Sacramento daily record-union., 1889-10-05
AN OBJECTIONABLE FEATURB IN THE
AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.


AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
Edward Wakefield, a distinguished Aus
tralian, who has had much experience in
Australian politics, has an article in the
Forum on the Australian ballot system, in
which he sets forth in detail the causes
that led to the adoption of the system, and
full particulars as to the working of the
new idea in the Australian Colonies. In
brief, it is as has heretofore been explained
in this journal 1t proceeds upon the
sound doctrine that without the guard of
secrecy the ballot is worthless to any man,
and 1t is not representative Of manhood
suffrage in its purity. Booths are erected
where the returning or election officer, who
Is a non-Voter, delivers to each elector his
ballot, bearing all the names of candidates.
The electors name is numbered on the
poll.list, and the same number is put upon
his ballot, and the corner of the paper
gummed down over it. The voter then
retires to a secluded booth, but within
view of the Election Board, and indicates,
by marking out opponents with blue PEN
Gil, which of the candidates he votes for,
returns with the ballot to the box and de-
posts it.
Anticipating that so much Of the scheme
as refers to the numbering of the ballot to
correspond with the poll-list, would meet
with antagonism in America, Mr. Wake
field enters upon a lengthy and labored
defense of the plan. We confess to falling
under his whitening denunciation for OBJ
jecting to this numbering plan. We can
see, if Mr.. Wakefield cannot, that in this
country it will destroy the very secrecy
that the scheme is intended to conserve.
In all else the system is commendable, but
in that it is not wise for Americans to
adopt. Mr.. Wakefield defends the num-
bering something after this fashion 'It
Is necessary to prevent double voting,
otherwise there is nothing to prevent a
man voting at every booth in the district,
or representing himself as another elector,
after having voted in his own name But
while this is often done, it is invariably
defeated and detected by the simple device
of writing the number Ct each voter in the
corner of the ballot-paper, and at the same
time ticking off the same number opposite
the voters name on the poll-list or regis
ter. The number is gummed down and is
never uncovered, unless there is persona
tion or double voting, when a comparison
Of the tick marks on the poll-list hav-
ing given the clue, the peccant ballot
papers tell their own tale, and are
instantly rejected Now,' says Mr.. Wake
field, there can be no disclosures of how
the voter voted, because the returning
officer is in the first place non-voter, and,
in the second, is liable to severe punish
ment if he reveals the fact. Moreover,
no one has possession of the ballot papers
except the returning officer He seals
them up and returns them to the Clerk of
Parliament, a ghly-responsible, nom
political officer, who after keeping them a
specified time to permit of disputing the
election, burns them" Those who hold
that under this numbering system the
secrecy of the ballot is imperiled, Mr..
Wakefield denounces as demagogues, griev-
ance-mongers and unintelligent. He adds
that he has been repeatedly questioned on
this point, and has never failed to con-
vince even the most illiterate and unin-
telligent that the objection to the number
ing process is silly and groundless
1t will be necessary for Mr. Wakefield to
class us with those who are SO foolish" as
to believe that the doubt about the num-
bering system is not the fear OF "bogie."
In the first place, the election officers in
America are not non-yoters, though we
cannot understand how the fact of their
not casting vote in Australia augments
to their integrity or stiffens their hon
esty. Tie rascal who has set about to de-
feat the law cares very little whether he
can or cannot vote. Here an election
officer who writes the electors number on
his ballot is poor timber if he cannot re-
member or tally the number of fifty or
sixty out of the two or three hundred
voters who cast their ballots at his booth.
He is poorer political material still if he
cannot find legal excuse-as, the charge of
double voting or personation-for examin-
ing the ballots and turning up the gummed
corners in order to ascertain if fraud"
has been committed. In that way he can
scrutinize the vote of each of the electors
who votes at his booth, and thus the
secrecy of the ballot will be destroyed
utterly.
As to detection and severe penalties, the
fear Of neither viii restrain the yenal
officer. He is doing his work for the