The record-union., 1891-03-03
BALLOT REFORM.
No Decent Argument Has Been Made
Against 1t.
Answers to Some of the Ridiculous
Statements Put
Forth.

advocacy Of ballot reform has left little to
be said on the subject; but the specious
opposition and cunning misconstructions
of the proposed law seem to make few
further suggestions in its defense neces-
sary.
The San Francisco Chronicle of this
morning repeats its oft answered charges
that the new Act will promote ''piece
clubs" vote buying and ''bossism,'' and
Mr.. Dibble has had scarecrow sample
ballot, of enormous size, printed, repre-
senting his fragrant misconstruction OF
the provisions of the Act relating to the
form of the ballot, and his fanciful antici-
patton of the hosts of office-seekers who
will secure nominations by petition un-
der the new Act.
l cannot imagine, and no one has yet
shown, what possible extortion could be
practiced, or what possible service could
be rendered by a piece club under the
proposed law. Whom could it black
mail? Whom could it help? Certainly
cause his place, on the single official bal
lot, would be assured by his single
nomination, and a dozen nominations
could secure nothing more for him. Why
should man not otherwise nominated
pay for piece club nomination, when,
if his friends were sufficiently numerous
to justify the slightest hope of his cleo
ton he could be easily nominated by
petition without expending dollar?
Would candidate buy the votes of the
piece club? Who would satisfactorily
vouch for the delivery of the goods?
What candidate will pay for a vote on the
uncorroborated testimony of a vote-seller
that he has delivered his vote?
= But the Chronicle says the vote seller
will swear that he is illiterate, and thus,
by securing assistance of any one of the
officers of election that he may choose
(Act, Section 30, in the marking of his
ballot, furnish to the purchaser of his
vote the proof of his infamous service.
This involves, first, securing on the
Election Board of every precinct in
which votes are to be bought an officer,
in league with the vote buyer, and base
enough and bold enough for the service:
and second, a corrupt voter, whose abil-
ity to read is not sufficiently known to
endanger his prosecution for the felonious
perjury which he is hired to commit.
These are the only conditions under
der the Act, and their difficulty and dam
ger will certainly reduce that now uni
versally prevalent crime to minimum.
If the new Act will promote bossism
why are the foolish bosses opposing it ?
Are they less keen in appreciating its
effect upon their interests than is the ed
itor of the Citr0nicte2 The new Act in
vests small minority of any party
with power to scopper'' any vicious
or unsatisfactory nomination, made
by a boss, by the nominations of more
popular and respectable member of the
same party for the same office, without
expense, and without the necessity OF
nominating candidate for any other
office. VIII that increase or diminish the
power of the men who manipulate con-
ventions? To give the answer would be
an insult to the intelligence of your read
ers. The question is capable of but one
answer.
''Ah," says Mr.. Dibble, "but the facility
with which nominations can be made by
petition will cause host of candidates to
arise whose names will overload the
ticket and make it unwieidy." The uni
versal experience under similar laws is
that the number of independent candi-
dates is diminished instead of being in
creased.
The reason of this is plain. Independ-
ent nominations are now made princi-
pally because of the trickery of machine
politicians in manipulating conventions
and forcing the nomination of candidates
who are unworthy or unsatisfactory to
which the party stands, and who are moi
willing to vote with the opposition. They
may be dissatisfied with only one or two
candidates, and, under the proposed law,
they would make only one or two nomi-
nations; whereas, under the present law,
they must, nominate or indorse full
ticket, and must print and work it sepa-
rately.
ssThe very facility for independent nom
inations, afforded by the proposed law.
serves as a wholesome check upon the
trlcllery of conventions, and does away
with the cause and necessity for indie
pendent nominations.
Again, regular Independent parties,
which are contending for certain princi-
pies without immediate prospect of sue
cess, are now obliged, unwillingly, to
nominate or indorse candidates for many
offices in which they have no interest
and for which they would make no nom-
nations under the new law.
Mr.. Dibble, the leading opponent of the
measure, expresses the further fear that
it Will cause a disintegration of the two
great parties OF the country. He does not
seem to appreciate the great fundamental
principle upon which all countries divide
into two great parties-the party Of con-
servatism and the party of change
Corruption and chicanery will disinte-
CRATE parties as they are now disinte-
grating our parties, but the freedom and
facility for checkmating fraud within the
parties afforded by the bill in question
will correspondingly tend to consolidate
and strengthen each.
Mr.. Dibble's expressed fears concern
ing the effect of the bill are mythical.
The dangers which he no doubt sincerely
believes to lurll in the measure are, nj
most, mere possibilities, against the real
ization of which experience shows that
the natural impulses and motives of hui
man nature are sufficient check. But
with him these possibilities are all terri
bic realities. Heimagines his own yearn-
ing for office firmly fixed i'll the breast OF
every citizen, native and naturalized, and
then, in his patriotic terror, he naturally
mistakes the quick and strong pulsations
ofhis own frightened heart, for the tramp.
tramp, tramp of mighty army of ad-
yancing, candidates principally foreign
laborers), all conspiring to exterminate
the Republican and Democratic parties
both OF which he dearly loves, and one OF
which he loves very dearly
JAMES G. MAGUIRE.
Sacramento CAL March ID