 81.
Ihe sub stitute as The re ore lost
/ Ha nm. ha ssan ION Al.