Even the strong Republican State of Pennsylvania has occasionally gone Democratic in what is called an "off year." Other Republican States,--or States that usually go Republican,--have gone Democratic when it was not an off year,--Illinois, for instance, in 1892.

All of this goes to prove how unreliable, unsafe, unsatisfactory, unjust and unfair would be the change in the basis of representation as thus proposed.
Another argument in support of the proposed change is that delegates from Democratic States are, as a rule, controlled by the administration then in power, if Republican, and that such delegates can be depended upon to support the administration candidate whoever he may be, regardless of merit, strength or availability.

This argument, of course, is based upon the assumption that what is true of Democratic States in this respect is not true of Republican States.

The slightest investigation will easily establish the fallacy of this assumption.

The truth is that the federal office-holders--especially those holding appointive offices,--can, with a few exceptions, always be depended upon to support the Administration candidate, whoever he may be.