1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Vote and Voting

From Wikisource
Jump to navigationJump to search

VOTE and VOTING. The Latin votum, derived from vovere,to vow, meant a solemn promise, hence a wish, desire or prayer,in which senses the doublet “vow,” derived through French,is used now chiefly. “Vote” is specially employed in the senseof a registering of one's choice in elections or on matters of debate, and the political meaning is the only one which requirescomment.

Ancient.—In ancient Greece and Italy the institution of suffrage already existed in a rudimentary form at the outsetof the historical period. In the primitive monarchies it wascustomary for the king to invite pronouncements of his folkon matters in which it was prudent to secure its assent beforehand.In these assemblies the people recorded their opinionby clamouring (a method which survived in Sparta as late asthe 4th century B.C.), or by the clashing of spears on shields.This latter practice may be inferred to have obtained originallyin Rome, the word suffragium meaning literally a responsivecrash. Owing to the lack of routine in the early monarchiesand aristocracies of Greece and Italy the vote as yet lackedimportance as an instrument of government. But in the daysof their full political development the communities of thesecountries had firmly established the principle of governmentaccording to the will of majorities, and their constitutionsrequired almost every important act to be directed by a formalvote. This rule applied equally to the decisions of generalassemblies, administrative councils and law courts, and obtainedalike in states where suffrage was universal and where it wasrestricted.

In every case the taking of votes was effected in the form ofa poll. The practice of the Athenians, which is shown byinscriptions to have been widely followed in the other statesof Greece, was to hold a show of hands (χειροτονία), excepton questions affecting the status of individuals: these latter,which included all lawsuits and proposals of ostracism (q.v.),were determined by secret ballot (ψήφισμα, so called from the(ψῆφοι or pebbles with which the votes were cast). At Romethe method which prevailed up to the 2nd century B.C. wasthat of division (discessio). But the economic and social dependenceof many voters on the nobility caused the system of opensuffrage to be vitiated by intimidation and corruption. Hencea series of laws enacted between 139 and 107 B.C. prescribedthe use of the ballot (“tabella,” a slip of wood coated with wax)for all business done in the assemblies of the people.

For the purpose of carrying resolutions a simple majority ofvotes was deemed sufficient. Regulations about a quorumseem to have been unusual, though a notable exception occursin the case of motions for ostracism at Athens. As a generalrule equal value was made to attach to each vote; but in thepopular assemblies at Rome a system of voting by groups wasin force until the middle of the 3rd century B.C. by which thericher classes secured a decisive preponderance (see Comitia).

As compared with modern practice the function of voting wasrestricted in some notable ways. (1) In the democracies of Greecethe use of the lot largely supplanted polling for the election ofmagistrates: at Athens voting was limited to the choice of officerswith special technical qualifications. (2) In accordance with thetheory which required residence at the seat of government as acondition of franchise, the suffrage could as a rule only be exercisedin the capital town. The only known exception under a centralizedgovernment was a short-lived experiment under the emperorAugustus, who arranged for polling stations to be opened at election-timein the country towns of Italy. In federal governments theelection of deputies to a central legislature seems to be attestedby the practice of the Achaean League, where the federal Councilwas probably elected in the several constituent towns. But littleis known as to ancient methods of electing delegates to representativeinstitutions, and in general it may be said that the functionof suffrage in Greece and Italy throws no light upon contemporaryproblems, such as the use of single-area constituencies andproportional representation.

Modern.—The modern method of obtaining a collectiveexpression of opinion of any body of persons may be either“open” or secret. An open expression of opinion may be bysome word of assent or negation, or by some visible sign, as theholding up of a hand. Indeed any method of voting which doesnot expressly make provision for concealing the identity of theperson registering the vote is “open.” Some methods ofvoting still employed (as in the case of parliamentary electionsfor some of the English universities, where votes may be sentby post) must necessarily reveal the manner in which the electorhas recorded his vote. It is in connexion with the electionof members of representative bodies—especially legislativebodies—that the qualifications for and methods of votingbecome especially important. Practically every civilizedcountry has accepted and put in force some form of representation,which may be defined as the theory and principles onwhich the obtaining of a vote is founded. These are dealtwith in the article Representation, and it will be sufficientto give here the various qualifications which are considered bydifferent countries as sufficient to give effect to the principleof representation and the methods of recording votes. Indetail these are given for the United Kingdom and the UnitedStates in the articles Registration of Voters and Elections,and for other countries under their respective titles in thesections dealing with the Constitution.

The first consideration is the age at which a person shouldbe qualified for a vote. This in a large number of countriesis fixed at the age of manhood, namely, twenty-one years of age,but in Hungary the age is fixed at twenty years, in Austriatwenty-four years, while in Belgium, Baden, Bavaria, Hesse,Prussia, Saxony, Japan, the Netherlands and Norway the ageis twenty-five years, and in Denmark thirty years. Somecountries (e.g. Austria, Germany, France) have adopted theprinciple of what is often termed “manhood or universalsuffrage,” i.e. every male adult, not a criminal or a lunatic, beingentitled to a vote, but in all cases some further qualificationsthan mere manhood are required, as in Austria a year's residencein the place of election, or in France a six months' residence.A common qualification is that the elector should be able toread and write. This is required in Italy and Portugal andsome of the smaller European states, in some states of theUnited States (see Elections) and in many of the SouthAmerican republics. But the most universal qualification ofall is some outward visible sign of a substantial interest in thestate. The word “substantial” is used here in a comparativesense, as opposed to that form of suffrage which requires nothingmore for its exercise than attainment of manhood and perhapsa certain qualifying period of residence. This tangible signof interest in the state may take the form of possession ofproperty, however small in amount, or the payment of someamount of direct taxation, indeed in some cases, as will beseen, this is rewarded by the conferring of extra votes.

In the United Kingdom possession of freehold or leaseholdproperty of a certain value or occupation of premises of a certainannual value gives a vote. This qualification of property maybe said to be included in what is termed the “lodger” vote,given to the occupier of lodgings of the yearly valueunfurnished of not less than £10. In Hungary, the payment of asmall direct tax on house property or land or on an incomevarying with occupation is necessary. So in Prussia, Saxony,Bavaria, Hesse, Italy (unless a certain standard in elementaryeducation has been reached), Japan, the Netherlands, Portugal(unless the elector is able to read and write) and Russia. Someof the states in the United States also require the payment ofa poll tax. On the other hand, in Russia, students, soldiers,governors of provinces and police officers are disqualified fromvoting; in Portugal, bankrupts, beggars, domestic servants,workmen in government service and non-commissioned officersare not electors; it must be noted, however, that the government of the new Portuguese republic promised in 1910 a drasticrevision of the existing franchise. Italy disfranchisesnon-commissioned officers and men in the army while under arms,as do France and Brazil. The United Kingdom and Denmark,disqualify those in actual receipt of parish relief, while inNorway, apparently, receipt of parish relief at any time is adisqualification, which, however, may be removed by therecipient paying back the sums so received. In some countries,e.g. Brazil, the suffrage is refused to members of monasticorders, &c., under vows of obedience. Apart from thosecountries where a modicum of education is necessary as a testof right to the franchise, there are others where education isspecially favoured in granting the franchise. In the UnitedKingdom the members of eight universities (Oxford, Cambridge,London, Dublin University, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeenand St Andrews) send nine members to parliament; inHungary members of the professional, scientific, learned andother classes (over 80,000) are entitled to vote without anyother qualification; in Brunswick the scientific classes electthree members to the legislative chamber; in Saxony, membersof scientific or artistic professions have extra votes; in Italy,members of academies and professors are qualified to voteby their position; while in the Netherlands legal qualificationsfor any profession or employment give a vote.

Many objections have been urged of late years to theprinciple of according a plurality of votes to one individual onaccount of superior qualifications over others which he maybe considered to possess. In the United Kingdom, where,roughly speaking, the principle of representation is that oftaxation, the possession of qualifying property in any numberof electoral districts will give a vote in each of those districts.Whether those votes can be actually registered will of coursedepend on certain circumstances, such as the distance of thedistricts apart and whether the elections are held on the sameday or not. The Radical party in the United Kingdom haveof late years been hostile to any system of plurality of votes(whether gained by educational, property or other qualifications),though it may be said that the tendency of some recent electoralsystems has been to introduce a steadying principle of thisnature. In 1906 a bill was introduced for reducing the systemof plural voting in the United Kingdom; it passed through theHouse of Commons, but was rejected by the House of Lords.The most remarkable system of plural voting was that introducedin Belgium by the electoral law of 1894. Under it, everycitizen over thirty-five years of age with legitimate issue, andpaying at least 5 francs a year in house tax, has a supplementalvote, as has every citizen over twenty-five owningimmovable property to the value of 2000 francs, or having acorresponding income from such property, or who for twoyears has derived at least 100 francs a year from Belgian fundseither directly or through the savings bank. Two supplementaryvotes are given to citizens over twenty-five who havereceived a diploma of higher instruction, or a certificate ofhigher secondary instruction, or who fill or have filled offices,or engaged in private professional instruction, implying atleast average higher instruction. Three votes is the highestnumber allowed, while failure to vote is punishable as a misdemeanour. In 1908-9 the number of electors in Belgiumwas 1,651,647, of whom 981,866 had one vote, 378,264 twovotes and 291,517 three votes. In some other countries weightis given to special qualifications. In the town of Bremen thegovernment is in the hands of a senate of 16 members and aConvent of Burgesses (Bürgerschaft) of 150 members. Theselatter are elected by the votes of all the citizens divided intoclasses. University men return 14 members, merchants40 members, mechanics and manufacturers 20 members,and the other inhabitants the remainder. So in Brunswickand in Hamburg legislators are returned by voters representingvarious interests. In Prussia, representatives are chosen bydirect electors who in their turn are elected by indirect electors.One direct elector is elected from every complete number of250 souls. The indirect electors are divided into three classes,the first class comprising those who pay the highest taxes tothe amount of one-third of the whole; the second, of those whopay the next highest amount down to the limits of the secondthird; the third, of all the lowest taxed. In Italy electorsmust either have attained a certain standard of elementaryeducation, or pay a certain amount of direct taxation, or ifpeasant farmers pay a certain amount of rent, or if occupantsof lodgings, shops, &c., in towns, pay an annual rent accordingto the population of the commune. In Japan, voters must payeither land tax of a certain amount for not less than a yearor direct taxes other than land tax for more than two years.In the Netherlands, householders, or those who have paid therent of houses or lodgings for a certain period, are qualified forthe franchise, as are owners or tenants of boats of not less than24 tons capacity, as well as those who have been for a certainperiod in employment with an annual wage of not less than£22, 18s. 4d., have a certificate of state interest of not less than100 florins or a savings bank deposit of not less than 50 florins.

The method now adopted in most countries of recordingvotes is that of secret voting or ballot (q.v.). This is carriedout sometimes by a machine (see Voting Machines). Themethod of determining the successful candidate varies greatlyin different countries. In the United Kingdom the candidatewho obtains a relative majority is elected, i.e. it is necessaryonly to obtain more votes than any other candidate (seeRepresentation).

Navigation menu