Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1910-09-02

Note: Park obtained a clear majority
in Greene Wilkinson and Hancock
hence he is entitled to the entire votes
of those counties. Likewise, Foster
gets the entire vote of Morgan, and Hines
that of Baldwin.
In Jasper county the total vote is zoos.
BY the rules, candidate must receive
at least one-eighth of the popular vote
to entitle him to share in the convention
vote. Park received POP votes, and one
eighth of the total vote is 126, hence he
received enough to give him one-fourth
of a convention vote with 76 popular
votes over. Foster got 40S votes, or
enough to entitle him to three-fourths
of a convention vote with 80 popular
votes over. Hines received 395 votes, or
enough to give him three-fourths of a
convention vote with II popular votes to
spare This leaves one-fourth of the con-
vention vote of this county unapplied,
but as Park lacks the least number of
convention votes to entitle him to this
one-fourth manifestly he should receive
1t, making his vote in this county one
half
In Jones county one-eighth of the pop
ular vote is 80. Park received 244 votes,
or enough to entitle him to one-half of a
convention vote with 60 popular votes
to spare. Foster received $50, or enough
vote with "a votes to spare. Hines re-
ceived 164 votes. or enough to give him
one-fourth of a convention vote with 70
popular votes over. This leaves one-half
of a convention vote of the county I'M
applied. Manifestly, this one-half vote
should be divided between the two can
didates lacking the least number of votes
to entitle them to an extra one-fourth
of a convention vote. These two candi-
dates are Hines and Park. To give this
entire one-half to Hines would be palpa-
bly, unfair to Park as Hines has not
twice the number of votes left over after
receiving his proportion that Park has
Hines is clearly entitled to one-fourth
added to his proportion, making him one
half of convention vote. The other one
fourth unapplied goes, of course, to
Park, as he has more votes left over
than Foster, and almost as many votes
left over as Hines.
The vote in Putnam county was 500
and one-eighth of this is ST. Hines, there
fore did not receive enough votes in
this county to entitle him to share in
the convention vote of the county, his
popular vote being only SO. The vote of
this county, then. will have to be divid-
ed between Park and Foster in proper
ton to the number of popular votes each
received. Park received 345 votes, or
enough to give him three-fourthS of
convention vote with 81 votes to spare.
Foster received 292 votes, or enough to
give him three-fourths of a convention
votes with 81 votes to spare. This leaves
one-half of a convention vote of the
county unapplied. Park certainly is enti-
tied to half of this unapplied vote, but
would it not be unfair to give the other
half of this unapplied vote to Foster?
Foster has only 81 left over after receiv-
ing his share of the convention votes,
while lark has 81 votes left over. In
other words, Park lacks only three popu-
lar votes to entitle him to one convention
vote, while Foster lacks SO. Foster lacks
80 more than Park and Park has over
twice as many left over after receiving
his proportion as Foster. 1t seems. then,
that the only fair thing to do is to give
Park the entire one-half unapplied con-
vention vote. 1t may also be noted that
Park lacked only seven popular votes
of having a clear majority over both
candidates in this county.
This calculation gives Park a majority
of convention votes, the total vote being
16 and he received 1-2. Even If the sur
plus one-half of a convention vote Of
Putnam county be divided between Park
and Foster, still Park would have a
majority of the convention votes. He
would have IA.
M. W. LEWIS.
Greensboro. Ga. Aug %, 1910.