The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1891-06-10
WEDNESDAY. JUNE 10. 1891.
TWELVE PAGES.
The Democracy and Ballot Reform.


For sublime assurance and unblushing
mendacity, the Fort Wayne Gazette,
edited, we believe, by an ex-minister OF
the gospel, certainly takes the prize. In
o recent issue it said:
Ohio has recently adopted the Austria
ian system for its election, and, as was
the case in Indiana, considerable Opposl-
ton has been manifested toward il on the
ground of expense, etc. This opposition,
gust as in our OWn state, and as was the case
In New York and wherever else the re-
form has been suggested or enacted, has
come mainly from the democratic party
When it is remembered that the Aus
sTalian system was introduced into Indiana
by legislature strongly democratic in
both branches, receiving the vote OF every
democratic representative, and OF every
democratic senator, save one that half of
the republican senators and members
voted against it, and the other hall resisted
1t until it was finally put upon its passage;
that the agitation for the reform was be-
gun by THE INDIANAPoLIsS SENTINEL the day
after the Harrison-Dudley blocks of-fve
election in Indiana, and continued without
o days intermission until the law had
been placed on the statute books; that the
republican press of the state. under the
leadership of the Indianapolis Journal
denounced the bill. both before and after
It's passage, In the strongest terms that
since it went into effect republican poll
ticians have caused its constitutionality to
be questioned, in and out of the courts
when all this is remembered the gall of the
Gazette in saying that the opposition to
ballot reform in this state came mainly
from the democrats will be recognized as
monumental.
Equally false are its assertions as TO the
opposition to ballot reform in other states.
In Maine and New Hampshire the repub-
Iican leaders have bitterly fought the re-
form. They defeated it in both states re-
peatedly, and it was finally passed in both
OF them despite their bitter opposition,
receiving all the democratic votes, with
Just enough votes from republicans who
were coerced by public opinion into disobe-
dience to the bosses to make the required
number. In Pennsylvania the democratic
party has been fighting for years for ballot
reform, but the republican party, under
the lead Of Quay and CAMERON, has
blocked it. At this very moment an earn
est struggle is being made in the Pennsyl-
vania legislature by the democratic
minority reinforced by a handful of re-
publicans, 10 pass a reform measure, but
the powerful republican machine Is
against the bill, and if it passes at all it
will be In an emasculated shape.
All over the country-North, South,
East and West-the democratic party is
in line for ballot reform and has been
since HENRY GEORGE began to urge the
Australian system upon the country. In
New York a few Tammany politicians
antagonized the reform and induced
Governor HILL to throw some obstacle in
its path. But with the exception of HILL
no democrat of prominence has opposed
the reform movement. CLEVELAND, GRAY,
PATTIsoN, PALMER, CAMPBELL and nearly
every other democratic leader in the
country has warmly advocated it. BLAINE,
CAMERON, Quay, CLARKsoN, FRYE, CHAND-
LER, HALE, Tom REED, BUCKLEY, HAL
STEAD and score of other republicans of
national reputation have fought it desper-
ately. THE SENTINEL was the first daily
newspaper in the country to make an
earnest campaign in behalf of this great
reform, but all the other important demo-
cratic newspapers quickly fell into line.
and the democratic press of the country,
from one end to the other, has long been
q unit in support of the reform. A num-
Der of leading republican newspapers,
such as the Commercial Gazette of Cincin-
natl, have, on the contrary opposed it.
The record of the two parties is pretty
well made up on this question. A small
element in the democratic party has OPP
posed the reform and a small element in
the republican party has favored if. But
the main support OF the movement has
naturally come from the democratic
party, because, for one reason, it had the
most to gain from it, while, just as nat
urally, the bulk OF the opposition has
come from the party which had the most
30 lose from 1.-THE party of QUAY, DUD-
LEY, CLARKsoN and WOODS.