_Revue du Droit Public_,
Nov.-Dec., 1894. The adverse votes were decisive,
i.e., 308,289 to 75,880 and 347,401 to 145,362
respectively.]

[Footnote 636: The introduction of proportional
representation in Switzerland is advocated
especially by the Socialists and the Clericals, to
whom principally would accrue the benefits of the
system. The Liberals are favorable to the
principle, though they prefer to postpone the
issue. The Radicals are solidly opposed. At the
referendum of 1900 the project was rejected by
11-1/2 to 10-1/2 cantons, and by a popular majority
of 75,000; at that of October 23, 1910, it was
approved by 12 to 10 cantons, but was rejected
popularly by a majority of less than 25,000
(265,194 negative, 240,305 affirmative). Rather
curiously, the defeat arose largely from the
defection of the Catholic canton of Freiburg, which
in 1900 was favorable by a vote of 13,000 to 3,800.
The canton's vote in 1910 was for rejection, by
11,200 to 3,900. By those best acquainted with the
situation this astonishing reversal is explained by
the influence which is exercised in the canton
to-day by M. Python, a dictator who opposes any
innovation whereby his own controlling position
would be menaced. Not unnaturally, the friends of
the project (and in 1910 all parties save the
Radicals gave it their support) regard the outcome
in 1910 as a certain forecast of eventual victory.
In nine of the cantonal governments, beginning with
that of Ticino in 1891, the principle has been
already put in operation. In truth, the defeat of
1910 was followed promptly by a triumph in the
important canton of St. Gall, where the
proportional system was adopted for the first time,
February 5, 1911, for elections of the cantonal
council. See E. Secretan, Suis