MKTHOUS FOR COUNTING IN ELECTIONS. 665 



10. To Carry Out the Voters Wishes, the Highest Choice 

 Possible Must he Used. — Whenever a higher choice on a ballot 

 paper for one candidate is passed over, and a lower choice on it 

 is used or counted to another candidate, that voter's wishes and 

 directions have not been carried out as he marked them on his 

 ballot paper, and as many as possible of the hije^hest available 

 choices must be counted. 



11. Hozv Droop's Quota Fails to Carry Out the Voter's 

 Wishes. — When Droop's quota is used for primary surpluses, 

 we stop counting first choice votes for the member as soon as 

 Droop's quoita is reached, and (i) on all his ballot papers up to 

 the point where Hare's quota is reached we use second or lower 

 choice votes for other candidates in place of the first choices 

 we use if Hare's quota is employed ; and in every one of these 

 cases we fail to carry out the voter's expressed direction. 



(2) In all cases where these lower choices help to elect a 

 member, we possibly prevent other voters who have marked 

 higher choices for that member having these choices counted, 

 and necessitate lower choices on their ballot papers being used 

 for another candidate. 



(3) With Droop's quota more members get surpluses, and 

 choices for these surplus holders have to be passed over on other 

 voters' ballot papers, and this necessitates the use of lower 

 choices. 



(4) With Droop's quota the necessarily non-effective votes 

 are at a maximum ; there are thus fewer votes that can be 

 counted to or allotted to a member than with Hare's quota, and 

 this necessitates the use of lower choices. 



Hare's object was to use and count to each member in every 

 election the maximum number of votes, every vote without excep- 

 tion, thus securing Proportional Representation. Droop's object 

 is to count the absolute minimum number of votes that will give 

 each member a majority of one vote. Its use is therefore abso- 

 lutely inconsistent with Hare's object. 



It is quite true that Droop's quota shows the minimum num- 

 ber of votes that will secure the election of the members ; and 

 where the non -transferable vote is used, or where with the use 

 of the transferable vote there are no transfers because the 

 election can be finished on first choice Azotes, Droop's quota also 

 shows which are the members most preferred by the voters. But 

 when, as Hare suggested, the transferable vote is used to secure 

 the efficiency of every vote the use of Droop's quota is utterly 

 inconsistent with securing Proportional Representation. It is not 

 only useless, but harmful, because with its use all the voters can- 

 not help in the selection of the members most preferred by the 

 voters for the choices marked on each of the ballot 

 papers of a section of the voters nearl}- e(|ual in num- 

 bers to Droop's quota cannot be used, their wishes cannot be 

 carried out, they take absolutely no part in the selection of the 

 members. Not only so, but in the case of the ballot papers of 

 all voters in the other n sections which are used and counted, 



D 



