The record-union., 1891-02-17
SOME PLAIN QUESTIONS PLAINLY
STATED.

An Assemblyman is reported in print
to have said that the reform ballot
method, or Australian ballot system, is
"a conspiracy against republican and
democratic principles" That is simply
silly-we are unwilling to believe that
any Assemblyman made any such idiotic
| expression. But since the gentleman is
named, we assume the story to be true
for the purpose of argument only.
Let us see what the facts are. l. The
| reform system substitutes for party bal
lots uniform ballot, printed by author
ity, bound in book form with stubs, and
so Identified as to prevent counterfeiting
| 2. Upon it all candidates names are
placed, and if political parties ask it,
their candidates are separately grouped
upon it. 8. It provides that the elector
shall receive this ballot free from the in
termeddling dictation or threats of
ticket-peddlers; shall in quiet and privacy
indicate upon the ballot his choice of men,
and returning to the box, prove the
identity OF the ballot given him by its
exposed number This is detached and
he then casts his ballot as a free man
should.
Now wherein is this process anti
republican or undemocratic? Does it
deny the inalienable right to worship
God according to the dictates of con-
science? Does it invade the right to en-
joy life and liberty, and to pursue hap
piness2 Docs it curtail the right in court,
to sue or be sued, to marry and give in
marriage, to acquire and bequeath prop
erty, to freely speak, write and print
opinions, to criticise officials, to vote for
ones choice for officers Of the Govern
ment? Does it in any way invade the
rule of the majority, or in anywise change
the relation of the citizen to the Govern
ment, or to his fellow men?
But, perhaps, the nominating scheme
of the bill is un-democratic and antago-
nistic to republican principles. Let us
see about that. l. 1t provides that par
ties may nominate as they do now. 2.
That independent candidates may be
suggested by certain numbers of electors.
3. That both classes shall, on due authen-
tication Of such nominations, have the
candidates names placed upon the bal
lots. 4. But, to close the faintest loop
| hole for objection, it is provided that
blanks shall be left on every ballot under
every title of office to be voted for, broad
and long enough for any elector to write
in the name of any one he chooses to vote
for, whether nominated or not, or certi-
fed or not, and that every written name
thus inserted shall be counted.
| Now we submit to the Assemblyman
that this cuts short no mans right, in no
wise invades any privilege, guarantee or
duty as a citizen. That it does not op-
press, limit or dictate to voter. That it
does not prevent political party at any
time, even during the progress of the
election, from notifying its partisans pre-
cisely as it can do now, by print, by
voice. by circular, poster or otherwise, to
write in certain names instead of mark
ing the printed ones.
Let us ask the Assemblyman wherein
in the law, the ticket peddler is affirma-
lively recognized? Whence came he
OF what statute was he born? Whence
came the practice of crowding about the
polls and blocking the passage so that
voters cannot reach the ballot-boxes
Whence came the 'sright'' to seize upon
timid men, force ballots into their hands,
drag them to the polls and compel them
to deposit the ballots?
Whence came the practice of ''spott1ng''
men, giving them ballots and compelling
them to keep them in view until dropped
in the box, under threat of depriving
them of their livelihood if they dare
TO substitute another for the ballot de-
livered? Yet all these practices are COM
mon; if not in the Assemblyman's city,
they are IN this and nearly all other cities.
Are these practices American, demo-
cratic, republican, and so sacred that the
reform method must not trespass upon
| them?
But the reform ballot system is not the
Australian system, because the officers OF
the election are not non-voters, as they
are in Australia; the ballots under the
Senate Committee billy are not indorsed
| by the clerks, as in Australia; the
counting of the votes is done in the pres
ence of witnesses; the ballots are pre-
served for recounting, and not destroyed
In short, the reform ballot system is
neither better nor worse for its initial
principle having been introduced in Aus
traia. Our laws sprang from foreign
sources; the spirit Of our constitution had