New-York tribune., 1896-09-28
JyFORU4TION FOR BRITISH READERS


The correction Of mistakes made by foreigners
concerning American affairs II an endless ana
generally ungracious and Improbable task. Such
mistakes have been. are, and will he, numerous
DESPITE all efforts al correction. No doubt
| Americans too. make their share Of them con
cernlng the affairs of other lands. They must
be taken a. a matter of course. Considering how
many things the average man does not know
about his own country 1t is not 10 he expected
that his knowledge Of other countries Will prove
AT all times accurate and comprehensive When
howcy.r an exceptionally wcll-nformed man
or paper makes an exceptionally big blundcr,
and does not realize It when taken 10 task for
H. there Is some cause for surprise. and some
excuse for "A more detailed attempt AT correction
and elucdaiOn than is generally 10 he made.
! These considerations are provoked hy some re-
cent uttcranc.s of The Manchester CITY News.
one of the foremost provincial journals In Eng
! land in point Of intelligence enterprise and
| friendllness toward America In discussing IN"
prospects Of the Presidential election IN this
country some weeks ago. il made series Of
| errors 80 curious 50 brwlldcring. So monumental.
as TO defy description. save in the term "nubdub
that choice Cracker cOntcciiOn expressive OF
otherwise incxprcssblc bundering. Attention
was called TO IL AZ the Zine" and II was 10 be
supposed that the merest hint would be sufficient
to recall "rhe City News from lis unique and
incomprehcnsible lapse to its usual state of thor
orgh and accurate Information. But, strange TO
say. such was not the case. and to this day the
| journal seems 10 be UNCONSCIOUS of ts error. and
| to be wondering what in the world called forth
the amazed mcrriment Of It's American readers.
What The City News" said was substantially
| this: That the successful candidate fOr the
| American Presidency must receive a clear ma
jority Of electoral votes thar 'it has frequently
| "happened that second. third and fourth ballots
! "have had 10 be taken before n clear ma jorliy
"has been pocd 10y n candidaie with the result
| "that as neither political party would accept
"thclr opponents nomination. n comparative out
"sder has been elected by the votes of both
| "partcs': and that this happened in the cases
of Lincoln and Garfield and may probably be
repeated when the electors meet in November TO
choose a President. Now every one of these
statements except the first, which Is quite cor
rect, is absolutely wrong. and so curlousy wrong
as to cause wonder how on earth It ever could
have been made. II has never once happened
that even a second ballot has had TO be taken
by the Electoral College, for the reason that that
body never takes even first ballot. The delcga
tions Of the various States meet each In It's own
State cast a single formal ballot and transmit
the result 10 Washington, where the votes are
counted and the election declared by the Vice
President in the presence Of Congress. only
twice In the history Of the Republic has a can
didae failed to receive n majority of the votes
thus counted Once. in 1901, the votes were
equally divided between two candidates, and
once in 1S2j they were divided among
three that no one had clear majority. But in
,I,, fh.r M hp hnt
the House OF Representatives, according 10 the
Constitution Immediately elected a President.
As for Lincoln, he had. in his first election. $50
out Of 1903 votes. and in his second. 2l2 out Of
314-a clear majority each time Garfield also,
had clear majOrty-2l4 out Of 3jJ Moreover,
the electors do net meet il November. hut In
January and their votes are canvasscd by Con-
gress In February And If they give Il clear iaa-
iority for no one, there is still no chance for a
comparative outsider" for the Constitution re-
guires the House in such ease 10 choose the
President from among the three leading candl-
dates.
All this is Of course, should be- familiar
as the alphabet 10 every American. and. Indeed,
also TO every Englishman who has read the
American Constitution and kept track Of Amcrl-
can political history That well-informed n
Journal as "The City News" should have blum
dered so extraordinarily Is almost inexpllcable.
The only imaginable explanation is that In some
way trains OF thought three different sub
jecs got mixed together in the one article e-name-
ly, on nominating conventions, popular elections