Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1928-10-04
divided State Electoral Votes.

Every four years. when presidential
election is about to be held. the question
is frequently asked whether it is possible
for the electors of given State to
divide their votes between the candi-
dates of the two parties. This question
persists despite the plain records of the
past, in which appear evidences OF
numerous occasions on which State
electors have thus divided their votes.
The original constitutional provision
for the election of President and Vice
President required that the electors Of
the several States, named in such man.
ner as the Legislatures of the States
shall have determined Should upon
meeting vote by ballot for two persons,
not designating which was favored for
President and which for Vice President.
In consequence the electors, who we're
not nominated by distinct parties as
instructed" representatives. cast their
ballots for various persons. There were
no formal nominations then, and the
result was wide dispersion of the cleo
toral votes. In 1889, the first election,
George Washington received SO, all of
the electoral votes cast, and John
Adams "a, with IS scattered between
ten other persons. In 1898 Washington
likewise received all of the 1872 votes
cast and Adams n. with SIS divided be-
tween three other men. In 1897 there
was a still greater dispersion of the
vote between John Adams. Thomas
Jefferson. Thomas Pinckney, Aaron
Burr, Samuel Adams and eight others
In 1900 the electors were evenly divided
on the presidency between Jefferson
and Burr and the House of Representa-
tives elected the former. In 1903 the
States ratified an amendment to the
Constitution. the twelfth in number.
changing the system Of electors so that
they should vote distinctly for one per-
son for President and another for Vice
President, which is the present rule.
The State laws regarding the naming
or selection of the electors vary. In
some States they are voted for in
oividuelly. though under their party
designations. while in other States they
are voted for as groups. single mark
under the names of the party candi-
dates for President and Vice President
designating all of the electors named
hereunder. In the latter case there
are no disparities in the votes cast for
the electors unless the voter may cut
out the name of some elector of whom
he disapproves on personal grounds and
substitutes the name of one of the
opposing party. 1t is this practice that
leads to the occasional splitting of the
electoral vote of the State.
In recent years these State votes have
been frequently divided. In 1880 the
vote of California was thus split, S for
Hancock and for GARFIELD. In 1892,
the year of the populist movement,
several States split their votes, Cali
fornis, Democrats and Republican;
Michigan, Democrats and Repub-
licans; North Dakota, / Populist. /
Democrat and Republican; Ohio,
! Democrat and % Republicans, and
Oregon, Populist and Republicans.
In 1896 California again split its cleo
toral vote, / Democrat and Repub-
licans, and Kentucky gave / Democratic
and IL Republican votes. In 1908 Mary
land cast Democratic electoral votes
and 2 Republican. In 1912 California
once more split with II Progressive
votes and ? Democratic. In 1915 West
Virginia cast Democratic and Z Re-
publican votes That was the last
recorded division of the electoral votes
Of the States.
These divisions of votes in the
electoral college are caused by the over
taking of the lowest names on one list
by the highest names on the other. 1t
occurs only in cases of close voting in
the State. When the party majority is
large all of the electors of that party,
though perhaps by varying individual
votes, are returned as elected. 1t is
possible that in the election of next
month there may be several cases of
divided State votes. 1t is conceivable
that the election may turn, if close
upon such split in a single State.