[TO THE EDITOR OF TEE " SPECTATOR.")
SIR,—The remarks on negative voting in your issue make me think it worth while to call your readers' attention to a pam- phlet on this subject written by Mr. Greer, of Reigate, and read by him before the Social Science Association in (I believe) 1869. . Greer's object is to express the unfavourable or negative nion as clearly as the present system expresses the favour- or affirmative opinion. The plan proposed by Mr. Greer is the voter's ticket should be arranged in the following r
Against.
120
256
88 In this specimen voting-paper, Williams is elected because his affirmative difference is greater than Jackson's, though the latter has a larger affirmative vote, which is counterbalanced by a larger negative vote.
A short quotation from Mr. Greer's pamphlet states the principle upon which the scheme is to be worked. He says :— "The equality of negative and affirmative opinion would con- stitute a standard or zero, and the candidates would rank above or below zero, according to the quantities of the excess of affirm- ative over negative, or of negative over affirmative opinion. Thus, whenever the negative votes exceeded the affirmative votes for any candidates, such candidates should be deemed to be rejected; and they might, if thought desirable, be arranged in the order of the quantities of the excess of the negative votes."
One improvement could, I think, be made, viz., that the places should be decided by the ratio of affirmative to negative votes, instead of being decided by the gross difference. It is quite possible for lower figures to show a lower rate of opposition.— I am, Sir, &c., Candidates,.
For.
Williams 517 Jackson 600 Grant 87
St. John's Wood, November 21st.. C. G. ,COMPTON.
Previous page
