the paper, if the first has enough votes without it,—but how many are enough?—and how is that to be known? The simple course is to ascertain how many persons vote, and to try how many votes each member to be elected would have if the votes were equally divided. On the morning which follows the election day, the entire number of votes would be known. If 658,000 people had voted, and there were 658 members, 1000 would be enough (or be the quotient or quota) for each member; and if any candidate had more than 1000, the excess beyond that number would be transferred to the successive candidates named on the voting-papers. I suppose that no inspector of a national school would allow a child of ten years old to be reckoned as entitling it to head-money out of the public grant who is not able to divide the number of the voters by 658, and thus obtain the quota. But even this achievement in arithmetic is not required from any elector. It is an operation to be performed by registrars, to whom the numbers are reported.
It is then necessary to determine which of the voting-papers shall be taken to make up the member's quota, and which shall go to the next candidates. It is of little importance to the voters, but may be of much consequence to the candidates placed lower on the papers. The papers might be drawn by lot, but I have preferred a series of simple rules, in which the appropriation is made to depend on locality, and on the number of alternatives the voting-paper displays. These rules are to be applied by the registrars, and any voter to whom they might appear perplexing need not trouble himself with them. It is only necessary to satisfy him that the rule is impartial and just. The voter has nothing to do necessarily but to look to his own voting-paper. It will be deposited in his town. He may at any time refer to it, and see by the endorsement to which of his favourite candidates it has been appropriated. This will be proved by his name being found among the constituency of
