The Sun.
London, England, 1859-09-16 00:00:00

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.

Sir,—ln your paper of the 27th ult., placed in
my hands since my return from Paris, I find a
letter from my fellow-countryman, Richard H.
Dana, jun., Esq., giving a brief history of the
ballot in Massachusetts.

Although generally correct in the details he has
furnished, Mr. Dana I think has inadvertently
fallen into a few important errors, which I beg
leave through your columns to correct.
After stating that although the ballot was at
first intended to be secret, such had been the modi-
fications of the original law, by subsequent enact-
ments which required that all votes should be depo-
sited open and unfolded, that it had virtually be-
come little better than the viva voce mode of vot-
ing, Mr. Dana proceeds to speak of the ballot law
of 1851, which provides that all votes should be
placed in sealed envelopes, of uniform " character
furnished by the State."
In giving an account of the operation of this
law, Mr. Dana says that " envelopes get opened in
the box, tumbling out their contents, and thus
were rejected."
This is a mistake. Such a result was predicted by
the enemies of the law and feared by its friends,
but no practical difficulty whatever arose from that
quarter to remedy the difficulty. He has errone-
ously stated further that the authorities " were re-
quired to keep a supply of gluten at the polls to
aid in sealing." Here, again, the gentleman is
totally in error ; no such thing was done, and he
will search in vain for any such provision in the
statutes of Massachusetts.
What confused the mind of Mr. Dana in this
case probably was that certain disaffected oppo-
nents of the sealed ballot did in derision of the law,
at the first trial, carry gluten pots to the polls, but
there was no use for them, and those who thus con-
ducted only made themselves ridiculous.
In giving his final summary of the whole matter,
Mr. Dana says " that the attempt to introduce a
mode of ballot which shall be at once secret and
secure against fraud and reasonably convenient, has
so far failed with us."
Here I feel compelled to take a direct issue with
the gentleman ; that such is his sincere opinion I
do not doubt, but that such opinion is founded on
fact I deny. He does not bring any proof. And
" if the law has so far failed," he should have told
us why.
Will he say that it did not secure the entire in-
dependence of the voter, or that he could not give
what vote he pleased without the knowledge of
any one ? Certainly I think he will not venture to
do this, for, from the very nature of the case, the
law must and did ensure entire secrecy ; the voter,
in going to the poll, could take tickets of different
kinds from as many vote distributors as he pleased,
and from these at his own convenience select the
one he preferred, put it in the envelope provided
for him, seal it up and drop it into the box, and no
human being could possibly know how he voted,
nothing could be a more perfect protection, and I
have never seen it asserted anywhere that secrecy
was not obtained by the sealed ballot.
Will Mr. Dana say that the law did not entirely
prevent fraudulent voting ?—I am sure he will not,
because he knows that under that law, double
voting by accident or design was certain to be de-
tected ; the words of the Act are, If in any case
more than one vote is found in any envelope, bear-
ing the name of the same person for the same office,
all but one of such votes shall be thrown out ; or if
two or more votes be found in any one envelope,
bearing the names of different persons for the same
office, all such votes shall be rejected." This, of
course, precluded all attempts at fraudulent voting,
and all accidental mistakes would be corrected, and
these accidents were known to have previously
been very frequent.
A respectable clergyman was detected a few
years since in depositing two votes which adhered
together so closely that he did not discover the fact
until informed of it by the inspecting officers. All

this was obviated by the new law.
Nor, lastly, will Mr. Dana, I presume, attempt to
prove that the law was so unreasonably inconvenient
or difficult, cumbersome or expensive, as to be
found impracticable. So far as expense was con-
cerned the sum total was not three cents per ann am
to each voter of the Commonwealth; and so far from
being inconvenient, the use of the envelope
greatly simplified the mode of voting, and rendered
the use of more than one ballot-box unnecessary.
Under the old system I have myself seen as many
as six boxes in use at the same time for the different
kinds of officers to be chosen : so convenient has it
been found, that in many cases, to my knowledge,
the envelopes are still used on account of their
greater convenience. If none of these specifications
can be sustained by proof—and I aver that not one
of them can be—how can it be said that " in so far
the law has failed ? "
Mr. Dana is one of the most distinguished men
of Massachusetts—holds a very high position at the
Bar as a man of integrity and honour—has no supe-
rior, and is entitled to profound respect—but I must
be permitted to say, that in regard to the question
before us, I think he is not sufficiently well in-
formed ; deeply engaged in his professional duties,
and far removed in all his walks and associations
from the ordinary affairs of political strife and agi-
tation, it is not surprising if in a matter apper-
taining to popular elections he should have in his
mind impressions rather than facts. 1 feel less
hesitation in speaking decidedly in regard to the
operation of the sealed ballot law of Massachusetts
during its continuance, than I should otherwise do,
had it not come especially under my personal ob-
servation. Holding the office of Secretary of State,
all the returns passed through my hands. As ex
officio Secretary of the Executive Council, I saw all
those returns opened and examined, and I know
that not a single case of dispute, informality,
or embarrassment arose from the use of
the envelopes, nor did a simple complaint
come up from any inspecting
town clerk, of any of the 32 towns and cities of th e
Commonwealth, of any difficulty or inconvenience.
I assert that the elections were never conducted
more satisfactorily and harmoniously, or with less
labour and expense. But it may be asked, if all
this is true why was not so good a law in full
force ? Mr. Dana and every other Massachusetts
man knows very well why it was not. In 1853
the Whigs, for the last time, got temporary posses-
sion of the government of the State, and as they
had ridiculed and opposed the sealed ballot while
out of power, one of their first acts of party spite
was, not to repeal it, for that they dare not attempt
to do, so popular was the law, but under the plau-
sible plea that every man should be allowed to me
the envelope or not, they provided by an amendment
to the law that the use of envelopes should be op-
tional. This emasculated the law, as every man
who voted under envelope would be presumed and
taken to be hostile to the dominant party.
But it may be further inquired why is not the
sealed ballot restored, since the Liberal party is
again in power ?—the reason is well understood in
Massachusetts. The Republican party, now in the
ascendant, is composed to a great extent of the in-
fluential members of the former Whig party, who
as they have been the persistent opponents of the
sealed ballot, object of course to its restoration, and
any attempt made for that purpose would divide
the party. In addition to all this, there is no
danger of intimidation in the present condition of
parties. In Massachusetts the Republicans are so
strongly in the majority, that there are no severe
party contests, and when one party is certain of
victory, no person cares how a particular individual
votes.

Consequently there is at present no occasion for
the protection afforded by the envelope. But let
the time come when party lines shall be well defined
and closely drawn, let the contending forces be so
equally divided that each section hopes for success,
partizans take the field to influence and intimidate
voters, as in times past, and the Sealed Ballot will
be demanded at once, and is certain to be restored.
—I am, Sir, your obident servant,
AMA SA WALKER.
London, Sept. 7, 1859.

A singular incident is related in the Memorial
de Courtrais as having just happened to a otel-k
seer in
that town. He had sent a lad, about 17, hwith ,peooof. of
French gold to be exchanged for Belgian bank-notes,
which the messenger regularly effected, receiving five
notes of I,ooof. each, but which he lost en his way home,
while the hotel-keeper was lamenting over his loss a little
girl, of five or six years of age, living at a short distance
from his house, brought to her mother a piece at paper, on
Which was a small vignette, and which she said her brother
had out out with a pair of scissors from a larger piece. The
mother recognising bank-note, ran to
the child, and found near him a I,ooof. note cut into eleven
it as belonging to a
had any
tithem in the street, and had
put four others others, began to cry, but
pieces. The child, on being questioned where he had found
at the el
ennogtteh,
ittle b arno his intending t
andsaid whetherthathehhaed
cut out the pictures -fromo.,N ng
each. The lotoysdof the hotelo .
keeper having tae come known, the woman restored him the
notes which remained whole, 43 well as the • pieces of the
other, These latter having been carefully put together,
were taken by tin bauk and cashed tAe next day. -