The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1896-11-21

of Representatives shall choose immedi-
atcly by ballot. the Preslheh'' But III
choosing the President, the votes shail
be taken by States, the representation
from each State having one No'e, quo
rum for this purpose shail CONSIST OIL =
member or members from TWIN uS VI
the States and majority OF an the
c,a,os shan Ia necessary 10 a cnoice.
And il the House of Representative shall
not choose a President whenever the r'sht
of choice shall devolve upon 'hein, ne
fore the 9TH day OF Marcn next lolio"-
| ing then the Vice President snail act as
| President. as i'm the case OF the death OF
or other constitutional dlsaDli'y Oh lne
President. The person hrN'ns ue
greatest number OF votes a.
| ident shall be the yice-President, II such
,,,,,at,c, ~, q, ,oaioritv Of the whole num-
| Nor ~ electors appointed, and II 10 per-
SON have a majority. then from the two
| b,ghest numbers on the list the SENATE
| shall choose the Nice-Presiderti a quo
rum for the purpose shdii consist Oh
tUo-thirds of the whole number OF SEN
ators and a majority of the whole Mum
Der shall be necessary 10 choice. bu'
no person consttutionaliy h'h5iD'e 10
| that of Vice President or Inc United
States"
IL H. Interesting in this connection TO
note that the original paragraph sup
planted by this Amendment contained
| curious blunder. IL provided that the
person having the greatest number OF
, votes shall be the President. II such
number be a majority Of the Whole num-
Der OF electors appointed anu il theI'
be more than one to have such majority
and have an equal number OF votes
then the House OF Representative shan
Immediately choose by ballot one OF them
for President" etc.
II was partly 10 correct the paradox OF
more than one person having a majority
In the same body and the same vote that
the twelfth amendment was proposed TO
the legislatures OF the states by the
Eighth Congress December Il, lN3. IN
the proclamation dated December %
lsH IT was declared 10 have been rati-
ned by the legislatures Of three-iourihs
of the States.
II will thus be seen from the Constitu-
ton that there was no idea OF constitute
ing concrete body OF electors who
should act as such. save in their indvid-
ual capacities. In fact, the theory of the
trainers OF the Constitution was mat
these electors should act independently
for the purpose Of preventing them from
being influenced by waves Of public sem
timent. and the device Of interpo-ins an
electoral college between the direct votes
OF the people and the presidency was
thought 10 be "a precaution against rcvo-
lutionary actions by the people IN their
exercise OF the right of suffrage. But
with the organization of great political
parties and the DEVELOPMENT Of practi-
cally a government by rites the custom
erew into am unwritten law OF placing i'm
nomination before the people certain can
didatcs on national tickets. and of nom
mating In the States electors pledged by
their party ties and by the obligations OF
honor to cast their votes In the electoral
college. If chosen. for the nominees of the
party clecting them. In other words, the
electoral college became mere form in
stead Of a safeguard against the unwlse
expression Of choice that might result
from the direct vote Of the people.
Thus the electors i'm the various States
bv the diff ercnt parties are little else
than fgurc-hcads and for all practical
purposes the people Of the States vote
directly for the President and the Vice
President. There is. Of course. no legal
restriction 10 prevent AN eicctor chosen
by the Republican party. for instance.
this fall from voting I'm the college for
Candidate Bryan. or vice versa. Yet the
possibility of such a contingency is so
remote as 10 bee barely worth considering.
fer the men nominated as electors are
usually leaders of their parties in the
States and men Of the highest integrity.
IL is recalled I'm this connection that IL
was charged I'm 1867 that an attempt was
made 10 bride one Of the electors chosen
in the State Of Oregon 10 cast his ballot
i'm the college for inc candidate of The
party that opposed him al the polls. The
olector unquestionat1y had the constitu-
tional right TO vote for whom he pleased.
but. of course. the suggestion OF bribery
caused a great sensation.
IL is to be noted that tho COnstitu-
ton provides that "cach State shall APP
point I'm such manner ass the Legisla-
tuTe thereof may direct. a number of
electors" etc. Thus me states are given
exclusive authority TO determine how
the electors shah be chosen. and "a not
able instance of "A departure from the
ordinary rule occurred in ls2. when the
Democratic Legislature OF the State Of
Michigan passed law providing for
the election Of the mcmbr-s or the cleo
tCral college by congressional districts.
The ordinary rule is for the people I'm
all parts Of The State 10 vote for the
electoral ticket as unit. and thus 10
is almost without precedent for the cleo
toral vote Of a state TO oe divided. The
Michigan law. however went into effect
and although The Republicans carried
the State as a whole by about 20 5W votes.
vet the operation Of the new Law gave
the Democrats five Of the fourteen cleo
tors. The law was attacked in the State
courts on the ground Of certain incon-
sietencies. and the decision rendered 10
practically imperative M this time.
There were other instances Of spit
election votes I'm 1892. resulting. hOwev-
or. from a different cause. The Repub-
leans in Ohio had plurality over the
Democrats Of 1072. but one Of the cleo
tors on tho Democratic ticket received
more votes than the lowest clector on
the Republican ticket and was cOnse-
auentlv declared elected As result
one OF Ohio's twonty-thrcc electoral votes
was cast for Cleveland The same thing
happened I'm oregon. whore one OF the
four electoral votes was thrown 10 Wca-
Yer. and I'm North Dakota. whore the
three votes were divided between Harri-
son. Cleveland and Weaver. I'm the lat,
ter State the PoDulists had bare plu-
falitv Of Isl votes I'm California fhis
has happened twice-onCc I'm 1850 whom
Hancock carried the State los seventy
eight votes and one Df fno six electoral
votes was given 10 Garfield; and ar7in
I'm 1902 when the Democrats obtained
plurality Of IA. and one OF the nine elcc-
toral votes was given Harrison. These
splits I'm the ticket arc caused hy scratch
ing I'm localities whore one candidate or
another among The nominees for electors
is personally popular or unpopular. as
tho case NAV be
The original paragraph Of the Constitu-
ton relating 10 the electoral college di-
rected that the person having tho great
est number Of votes should be the Pres
ident. If such number were "a majority