PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION.
[TO TIM EDITOR 07 THE "SPECTATOR."]
SIR,—Since Mr. Humphreys in his letter to you on "Propor- tional Representation" refers somewhat pointedly to myself, a few words in reply may seem called for, though I trust he will excuse me if 1 refrain just now from carrying on a prolonged newspaper controversy on this interesting topic. The Pro- portional Representation Society have indeed scored a triumph (for which their energetic Secretary should be chiefly con- gratulated) in having persuaded the House of Commons to swallow (somewhat hastily, I think) their pet remedy for our electoral maladies, though I cannot persuade myself that the millennium is about to dawn in consequence. For, supposing that Proportional Representation were to be adopted for the House of Commons, which is the Society's ultimate objective, should we really be better governed ? Let me state the case as briefly as I can. The present constituencies (six hundred and seventy) average about sixty-seven thousand population apiece. Under Proportional Representation the electoral areas would be enlarged so as to contain between four hundred thousand to half a million population apiece, returning between five and ten (say, seven) members. For these seven seats there may be any number of candidates, for it is the very essence of the scheme that any group, quite apart from the regular parties, may put forward its champion or champions, and the foreshadowed pay- ment of election expenses is not likely to reduce their number. A voting paper, therefore, might easily contain thirty or forty names, or even more. The average elector, faced with this portentous document, would hardly be more mystified if he were to be presented with a page out of the "London Directory." And what would he then in real life proceed to do P Would he sit down with his lengthy list and proceed by himself to worry it out, placing these gentlemen in their proper political perspective ? I fear not, especially as he would not probably know half of them by sight or even name. But help would be at hand, since all the candidates (if they wished to be amongst the successful seven, rather than merely amongst the "also rens "), would assuredly have their agents on the spot. The perplexed voter would be deafened with advice, and elections would thus still further depend on highly organized electoral machinery and money. In fact, money and motor-cars would become a sine qua non. Mr. Humphreys may not agree with this, but it is what would happen, I fear, in real life.—I am, Sir, Ste.,
[We cannot find space at present to pursue this corre- spondence further.—ED. Spectator.]
Previous page
