Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 10.pdf/21

 Rh

It is now understood that Sir Oliver will will be viewed with regret by a large body soon — possibly before this article sees the of his Canadian fellow-citizens, who hoped light — be appointed lieutenant governor of to have the benefit of his wisdom and expe Ontario.* The appointment will be a fitting rience at the council board of the country culmination of his successful career; but it for some years yet to come. During the Diamond Jubilee celebration Ontario in November, and was succeeded as Minister of Sir Oliver Mowat was created a G.C.M.G. Justice by Hon. David Mills.
 * Sir Oliver Mowat was appointed lieutenant governor of

THE ELECTION OF UNITED STATES SENATORS BY THE PEOPLE. By Hon. Walter Clark. IN 1787 scarcely a State elected its gov combinations, to whom the choice of sena ernor and higher officials by popular tors is all-important, have money and skillful vote. Now there is no State in the forty-five manipulators. They pick their counties. which elects its governor by the legislature. With free passes to the conventions over rail Why should each of those States continue to roads, and by other methods, it is easy to se elect its two senators by a method it has cure the requisite delegates in the county par condemned as to the election of its governor? ty conventions who represent these 25,000 The interest of consolidated wealth in the voters, and thus name the nominees who election of senators is far greater than it is in shall, when elected, constitute a majority of the choice of governors, and the corrective the caucus which shall name the senator. of popular choice is therefore more needed. The counties belonging to the minority party A little consideration will show that under are neglected by the manipulators, as also the present system it is possible for a skillful are the counties belonging to the majority combination (and money combinations are party which are difficult to handle. The always skillful) to secure the United States money combination wastes no money. That senator in each of the close States if it can this is not a fanciful sketch will be recalled obtain control of one sixteenth of the voters, by the many instances in divers States in or even less. Let us see. Take a close State which the caucus nominee of the money which casts 400,000 votes. A majority of power has received one or two majority in the legislature is elected from counties hav the caucus. It is true this great disparity ing 200,000 votes, or less when (as is often could happen only in close States, but it demonstrates that in any State the election of the case) there is a gerrymander. A major ity in the caucus, which controls the party's senators can be controlled by a small but choice, is therefore chosen from counties skillful minority under the present system. having 100,000 votes. But nearly half of There is another objection to the election these were of the opposite political party, of the United States senator by the legisla leaving the majority of the caucus chosen by ture in that the voters of the dominant party 50,000 voters. These members were nomi residing in counties in which that party is in nated in the conventions in their respective a minority are utterly without influence or counties by a majority only of their party, voice in the selection of senator, whereas in i. e. by delegates representing, say, 25,000 the election of senator by popular vote every voters or less, which is one sixteenth of the voter, irrespective of the county of his resi 400,000 voters of the State. The money dence, would have an opportunity to express