The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1871-04-07
REFORMED VOTING.
THE FREE VOTE IN BORouGHs.

", eWtsytouutu, MoHudy ECenny,
March q, 1871.
Agreeably to order the Senate re-
sumed the third reading aud considera-
tlon of an act for the further regulation
Of boroughs.
Mr.. BUCKALEW, being entitled to
the floor, said: Mr.. Speaker, in rising
to speak upon this bill / desire
to make single observation of an
Introductory character. / came to
this Senate to serve during my pres
ent term for no purpose except to
advocate and support electoral reform.
Other objects were imputed to me,
have been told-objects of personal ri.
valry and ambition-but that imputa.
ton was wholly false. l thought, sir,
that the attention of the representatives
of the people assembled in the Legisa.
ture should be directed to some funda-
mental and searching changes in our
electoral system, which seemed to be
demanded by the public interests and
by the welfare of our people.
Now, sir, in the first place, L propose
to call attention very briefly to what
has been done heretofore in this State
upon this subject of reform i'm the direc-
tion indicated by the present bill. In
the convention of 1878 Mr.. Thomas
Earle of the county of Philadelphia
submitted two propositions at different
times with reference to the choice of
election officers by the people upon the
plan of what is now known as the lin.
tied vote. Upon the 9th of June 1898,
if remember the date correctly, he
addressed that convention at some
length in support of his second propo.
sition. 1t was then submitted to a vote
and rejected very strongly-by a vote
of, think, over three to one-and the
majority comprised most of the strong
men of the onvention-3uch men as
Woodward, Sergeant Forward and 9TH
ers. The convention passed off and
nothing more was done. At the session
of the Legislature in 1889 the Governor
of the Commonwealth called attention
/ n his Message to the subject of elector.
al reform. He pointed out to the two
houses that extensive changes had be-
come necessary in our election laws by
reason of the amendments to the Con-
stitution. He pointed out the fact that
extensive frauds had taken place at
elections in various parts of the Com.
monwealth, and, in short, that our elec.
toral system had fallen under reproach
and needed radical amendment. Du-
ring the course of the session Mr.. Sena.
tor Brown of Philadelphia county,
turned his attention to this subject, and
in a committee of conference upon the
general election bill of that year OBJ
tained the insertion substantially of
the proposition which had been advoca-
ted by Mr.. Earle in the Constitutional
Convention the year before, and for
which Mr.. Brown himself had voted,
he being member of that Convention.
Well, sir, that proposition will be found
among our statutes as one of the leading
and one of the most important and
useful provisions of the election act of'30.
1t provides that each voter, at the time
when election officers are to be chosen,
shall vote for but one person for inspec.
tor of elections during the coming year
| and that the two candidates highest in
vote shall be declared elected. Then
| follows provision that each inspector,
SO chosen, shall appoint clerk. The
judge of the election, the only addition.
al officer, is chosen under the old plan
of the majority vote. That was in 1899
and it is to be noted that upon debate
this reform was carried in the Senate
by vote of only fifteen to eleven.
But this law as to the manner Of
choosing election officers has continued
| to the present time, a period of over
| thirty years, and it is well known that
it is most salutary in operation and
most satisfactory to the people. l do
not know what the whole number of
election districts in the State is at the
| present time; in 1888 the number lit.
tie exceeded one thousand. l suppose
the number now exceeds two thousand,
and it happens under this law that in
nineteen-t twentieths of the election dis.
| tricts of the Commonwealth, each of
the two political partiss into which our
people are ordinarily divided, has an
inspector in the election board, and al
so n clerk, and that the majority has
the judge. Sir, it is this provision of
the law that has preserved our elections
from degeneracy and disgrace. Ifit
were recalled from our statue book and
we should apply to the choice of elec.
tion officers our ordinary plan of voting
we might expect an enormous increase
OF fraudulent voting throughout the
State, with consequent degeneracy Of
our political system, and to great ex.
tent discredit would be cast upon the
political institutions under which we
live.
| Some years since, complaint began to
| be made in various parts of the State
| that jurymen were not fairly selected
| by county commissioners and sherif's
to whom the law committed their selec.
tiOn. In some counties they were ta-
ken, it was alleged, exclusively from
the majority party in the county-the
county commissioners and sheriff rep
resenting the majority and selecting
| their political friends almost exclusive
| ly, from year to year. Appeals were
made to the Legislature, and several
local acts were passed for particular
counties, providing new arrangement,
an election by the people of two jury
commissioners in the same manner in
which inspectors of election are chosen
under the election act of 1889. Finally
the Governor recommended the extern
sion of this plan to the whole Common
wealth. This recommendation was
made, believe, by Governar Curtin.
| A general statute was passed and ap.
| 1867, applying this plan of jury COM
missioners to the whole State, and ev-
cry Senator present is familiar with it.
Since that time throughout the State
we have had elections for those officers
upon the plan of the limited vote. The
statute assigns to president judges some
duties in connection with the jury com
missioners. In many of the judicial
districts the president judges declined
to act or did not act for some time after
the law was passed. They thought, and
| suppose thought properly, that they
ought to have no part in the selection
of the gentlemen who were to serve in
their courts as jurymen that it was a
duty which ought not to be charged
upon them, because it was to some ex-
tent inconsistent with their judicial du-
ties and with that entire independence
which ought to exist between the Judge
and Jury who are to try the disputes
and differences of the citizen. But
presently it came to be understood that
in all cases under that law jurymen
would be divided equally between po-
ltcal parties that in county where
there was nearly two.thirds majority
the minority would have an equal num-
ber, which seemed unfair and so, from
time to time appeals have been made
to president judges to take part and as
sist their political friends to get their
full share, or perhaps more than their
share of jurymen.
One of the president judges described
to me the performance on one occasion
when he first attended to select jurors
| II xuau In q nnunty with tha inha ahitants