votes, many of which would be thrown away, if means were not given to the electors of transferring them to another candidate, in case the first they have named be elected without their aid. Accordingly, the form of the voting-paper,[1] without making it compulsory on the voter to name more than one candidate, yet permits him to insert a second name under the first, a third under the second, and so on,—at his discretion, and according to the measure of his sympathy, his desire to show a concurrence of opinion, or to manifest his respect or appreciation. Those who come to the examination of this scheme for the first time will probably be amazed to learn, that—so far as there is anything to be done by the voter—this is the whole extent of the complexity from which so many politicians have shrunk.
Many of the epithets used in describing this proposal would appear intended less to invite attention than to turn away inquiry. Legal phraseology has been borrowed to cloud with its abstractions the simple act of writing the name of one candidate under another,—that the vote may be transferred to the second, if the candidate named first should have votes enough without it. It has been called a “contingent remainder,” and an “estate tail” in a vote! It may be left to the electors of the kingdom to judge between those who seek for them this vast augmentation of their electoral power, and those who tell them that a vote for a second person to be used on the contingency of the first not requiring it, is beyond their understanding. I would remark, however, that if any voter can be found to whom it is not intelligible,—the use of the contingent vote by others will do him no harm. Every power which he has under the present system is scrupulously reserved to him, except that (which may indeed have its value in the eyes of those who are skilful in wielding ignorance) of drowning the voices of other people. A vote is to be given to the candidate placed second on
- ↑ Page 124.
