Year: 1875

What a Change i'm the Manner of Voting is

 Expected to Do.

 In the United States Senate, the bill amending the Constitution so that the people shall vote directly for President and Vice-President was under discus sion. Morton, of Indiana, said the proposition was to amend the Constitu- tion so as to bring the election home to the people as near as possible, and at the same time avoid the dangers which are threatened by the present mode. When he looked back oyer the history of the country, it was matter of surprise to him that there had not been trouble re- tenn. The election of electors might be attended with fraud, violence and tu- mutt, and there was no power to correct much power was vested in the hands of the ice-President, or president of the Senate, to whom the electoral votes must be sent under seal Six times it had hap pened that the Vice-President had count ed votes where he himself was candi- date. John Adams counted the vote and declared himself elected in 1797. MT. Jefferson counted the vote in 1901, when there was tie. Suppose there had been two sets of electors there from any one State, one set making tie vote and the other electing Jefferson; there was no power to prevent him from counting the vote which would have elected him. Again, in 1921, MT. Tompkins, who was a candidate, counted the vote. In 1927 MT. Van Buren did the same thing and declared himself elected. In 1S4f MT. Johnson counted the vote and ill 1861 MT. Breckinridge did so. Although the count had been honest i'll all these cases, all instance might arise when dishonesty on the part of the Vice-President would elect, It did not seem to have occurred to the framers of the Constitution that there might be two sets of delegates, or fraud in their election.

 The dangers and difficulties which at tended the present system were many In case of death or non-attendance of electors from any State other electors from that State might fill vacancies. Suppose the electors from any State were evenly divided, and if one died or failed to attend, the other side could select one, and thus have the majority on their side. A majority of one could cast the entire vote of the State of New York, and two and half million people might be utterly silent in their vote for Presi- dent. Under the present system ten States could elect the President of the United States. It was now an election by States, not @ national election. He sent to the clerks desk and had read the twenty-second joint rule of Congress, in regard to the counting of the electoral vote, and said it was grossly unconstitu- tional. It was the intention of the framers of the Constitution to make the election of President independent of Congress-; but this twenty-second rule made the election of President depend upon either House of Congress, as either House under the rule could prevent the counting of the vote of any State. In case the House was Democratic and the Senate Republican, the former might throw out the Republican States, and the latter throw out the Democratic States, until no votes wero left, and then the election would be thrown into the House of Representatives. An election by the House of Representatives had been twice tried, and both times the country came very near being ship wrecked. In an election by the House, Nebraska with her 42,000 people would have the same vote in electing Presi- dent as New York with her 5000, 900 in habitants. Under the present system the electoral vote never approached within ten per cent. of the popular vote, and in some instances it varied as much as thirty per cent.