FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267  
268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283   284   285   286   287   288   289   290   291   292   >>   >|  
doption of the last-named method had an early beginning and went steadily forward among the States until in 1832 there remained but a single State (South Carolina) that had not adopted it. That State until the Civil War continued to choose its electors by a vote of the legislature, but after the war changed its method and conformed to the practice of the other States. For nearly sixty years all the States save one have appointed their electors by a popular vote upon a general ticket, and for nearly thirty years this method was universal. After a full test of other methods, without important division or dissent in any State and without any purpose of party advantage, as we must believe, but solely upon the considerations that uniformity was desirable and that a general election in territorial divisions not subject to change was most consistent with the popular character of our institutions, best preserved the equality of the voters, and perfectly removed the choice of President from the baneful influence of the "gerrymander," the practice of all the States was brought into harmony. That this concurrence should now be broken is, I think, an unfortunate and even a threatening episode, and one that may well suggest whether the States that still give their approval to the old and prevailing method ought not to secure by a constitutional amendment a practice which has had the approval of all. The recent Michigan legislation provides for choosing what are popularly known as the Congressional electors for President by Congressional districts and the two Senatorial electors by districts created for that purpose. This legislation was, of course, accompanied by a new Congressional apportionment, and the two statutes bring the electoral vote of the State under the influence of the "gerrymander." These gerrymanders for Congressional purposes are in most cases buttressed by a gerrymander of the legislative districts, thus making it impossible for a majority of the legal voters of the State to correct the apportionment and equalize the Congressional districts. A minority rule is established that only a political convulsion can overthrow. I have recently been advised that in one county of a certain State three districts for the election of members of the legislature are constituted as follows: One has 65,000 population, one 15,000, and one 10,000, while in another county detached, noncontiguous sections have been united to make a l
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267  
268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283   284   285   286   287   288   289   290   291   292   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

States

 

districts

 
Congressional
 

method

 
electors
 

practice

 

gerrymander

 
President
 

popular

 

voters


general

 

influence

 

county

 
purpose
 

legislature

 

apportionment

 
approval
 

election

 

legislation

 

electoral


statutes
 

created

 
accompanied
 
Senatorial
 

choosing

 
secure
 

constitutional

 

prevailing

 

amendment

 

popularly


Michigan

 

recent

 

members

 
constituted
 

united

 

recently

 

advised

 

detached

 

noncontiguous

 

sections


population

 

overthrow

 
making
 

impossible

 

majority

 

legislative

 

buttressed

 

gerrymanders

 

purposes

 
correct