The Portland daily press., 1890-11-27
The Count under the Federal Election

t@e Count under the Federal Election
alh.
In the logical and admirable letter pub.
hsheo yesterday morning Senator Roar de-
votes few OF his most brilliant paragraphs
70 the young Mugwlmpr Democrats who left
tne Republican party In the 1884 campaign
ana VINO have since furnished the brains end
resources OF teo1 Democratic party in Massa.
cnusessls. Speaking OF the points upon which
the Young Massachusetts Democrat who goes
20 Congress next year will be obliged to take
his position, Senator Hoar supposes the
federal election bill to have been passed by
this Congress, and then asks:
VIII he dare repeal the law to submit the prima
facia title IT, seats in the House of Representa-
lives to the peaceful decision of the courts of the
UniteG States If We pass 1t this winter; and bring
back again Inc reign Of the shotgun and the tissue
balots
The question brings out in few words the
fallacy of the great objection to the federal
election bill, or "lorce bill" as 1t is miscalled.
Ask the average Maine Democrat to-day
what the "foree bill" is and he will probably
tell you.that it is bill to surround the voting
places with United States troops in order
that federal officials may be protected in
counting the votes as they may wish. Were
the election bill such measure, Senator
Hoar and every other conscientious Re-
publican would be against it. Then what is
the elections bill? Senator Hoar's question
answers 1t. We can answer 1t more fully by
explaining how the bill would work in
Maine Town If it should be invoked in
Maine election. Take the town of Deering
for an example. Whenever congressional
election is held, the selectmen preside over
the voting, determining what men are
entitled to vote, counting the votes and CO.
operating with the town clerk in making
return OF the vote TO the Governor of the
State. To carry out the illustration suppose
for an instant that a large number of
the voters OF Deering believe that the select
men and clerk make fraudulent returns to the
Governor and Council for partisan purposes
and they invoke the FEEDER ection law,
which we will suppose tosb- the statute
books. What happeDss Are the Deering
selectmen turned out of the desk or CON-
PEELED to surrender any rightful control over
the ballot box, perhaps by troops? Not at
all. Are they robbed of any of their rights
or prerogatiyes? Not at all. The United
States authority simply puts three addition
al election judges, two of one party and a
third Of the other, into the desk, to cooper
ate with the selectmen, count the votes and
with the clerk make the usual return to the
Governor. Then the United States super
visors also count the votes and make their
returns to the United States election super
visor. If both the Deering selectmen and
the United States judges have been honest
both returns will show thu same result. If
either party has been dishonest, or there has
been some blunder in the count, the returns
will differ. What then is to be done9 Our
Democratic friends have an idea that the re-
turns of the selectmen are to be rejected and
those Of the United States judges retained.
This is not at all true. If the returns differ
they are to be taken to court of the United
States. and there, under judicial investi-
CATION, 1t will be determined where the re-
sponsibilty for the dishonesty or the blunder
lies. This is how the Federal election bill
would operate in Maine town. 1t would
operate In the same way in South
Carolina, excepting that there are no select
men there, the State election judges being
appointed by the Governor, who appoints
Democrats entirely and refuses to allow the
Republicans to have even one of the three
men who receive and count the ballots at
each polling place.
Tcis is the Federal Election bill Like the
law against stealing, 1t is trouble to Of
tenders; but will harm no honest man,