The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1889-10-25


exprr;ence wish the Australian ballot sys-
TEN. which has for the past few years been
urred 20 p<rsissensly Upon the people of
he United States The count has been
rreschsdsy slow and unsatisfactory. and Is
Is evident that the election vas no more
free from fraud than IL would have been II
The elaborate safeguards Of the Australian
syssen had never been heard Of. Al that
appeared 20 be necessary in order 10 make
everything smooth and easy VAS some
thing more than the ordinary degree Of
mutual confidence between the buyer OF
votes and the seller. Ii is not strange.
considering all things. that many OF the
Montana newspapers express the opinion
that the Australian system is more bother
than il is worth. This judgment, however,
may be hasty one IL may readily be
admitted that the Australian system does
no: prevent fraud and bribery, the prac-
ficsl question TO be decided being whether
its unique features are valuable in pre-
venting corrupt practices to degree COM
msnsurafe with their expensiveness and
elaboration Of detail.
III may as well be admitted that when
man desires TO sell his vsse be viii not only
find market for it but viii find some
means of evading any legal restrictions
that may render the transaction . delicate
one The most effective way TO prevent such
transactions would probably be to make
the punishment of those taking part in them
commensurate with the offense and TO en-
force the law regardless. of the influence or
the station of those who defy it. A secret
ballot, no matter how elaborate the meas
ures taken to secure it may be, will not pre-
vent the purchase or sale of votes. IL VIII
merely afford the vote-seller an opportu-
nifty to cheat the buyer By not delivering
his goods, ard II may well be doubted
whether the morals OF the community will
be improved or the purity of the ballot en-
HANGED by law which simply enables the
vote-selier TO add bad faith with his part
ner in guilt to his bad faith with the COM
munity at large.
As preventative OF fraud the Australian
system may be regarded as failure. Its
value as means of securing secret ballot
remains, and this is no small argument in
its favor. Absolute secrecy of the ballot is
an end greatly TO be desired, and any law
which will secure il should receive the
hearty support of good citizens. 1t is al
ogether probable, however. that an cleo
ton law could be devised which would be
as eficacious as the Australian law in Sc
curing secrecy, and would yet be free from
that may elaboration which renders the
Australian system a thing altogether be-
wildering TO the ordinary American citi-
zen. Booths, government-printed ballots,
gummed corners. stamps, numbers and
clerks ready to assist the uneducated and
the blind in the preparation of their ballots,
form an aggregation too formidable to be
hastily invited to participate in our cleo
tons. American ingenuity should be able
to devise an election law less elaborate and
less complex than this, which would never
theless be equally efiicacious in securing
secrecy.
The Australian system is not to be ut
terly condemned because OF the Montana
election. Nor, on the other hand, is it to
be lightly taken up and adopted by the
people of other states. 1t will be better to
allow the people of Montana to experiment
with it awhile longer before we either take
it to our our hearts or dismiss il entirely
from our thoughts.