The sun., 1900-03-17
Saturday, March IL, 1900.

SOME of our Anti-Addicks friends are
not we'll informed about or do not under
stand the principle of majority rule. In
the Senatorial deadlock of 1895, the four
men who voted continuously for j. Ed
ward Addicks were the true representa-
tives of majority rule. The fifteen men,
although majority of the Republicans
in the General Assembly, were repre-
sentatives of the minority vote of the
Republicans at the polls. In the cam
paign preceding the election of 1894, it
was generally known that Mr.. Addicks
was Senatorial candidate, and in voting
for legislative candidates the people we're
asked to vote for candidates believed to
be, and known to be favorable to his
election. 1t was further known that
his being a Senatorial candidate in
fuenced the voting and determined
the result. Indirectly, but with know
lege and intent, the Republicans of the
State bad voted for Mr.. Addicks. That
was known during the campaign and
was admitted as result after the elec-
tion. The candidate for Governor who
was believed to favor Mr.. Addicks' cleo
tion to the Senate (he had said SOY was
elected; the congressional candidate who
had made the same avowal, was elected;
the legislative candidates who were
known to be in favor of, and would vote
for Mr.. Addicks for Senator, were elect
ed; majority of the Republican legisla-
tive candidates elected were known at
the time of the election and up to the
meeting of the Legislature, to be Addicks
men. There was no doubt about these
things during the campaign nor after it
was over; the whole trend of the election
sentiment, it's anticipated and achieved
result were known to be as here
stated. So the people voted. That
voting had made Mr.. Addicks the
Senatorial candidate representing the
majority vote of the people; the repre-
sentative of the majority Republican vote
of the State, and as such the representa-
tive of majority rule. This is indisput-
able common sense. What occurred was
that some Of the legislative candidates,
after their election, were induced to vio-
late their anti-election pledges and ally
themselves with the minority interest.
That alliance included majority OF the
Republican members of the Legislature,
but that fact did not make it representa-
tive of the principle of majority rule. It
had espoused the cause of the minority.
The fonr men who refused to change
their allegiance were still the real repre-
sentatives OF majority rule. The prin-
ciple of majority rule is never truly OBJ
served and obeyed when representatives
elected, vote contrary to the record made
by the people in voting directly or indi-
rectly upon question to be finally set
tied by the vote of the representative.
The original vote represe nts the prin-
ciple involved, and ought to direct and
determine the direction and character of
the secondary vote. The original vote is
independent; the secondary or repre- SEN
tative vote is pledged to what the origi-
nal vote designates and approves. The
vote of the people in the campaign of
1894 designated and approved Mr.. Ad-
dicks az the Senatorial candidate of the
majority of the people voting. No after
occurrence could change that fact. 1t is
the people who decide political ques-
tions, even in cases where the final act
is by their representatives. The action
OF the fifteen men who voted against Mr..
Addicks, was contrary to the peoples
decision at the polls, and therefore op-
posed to the principle of majority rule.
The course OF the four men who voted
continuously for Mr.. Addicks was in
accord with the decision of the people at
the polls, ard therefore in favor of ma
In