BY E. L. PIESSE, B.SC, LL.B. 



63 



primary object the return by each party of the proportion 

 of members to which it is entitled. (^®). 



The method here used is not well suited for a com- 

 parison of the quotas in a contest between .nore than two 

 parties. 



List Systems. 



22. In list systems of proportional representation, the 

 votes obtained by the list of each party are counted, and 

 it is required to partition the seats for the constituency 

 among the parties in proportion to the strengths of the 

 parties; that is, in proportion to the votes for the respect- 

 ive lists. 



We shall use the term electoral unit for the number 

 obtained by dividing the total of the votes for all the 

 candidates by the number of seats for the constituency. 

 The electoral unit corresponds to the Hare quota ; if each 

 elector has six votes, the electoral unit is six times the 

 tiare quota. 



23. If the strength of each party is an exact i ultiple of 

 the electoral unit, the apportionment of seats among 

 parties can be carried out exactly by applying the rule- 

 of -three. This method, with the condition afterwards 

 mentioned as to the allotment of seats to the largest 

 remainders, is referred to as the rule-of -three method. 

 Usually it will be found, on dividing the strengths by the 



('•) See Report of the Royal Comviission appointed to enquire into 

 Electoral Systems (United Kingdom, 1910, Cd. 5163). 



The statistics available of the effect of the Uroop quota show that it has 

 produced exactly proportional representation. The following are the 

 actual results of the Geneial Elections in Tasmania on 3()th Ipril, 1909, 

 and 30th April. 1912 (in which, of course, exhaustion of votes and en ss- 

 votiog, possibilities excluded from the arg-ument of the paper, occurred). 



Tasmania — General Elections. 30th April, 1909, and 30th April, 1912. 

 Proportional Representation of the Parties. 



See (10), p. 8, and (11), p. 4. 



