New-York tribune., 1890-04-01
THE TETO OF THE SAHTON BILL.

THE TETO or THE SAXTON BILL.
For the third time David i. Hill has de-
monstrated his subscrviency 10 the worst ele-
ments of his party by using his veto to prevent
ballot reform. The SaXton bill, which he
killed yesterday, was one of the most excel
lent measures ever presented to a legislative
BODY. II was absolutely partisan it was
i'm The interest of all the honest voters of the
state: il met a great popular want; an over
whclming public sentiment was behind 1t, and
with the exception of the bosses who make a
living Out of politics it encountered little op-
position. Nor was ii open to the criticism or
being an experiment. lt had been put TO the
proof SO far from being an experiment. If
was in its essential features the reproduction
of plan Of voting which has long been in sue
cessrul operation. 1t was modelled upon what
is known as the Australian system. and that
system. as intelligent persons are aware, is
pronounced Try all who have tested il one Of the
most effective safeguards ever placed around
the balot-boX. This is the bill which Coy
crnor Hill vetoed last evening, having first en-
dcavoTcd to Shirk his responsibility by an ABB
Smd proposition, manifcStly made i'll bad faith,
to refer it to the Court Of Appeals
The reasons which the Governor assigns for
committing this Outragc-it is tlSt that-upOn
the people whose veal he has swOin to serve
TO the best of his ability, are substantially the
same as those which he employed las year
If the bill had not contained the provision pro-
hibting the use of all ballots except those
furnished at the public expense, he would prob
ably have signed ii. OF cOulSe-hc is in favor
of ballot reform which does not reform. IN
examination of the literature ON this subject
proves that the exclusive official ballot is
fundamental part of the reform its very corner
stone Take that out of the SaXton bill and
the heart is taken out of it. a party ballot,
rs the author Of the bill forcibly renlrkcd in
a recent paper contributed to 1.-The North
American Review" cannot be a secret ballot.
One Of the cardinal principles Of ballot reform
is that no ballot should be allowed to 90 out
side the pollng-place. and that no ballot should
be valid that comes from outside. The pro-
vision that places part>ans in charge OF the
ballot booth gives poll-worlers the opportunity
they seek OF aSccrtaining what party ballot the
voter selectS' But the Governor argues that
he believes the eXCluaNe official ballot is un-
constitutional. The pretence is dishonest
one. on his own admission. The very fact that
he proposed to submit the bill TO the Appeals
bench demonstrates that he was in doubt IN
regard TO its conSt;utonaliy. II he was not
in doubt il was his sworn duty TO veto it, and
being in doubt. it clearly became him 10 yield
his judgment TO those Of the ninctyone repre-
,entatives of The people who said by THEN votes
that they did no, regard the measure a> beng
in conflict with the Constitution. d" ! have 40
pride of opinion in this matter" the Governor
wrote in proposing reference to the Court Of
Appeals. If it had not been for his pride or
something worse. he would have approved the
measure and left i, to tho courts 10 pas upon
It's constitutionality when that question was
raised. Does the Governor forget his action OH
the Mcfvoy Elevator bill OF 1855? lie signed
that measure, although in the memorandum
fled with the bill he wrote: :" II must be- ad
mttcd that there may exist some doubt aS 10
the constitutiona!ity OF the bill or portions
thereof. II may be that tho clause IN
the first s"ction j. OF doubtful OK
pcdicncy and impcl.s the cOnst!tutiOnahty OF
the measure. bat this j. also contested qucs-
ton for the courts" If the Governor was not
"A, heart hostile 70 ballot reform undoubtedly
he would have made a similar disposition Of
the ~aXtOn bill.
There i, nojhinc else in the veto message
that merits serious consideration. lh" petit
fogging talk Of last year 70 the effect that the
bill would d~iIauchi>c illitclatc voters is re-
heated. What j, the truth? That the llll
would prove a positive blessing 10 that class
who. under our present defective election laws,
fall an easy prey to the ScoundIcls who hang
around the polls II would keep them ont ol
the clutches Of the bosses and give them the
gudance and protection Of The sworn officers
of the law. The Governors assertion that II
the bill passed thousands Of llitcmie voters
would refrain from going 70 the polls Is en-
firciy unwalantablc Statistics show that the
adoDtion Of the Australian system has never
ploduced such a result. Equally untcnahlc IS
tie Governors conception Of the ballot. lis
aroumont on thi, feature Of the bill j. exceed
iuely abOrod not al all convincing. and has
olre9dv been demolished. The other points
which Nh I.ll makes are or minor importance,
and would never have been Insisted upon by
an Executive who was not hard pressed for
reasons upon which to base Il veto. l'y de-
stroying this great reform measure. he has sim
,,lv succeeded in making bad reputation
worse. lie has emphasized the fact that 50
lonp as he remains Governor the balOt-bOX shall
M, lc saved from its enemies WhskcyS
Governor is the bosses Governor.
----------~-v.--------