TIONS, FEDERAL CONTROL OF.
Electoral Frauds and Safeguards Against. —See that title.
Minority and Proportional Representa tion.— See that title.
Majorities and Pluralities.— There is no legal, philological or popular agreement as to the use of the word (majority° in matters of election. In computation it may mean the amount by which the greater number exceeds the lesser, if but two numbers are compared; or the amount by which the greatest number ex ceeds the total of the lesser numbers; or the amount by which the greatest number exceeds the next to the greatest. For the last case we customarily use the word (pluralitY,° but in England the normal designation is °majority," and candidates have been elected with regard only thereto from time immemorial. The weight of American usage restricts (majority° to excess of the greatest number of votes over the total of the rest, and we say that for a majority a total of one more than half is neces sary. This practice dates from colonial times. In M,assachusetts, New York, New Jersey, South Carolna and Georgia, a majority seems to have been required; in other colonies as a rule a simple plurality sufficed. New York put the plurality rule into her constitution of 1777 and most of the other States followed her ex ample, but the belief in the virtues of an abso lute majority lingered in the New England States till the middle of the follovving century. Propositions to go back to the absolute majority plan are now very rarely heard, and in the mat ter of popular elections the subject still has importance only because the Constitution of the United States requires an absolute majority of electoral votes for the choice of President. In conventions the majority rule yet prevails, occasionally entailing hundreds of ballots, and in the Democratic national conventions a two thirds vote is required to nominate. In pri maries and caucuses the plurality plan prevails by. almost invariable custom, voters everywhere being unwilling to give the time required for repeated ballots.
Under the Constitution a majority vote in the electoral college may elect a President who did not receive either a majority or a plurality of the popular votes cast, though probably the framers of the Constitution intended that no President should be elected without substantial support in a considerable number of States. Often delegations are divided under the system • of State-wide popular vote. This is possible it a State legislature should decide that the electors of that State be chosen by districts. This system was followed by Maryland up to 1832 and in 1892 the Michigan legislature changed the districts and thus divided the State electoral delegation. But as a rule all electors, save those chosen by legislatures, have been chosen by general ticket since 1836, for which reason the ticket that obtains a plurality of the popular votes elects all the electors of, that State. Sometimes, however, when the vote is close, the electors with the highest vote on one ticket may defeat the electors with the lowest vote on another ticket. This happened in California in 1880 when, of the 161,000 votes cast, the difference on the head of the ticket was only 78, with the result that one Republi-_ can and five Democratic electors were chosen.
In the same State in 1912 two of the Demo cratic electors overran the lowest two on the Progressive ticket, so that the State sent a divided delegation to the electoral college of 11 Progressives and two Democrats. Often the electors represent a minority of the State votes, and sometimes the majority of the elec toral vote may represent a minority of the popular vote. In 1824 Jackson received 50,550 votes more than Adams, but received 40,300 votes less than his three opponents combined. In 1844 Polk received 38,000 votes more than Clay but the combined vote for Clay and Bir ney put him in a minority of 24,100. In 1848 Taylor had a plurality of 139,000 but a minority of 151,500. In 1856 Buchanan had a plurality of 497,000 but a minority of 377,000. Lincoln received nearly 500,000 more votes than Douglas but nearly 950,000 votes less than all his opponents combined. In 1876 Hayes, though chosen President by one electoral vote, not only had a minus plurality of 251,000 but was in the minority by about 345,000. In 1880 Garfield had a plurality of 7,000 over Hancock but was in the minority by over 310,000. In 1884 Cleve land received about 62,000 votes more than Blaine but was in the minority by about 230,000. In 1888 Cleveland received nearly 100,000 more popular votes than Harrison but the latter was elected even though he was in a minority of 500,000. In 1892, however, Cleve land received a plurality of 380,000 over Har rison but was in a minority of 950,000. In 1912 a striking discrepancy occurred between the electoral and popular votes, Wilson carry ing 43 of the 48 States and having a clear majority of 339 in the electoral college, while he had a plurality of 2,150,000 over his nearest opponent, but was in the minority by 2,500,000. Hence, with the exception of Hayes and Har rison, all the Presidents would have been elected by at least a plurality if the election had been directly popular. On the other hand a small popular majority for the electors in one State may swing the election, as was the case in New York in 1884 and 1888; in the former year Cleveland carried the State by 1,047 which gave him the 36 electoral votes of that State and decided the election in his favor; in 1888 these votes were turned over to Harrison by a plurality of about 15,000, thus electing him President. In 1916 was cast the largest vote in the history of American politics. Wilson had a plurality of nearly 570,000 over Hughes but an electoral vote of only 276 against 255 for Hughes, this being the nar rowest margin of electoral votes determining an election since 1876. So even was the voting in some of the States that Wilson won New Hampshire by only 56 votes, New Mexico by 2,400, North Dakota by 2,600, California by 3,700, and Nevada by 5,600, whereas Hughes gained the electoral votes of Minnesota by 392 votes, Delaware by 1,273, West Virginia by 2,721,. and South Dakota, Maine and Rhode Island by about 5,000 each. In spite of the closeness of the election no split delegations of electors were sent' to the electoral college.