in a variety of ways, are based numerically on the representation of the States in Congress, with bonuses for party achievement, and penalties for singular failure to achieve, in the most recent election.

The power of these state delegations in the conventions are not very closely related to the numbers of delegates involved, but to the political conditions in the respective States. The thing to be done is to nominate candidates for President who can be elected. Nothing is more natural than that the convention delegates from the large, doubtful and pivotal States should have the decisive voice as to the candidate most likely to carry those States. And, remember that there is doubt that any candidate other than their choice can carry a State, a State so necessary to party success that defeat is certain if it is lost. Such a State is the pivot on which turns the election of the President of the United States.

My own State of New York is such a State in the Republican scheme of things. No Republican President has been elected without its electoral vote. Of its importance in the national conventions of both parties, the late Charles D. Hilles, who served as a New York member of the Republican National Committee for twenty years, and who moved in the inner-circle of the party leadership for even more years, could speak with authority based on experience. Mr. Hilles has said:

"New York's power in political conventions, and therefore over the White House, comes not from the size of its delegations in the party National Conventions, which are roughly ten per cent in both instances. New York's power comes from the fact that its delegations represent 47 (now 45) electoral votes, or nearly twenty per cent of the total number needed to elect a President. It is this little understood fact that accounts for the almost invariable selection of Presidential nominees from New York or some other large state in sympathy with New York's political attitudes. But New York decides even that." [Emphasis supplied].

A proposed Constitutional Amendment to require that Electors of the President and Vice President be elected in the same manner as their counterparts in the Congress (Senators and Representatives) is pending in the Congress. Senator Karl Mundt of South Dakota is sponsoring it in the Senate and I am sponsoring it in the House. Its effect, if adopted, will be to divide each State's weight in selecting the President on exactly the same political basis as it is now divided in the selection of the members of Congress. Again, the political base of the Executive Power would be the same as the political base of the Legislative Power.

A secondary effect, but equally important, would be on the conduct of party nominating conventions. No longer would there be large, doubtful and pivotal States. All states would be equal with respect to their two “Senatorial" Electors; and the "Representative" Electors would be divisible among the parties according to their strength in the Congressional Districts.

Not only does the Mundt-Coudert Amendment provide an ideal method of selecting the President, it restores political balance between the White House and the Congress; and it is both simple and practical. There is no novel idea or principle in it that might unbalance our Constitutional system. It is electoral reform in the best sense, a mere rearrangement of familiar things.

(The following is an excerpt from "Political Parties and Opinions, 1788-1930," found in Atlas of the Historical Geography of the United States, by Charles O. Paullin (1932) :)

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS, 1788-1928

[Plates 102-111]

In constructing a series of political maps it is self-evident that the materials upon which they are based should be as uniform as possible. This rule was ob served in constructing the maps of this series, but unfortunately for some of the maps, chiefly the early ones, the materials are of considerable diversity. Uniformity in the vote illustrated is prevented by differences in the method of choosing electors, by the loss or the inaccesibility of some of the early returns, and by variations in the vote that is published (see below).

The maps of this series are of three classes: (1) maps showing the electoral vote for President, 1789-1796; (2) maps showing the vote at Presidential and other elections, 1800-1816; and (3) maps showing the vote at Presidential elections, 1820-1928.

Character of Available Election Returns

For the first three elections 1788-1789, 1792, and 1796, the political statistics still in existence are too few and scattering to admit of the construction of maps based upon the vote of the people and of the legislatures for electors. The maps for these three elections are therefore based upon the vote of the Presidential electors. With a few exceptions in connection with the election of 1796 (see pp. 92-93, below) the vote that is mapped is by states.

For the five elections covering the years 1800-1816, owing to the loss or inaccessibility of some of the returns for Presidential elections, the returns of other elections were used to fill the gaps. The maps for these years are therefore based only in part, though chiefly, upon the vote at Presidential elections. With a few exceptions the vote that is mapped is the popular vote, by counties. The exceptions comprise a few cases in which the vote for Presidential electors of one or both houses of some of the state legislatures was used.

The maps covering the years 1820-1928 are based entirely upon the vote at Presidential elections. With a few exceptions they are based upon the popular vote, by counties. The exceptions comprise a few cases for the earlier part of the period in which the vote of one or both houses of the state legislatures was used.

A larger use of the votes of legislatures for electors was prevented by the lack of records giving the vote of each member of the legislature. New York is the only state for which such a vote was found. In several other states it was sometimes possible to ascertain the vote of the members by computation and comparison. According to the New York practice, the election of electors began with the nomination by each house of as many persons as there were electors to be appointed. The two houses then met in joint session and compared nominations. Those persons nominated by both houses were declared to be chosen electors. In case of a disagreement deficiencies were supplied by means of a joint ballot of the two houses (New York Statutes, Apr. 12 1792, Ch. 72; N. Y. Constitution of 1777, Section 30). For New York, during the years 1800-1824, the vote mapped is the first vote of the assembly nominating electors. By reason of the small number of counties in Delaware and of their political consistency the vote of the members of the legislature of the state could generally be ascertained. The vote of the legislatures when unanimous presented no difficulty.

The published statistics for Presidential elections, except in some recent state publications, do no give the vote for all the electors. They rarely state what vote they give. Comparisons show that as a rule they give the vote for the leading elector on each ticket-that is, the elector who received the mo votes in the state. Sometimes they give the vote for the first elector, who generally is the leading elector; sometimes the average vote for all the electors; and some times the vote for the leading elector in each county. The vote for electors at large is more likely to be given than that for other electors.

All the several kinds of votes found in the election statistics were used. As a rule no selection was possible. In recent years, however, when the vote for all the electors is occasionally given, close contests were sometimes decided by aver aging the vote. Fortunately, the political complexion of a county was rarely changed by using one vote rather than another. It was the same whether derived

from the vote for the leading elector, the vote for the first elector, or the average vote.

When more than one return for the same election was accessible comparisons were often made with a view to correcting typographical or other errors. Occasionally, in the case of Texas and a few other states, when returns for a county were lacking, its habitual way of voting or the politics of the surrounding area was permitted to determine its political complexion, and the county was mapped accordingly. In general, however, counties for which there were no returns have been left blank. Returns for some of the minor parties, such as the Prohibition party, were sometimes less complete than was desirable; but is it believed that all cases in which minor parties carried a county have been discovered. Several of the minor parties have never carried a county.

Choice of Electors

In the early Presidential elections no uniform method of choosing electors was followed either in the several states or in any one state (with an exception or two). The three most usual methods were: (1) election by the legislature, (2) election by the people in districts, and (3) election by the people on a general ticket. Occasionally two of these methods were combined, as may be seen from the table below. By 1836 all the states except South Carolina, in which the election was by the legislature until the Civil War, had adopted the method that now prevails, that of a popular election on a general ticket. Since that year, with the exception given above, there have been but three instances of an election other than by general ticket. These are Florida in 1868 and Colorado in 1876, in which the elections were by the legislature; and Michigan in 1892, in which the election was by the people in districts, with the exception of two electors who were chosen at large. When the election is by districts the state is divided into electoral districts. Occasionally the electoral and Congressional districts of a state are identical, as was the case in New York in 1828. States in which the election was by general ticket were sometimes divided into districts, with a view to securing a geographical distribution of electors.

Table I, which gives the method of choosing electors during the years 1788–1836, has been compiled chiefly from state statutes and contemporary newspapers. Geographical Units Used in Constructing the Maps

With a few exceptions the geographical unit employed in constructing the maps for 1789-1796 was the state and in the maps for 1800-1928, the county (or parish, in Louisiana). In mapping the electoral vote for Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina for 1796 the electoral district was used; and occasionally in mapping the popular vote for the years 1800-1828, when county returns were missing, the electoral or Congressional district was the unit employed. Occasionally the combined vote of some two or three counties, when it was impossible to separate their vote, was mapped.

The county is as a rule the best unit for political purposes. It is common to all the states (except Louisiana, in which the parish corresponds to the county in other states) and is the unit for which election statistics are usually recorded. In New England, however, the town is the more important political unit, but it cannot be shown on maps of small scale. Cities are often more important political units than the counties in which they are situated, but with two exceptions it was not feasible nor desirable to treat them separately from counties. The two exceptions are Baltimore after 1854 and St. Louis after 1876. As these two cities since those years have constituted urban areas distinct from the counties bearing the same names they have been treated separately from their corresponding counties. Boston was treated as a part of Suffolk County; New York, of New York County; Brooklyn, of Kings County; Philadelphia, of Philadelphia County; Baltimore, of Baltimore County for 1800-1852; Chicago, of Cook County; St. Louis, of St. Louis County for 1820-1876; and San Francisco, of San Francisco County. The Virginia cities that form distinct political divisions have been treated as a part of the counties to which they naturally belong.

The counties of the United States vary considerably in size. Wide differences of area will be found by comparing with each other the counties of a given state or of different parts of the Union at any one time, or the same counties of a given state or part of the Union at different times. The area of most counties is between 100 and 1000 square miles. A few fall below the former figure, and a considerab number exceed the latter. In 1920 the average area of the counties of the United States was about 990 square miles. In 1800 the average size of the counties of the thirteen original states was not far from that figure, being a little under 1000 square miles. In 1920 the counties of these thirteen states were about half that size. In the same year the average area of the counties in the Pacific and Rocky Mountain states, in which are found most of the large counties of the Union, was about 2960 square miles; while the average area of the counties of New England, exclusive of those of Maine, was about 630 square miles. There have been no great changes since 1920. In 1930 the smallest county in the Union was New York County, New York, with an area of 22 square miles; and the largest, San Bernardino County, California, with an area of 20,175 square miles. There are eight states any one of which is smaller than San Bernardino County. Its area exceeds by 4000 square miles the combined area of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and Delaware.

When a state is being settled the older or eastern counties are generally smaller than the newer or western ones. The more populous regions as a rule have the smaller counties. The counties in which Boston, New York, Brooklyn, Jersey City, Denver, and San Francisco are situated are exceptionally small-less than 75 square miles. Because of the creation of new counties the average size of counties in most sections of the Union is always decreasing-rapidly when the sections are new, and slowly, later. In New England, however, no new county has been created since 1860. On the other hand, in Georgia, one of the thirteen original states, eleven counties were created between 1905 and 1912. In three states, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Delaware, no new counties have been created since the eighteenth century.

Counties vary greatly in population. In 1930 most of the counties had a population of from 5000 to 50,000, although there was a considerable number with less than 5000 or with more than 50,000. The counties with less than 5000 people were rural counties and were situated chiefly in the Rocky Mountain and Pacific states. The counties with more than 50,000 people usually contained a large urban population and were situated chiefly in the Eastern and North Central states. In 1930 the most populous county was Cook County, Illinois, with a population of 3,982,000; and the least populous was Armstrong County, South Dakota, with a population of 80. Next to Cook County in population was Kings County, New York, with a population of 2,560,000. Los Angeles County, California, was third, with a population of 2,208,000. Only nine states had total populations greater than that of Cook County. Erie County, New York, was more populous than the states of Arizona, Nevada, and Wyoming combined.

In 1800 the population of most of the counties of the Northern states was from 5000 to 50,000; and of the Southern and Western states, from 1000 to 25,000. In the less populous regions of the West, counties below 1000 were not infrequent. There were a few counties above 50,000. Philadelphia County was the largest, with a population of 81,000.

In 1930 the population was most dense in New York County, where there were 84,878 people to the square mile, and least dense in some of the counties of the Pacific and Rocky Mountain states and Western Texas, where there were fewer than two persons to the square mile. Most counties had a density of from 10 to 100 people to the square mile, although there were many counties below the former figure, chiefly rural counties west of the Mississippi; and not a few counties above the latter figure, chiefly urban counties in the thickly populated regions of the Eastern and North Central states. In 1800, as in 1930, the density of population in most counties was from 10 to 100 to the square mile. Many counties in the West, however, had a density of less than 10 and a few in the East of more than 100 to the square mile. New York County had the greatest density, about 1400 to the square mile. For further information on this subject see p. 48, above, and Plates 76B-79.

Representation of Votes on Maps

The vote that is represented on the maps is the vote for candidates and not necessarily the vote for parties. The vote represented for each of the three classes of maps is as follows: (1) 1789-1796, the electoral vote for Presidential candidates; (2) 1800-1816, the vote for each Presidential or other candidate who carried a county; and (3) 1820-1924, the vote for each Presidential candidate