New-York tribune., 1902-04-11
NR DEpEH'S Plan.

Senator Depew's amendment to the scheme
for electing United States Senators by popular
vote is probably no more intended to bring
about that change than Senator Penrose's
impossible suggestion of proportional repre-
sentation in the Senate. 1t is, however, piau-
sible: so plausible that those who demand direct
popular representation in the Senate will find
1t difficult to oppose this development of their
theory in the direction of more perfect repre-
sentation. Mr.. Depew's proposition is that If
Senators are TO be elected by a popular vote
the United States Government shall make uni
form rules for the suffrage in Senatorial elec
tions so that the Senators may truly represent
the people Of the various States and not in
one State represent the body of the citizenship
and in another a small oligarchy.
Mr.. Depew says he does not in general sym
pathize with reduction of representation in the
Southern States any interference with the
local affairs of commonwealths, but he holds
that if we are going to depart from the theory
that the Senate represents the States in their
corporate and so-called sovereign capacity and
make it the representative of the individual citi
zens. then ought TO have common standard
of citizenship. AS a popular representative
body the Senate, where two hundred thousand
and five million people have the same voice, is
ridiculous, but that cannot be changed, for the
equality of small States is guaranteed OF
course the Senate was never meant to be such
a body 1t was TO be the council of the States
as States. When, however, this principle is re-
versed and the Senate is made popular body,
the people of New-York become interested to
know that. in addition to having their voice off
set by much smaller number of people, this
number is not artifcially reduced to give
handful Of men power to negative their will,
not in the name of sovereign State but in the
name Of an overrepresented people. Mr.. Depew
says:
A number of States have by various devices
prevented third or half or more Of citizens.
recognized such by the constitution of the
United States, from exercising the right of
suffrage. The local reasons which have led to
the adoption of these measures disfranchising
citizens who have enjoyed the right to vote for
thirty-hve years are NOT pertinent TO this dis
cussion. The adoption OF these new constitu-
tions. however. containing grandfather" and
other clauses, have led to movement in the
House of Representatives and in the legislat-
ures OF some Of the States to change the repre-
sentation in the House Of Representatives from
population to votes. That policy would reduce
very largely the number Of Congressman which
those States are entitled to. That measure
does not receive the attention it would, because,
the House OF Representatives being elected by
the people the vast majority of populations
vote upon manhood suffrage. and therefore they
do not feel accutely the discrimination which
these measures bring about But if in the cleo
tion of United States Senators small oligarchy
in any State is to send an equal representation
here TO legisate with great States like New
York which have manhood suffrage; If States
in which half of the votes are disfranchised
10 have an equal voice in this body with States
like Pennsylvania. of five ten times their
population and with manhood suffrage: If New
York, because that commonwealth by the man
hood suffrage casts 1919 votes is to be
neutralized in legislation affecting her vast in
terests by Mississippi. casting $1,000 votes, be-
diSfran-
chised. then the situation becomes intoerabl
Such arguments as this will not please ad
voeates of democracy" and popular representa-
ton like Mr.. Bailey, of Texas. Popular repre-
sentation is all very well SO long as it lets