Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1888-12-28
DAILY RECORD UNION
IDAY. DE.cEMBER 2s, 1885
COUNTING IN COURT.

Congressman Morrow in saying he would
like to have a recount of the vote of No
vember in San Francisco, but expresses the
desire of every person who abhors election
frauds. But general recount is impracti-
bic. The individual contests inaugurated
will sufficiently establish the fact that
gross frauds in counting the ballots were
perpetrated in San Francisco, that in
nearly all cases the fraudulent count was
in favor of Democrats and against Republi-
cans. But no matter IN whose interest,
the fact is that unless barriers can be
erected to prevent false tallying, the value
of the ballot-box as a means of ascertain
ing the will of the governed will be clint
mated from our system. Unless that is
done the republic will come tumbling
about our ears. The truth will address it.
self to every intelligent mind clearly that
the Government must fail unless we are
able to construct system for the honest
ascertainment Of the will of the majority
that shall work as well as do business sys-
TENS in the common concerns Of life.
There is bat one specific the REcoRD-
UNION can as yet perceive, and that is as
heretofore set forth in detail, to have the
counting Of the votes proceed in the first
instance under judicial supervision, pre-
cisely as is done in recounting now. Under
such system, elaborated much to secure
rapidity, there can be no possible false
calling off Of the verdict of the voter with
out instant detection
It is objected to our suggestion, that
counting in open Court viii be too tedious
and so long delay announcement of the re-
turns as to enable the political FOUNDERS
to make up deficiencies in one section OF
the country by ballot and return manipu-
lations in other parts where the Court
system may not be adopted. 1t might be
replied that California should be content
with first perfecting her own system. But
the plausibIlity of the objection vanishes
the instant we advert to the fact that the
need of early knowledge of the result is
not an essential in our electoral system al
all. 1t is one outgrowth of the advance Of
the age, in Improvement Of the means o.
communication. Prior to 1914 the people
o; necessity, waited Tor month or two
months before the result of Presidential
election could be made known. That the
country suffered or the liberties of the PEG.
pie were endangered in consequence is moi
recorded. But the apparent force of the
objection-and it is the only objection that
Is, or can be, advanced with reasons de-
stroyed by the explanation that the Courts
can Just as well enroll as many clerks and
tellers to count the ballots as are now EN-
ployed, and therefore the speed of count
ing will not be reduced to any material
extent. The simple change is from boss
domination in election booths to judicial
procedure in open court, where candidates
and parties may appear by counsel and in
spect the ballots and overlook the calling
of under the eye of the Court We under
take to say that it can be demonstrated
that an election Count can be proceeded
with with almost as much rapidity in
Court as in the polling place. That being
true, then substitution of judicial officer:
for boss appointees is the only thing re.
naming to be considered.