The Portland daily press., 1889-03-02
SENATOR HEATH TALKS OF BRIBERY.
An Exciting Debate over the Ballot
Reform Sill.
Thestatemenrs of;the Senator From
Kennebec
Answered by Messrs. Wright, Ryder
and Collins.
Especial to the Press.l

AuGIsTA. March 1.-The debate on the
ballot reform bill occupied the day in the
Senate. That debate has been by all odds
the most exciting and important of the
session. Every man who participated made
a more eloquent speech than he has yet
made during this session. Senator Heath's
speech, however much 1t may have dis
pleased, was of high order Of eloquence
that will give him high place as an orator
and drew applause from his bitterest oppon-
ents Senator Wright and Senator Ryder
spoke with unusual force and feeling; and
Senator Collins's remarks If more vigorous
than discreet, were yet an important feature
of the debate. Senator Heath's reply in the
afternoon to the charges of disloyalty to
party made against him by Senator Collins
was very eloquent The bill came up
this forenoon on motion of Senator Heath.
Tie parliamentary status Of the bill was
somewhat peculiar. A majority of the legal
affairs committee had reported against the
bill and the House had adopted that report.
Therefore, when the two reports came to
the Senate, there was no way of amending
the bill which was the minority report,
except by recommitting 1t to the legal affairs
committee with instructions for them to
make such amendment In it as the Senate
might wish. Senator Heath wished the bill
amended so that it should apply to the cities
and not to the towns. Therefore he moved
that the bill be recommitted to the legal
affairs committee with the instruction for
them to make the amendment.
Senator Wright opposed the recommitment.
Senator Heath, then said as there was no
member of the legal affairs in the Senate
who had favored the minority report, he
would assume to advocate such plan as
would bring the bill before the Senate in
form for discussion. To his mind this was
the most important bill addressed to this
legislature. and the proposition which he
asked the Senate to vote upon was a radi-
cally different proposition from that voted on
by the House. The House voted on bill
that applied to every town and plantation in
the State. OF course such a bill was radi
cal innovation upon the customs Of the State
and the men from the small towns and planta-
tions, who are not familiar with the evils
that are striking at the roots of our system
Of government, naturally were disinclined to
make change which seemed to them fraught
with considerable expense and bother. But
upon the other proposition they had ex-
pressed no opinion. There was no possible
parliamentary objection that could be raised
against the recommittal of the bill
Il need not" said Mr.. Heath, .go over the
history of the efforts of States and common
wealths to reform the system of voting. 1t
Is fact that the great State of Massachu-
sets at the last session of its legislature
adopted this system hot only for its cities,
but for its smallest towns as well. They
mast have considered it adequate or they
would not have done this. take 1t that the
gentlemen of this House know something
of the politics of this State; and do not
think there is one of them who will deny
that If such system is needed in Massa-
chusetts it is needed also In Maine.
Gentlemen, facts are stubborn things, and
however proud you may As OF the old State,
Ii Is no answer to rise. and in a spirit of
bunkum to appeal to State pride Such an
appeal will not answer facts. And 1 chal-
lenge any man in this Senate, acting in the
fullness of his knowledge and of
his honesty to deny that in every
challenge them to deny that the facts do
not, with one or two exceptions. show that
in the cities Of this State from 10 to IL per
cent of the vote Is purchasable and in con-
tested elections is purchased. And in some
of the cities OF this State, and | appeal to
the Senator from York to sustain me, this
per cent rises higher than 20 per cent. Mr..
President, that is an alarming fact.
Il make this statement too, that in the
last 10 years the number Of purchasable
votes has spread from national to State and
even to municipal politics. | will illustrate.
In the city of Biddeford at the last election
$4,000 were spent in buying votes. And
the public conscience was so benumbed that
men went about the streets of that city with
coupons in their hands and went to men
who sat at desks and exchanged the gold
and silver for those coupons. Now gentle
men, when such statements can be made and
backed up, is it not time that something is
done?"
Mr.. Heath said he did not think there was
much intimidation in Maine, but that there
was bribery no one would deny. He heard
the debate in the other branch, and heard
gentlemen declare that there was no bribery,
who, If the circumstances of their elections
were made public, would feel cloud over
their spirits.
1t is idle, as every lawyer in this branch
knows, to try to exterminate bribery by PEN
al statutes. Does any one know Of a case of
bribery that was ever punished in this State.
There was once case in Roekland where a
conviction was secured by accident, but this
exception only intensified the force of the
rule. In 1881 the legislature of this State, by
making the penalty applicable to the briber
and bribee alike, closed the door to convic-
tions for bribery. For in bribery but two
are concerned, the one who bribes and the
one who is bribed.. But neither will testify
against the other, because thereby both will
be landed in prison.
Mr.. Health believed that law of 1881 was
put on the statute books that bribery might
not be punished He remembered the dis
cussl0n ana knew who were responsible for
it. But even if we went back behind the
statute of 1881 as the law was previously,
when only the man bribed was subject TO
punishment, it would be impossible to con-
yict,. because the man who will buy his
nelgh6or's vote will periure himself without
hesitation.
Illustrating the difficulty of enforcing a
bribery law, Mr.. Heath referred to the we'll
known difficulties of enforcing the Maine
liquor law. The same difficulties rendered
the law of bribery, not only difficult but i'm
possible Of enforcement. Could any mem
ber OF this Senate give him an instance even
OF prosecution for bribery within he last
20 years, excepting the lone instance Of Rock
land ri remember one case,' said
years ago when an Augusta man was tried
in the United States Court for bribing two
men in Augusta. The two men swore againt
him. But twenty or more citizens went into
court and testified that the regulations of
those two worthless fellows whose oaths
were good for nothing. and the man was
cleared. OF course. Every man who sells
his vote is SO miserable that his oath is
never of any account in the trial of the
man who bribes him."
'Now, gentlemen, the only way to remove
bribery from the State OF Maine is to re-
move the opportunity for bribery; and the
experience of all history is that secret bal
lot is the most efficacl0us preventative of
bribery. Gentlemen in the other branch ar
gued that bribery should be as openas he
daylight. That sounds well enough; but
every man of experience knows that the
more open the ballot che greater the oppor-
tunity for bribery"
Mr.. Heath gave very vivid description
of the abuses that exist under the ballot that
is "as open as the daylight"
Mr.. Heath said it had been argued that
tis same system was In use In New Bruns-
wick and that their bribery was rampant.
The speaker said that argument was unfair
and deceptive. He had spent great deal
of time In New Brunswick and he knew
their system of voting over there. Their
law was not the law proposed here. 1t was
a secret ballot. but so full of loop holes that
| 1t did not prevent bribery. 1t was a very
different law from the law that Massachus-
| etts had put upon her statute books. and
from the bill that was before this Senate.
Passing from this to the question of re-
| sponsibity, Mr.. Heath said
"Gentlemen, / believe the responsibility of
| giving some relief in this matter rests upon
the Republican party. What Is the history
| of the Republican party In this measure ?
| One year ago in the legislature of New
| York a bill like this was passed. And
Governor Hin. acting in the Interest
I of the corrupt Democrtic machine Of New
York vetoed that bill. For that act he re-
| ceiyed the unanimous condemnation OF the