St. Paul daily globe., 1891-04-18
PROGRESS OF THE REFORM.

In the discussion in the house Thurs
day night, one of the advocates of the
amendment to the reform ballot act
strongly deplored the fact that partisan
considerations could not be kept out of
the composition of the measure.
whether honest or not, he was right in
viewing 1t as a measure that should
nave consideration alone upon its utility
as promoter of purity and freedom in
the elective franchise. There is no in
tentlOn to question the sincerity of this
speaker. He may have accepted the
specious plea that so late in the session
disagreement would be fatal to the
success of any measure. Others may
have been persuaded by this portrayal
OF danger to consent to the eviction of
feature thatis well nigh vital to the eff
cheney and success of the system. With
out partisan prejudice, it is worth not
ing that lii the legislatures this winter
the Republicans, as rule, stand in the
way of this reform. 1t has now been
adopted in fully half of the states. the
majority of them acting upon it for the
first time favorablv, this winter. Every
SYSTEM
in some form i'll its statutes, the last to
accept it beng Maine and New Hamp-
shire. in which it has just been carried
by the solid Democratic vote and a mi
nority of the Republicans. There was
bitter opposition by the operators of the
republican machine, as obstructive to
their operations. In Ohio, Republican
opposition has so far been able to defeat
the reform, but there is a hopeful pros
pect. This is true, also, of Illinois. In
Iowa, Kansas and pennsylvania, the
Republicans have SO far been too
strong for the friends Of the reform.
In Pennsylvania the Republicans
| pledged themselves in their platform
to adopt the measure, and the Demo-
Gratis have some hope that enough of
! them can be prOdded into its support to
secure its passage in both houses. Tile
| Republican party has usually tried to
| pose as the special custodian of this
! high prerogative of citzenShip-a free
and honest ballot. There is no hesita-
| ton III credlting the mass of the voters
OF the party with entiIe honesty in this.
Yet the fact remains that the manipu-
latorS of the party-the machine poiti-
clans-defeat the reform where they
can do so, and, when the pressure is too
strong, aim to make the machinery of
the law as ineffective and vi
cious as possible. Take the pro-
visions insisted upon in this state
and anticipate their effect. 1t is
required that the voter shall put his
cross after every name on the ticket.
The candidates of each party are i'm a
column by themselves, and if the voter
wants to give his ballot for them all, the
common provision is to put his mark at
the first name only. The majority of
voters are usually partisan enough to
vote the entire party ticket. If there
were no other considerations, it would
be a needless burden to require them to
go over fifty or sixty names and mark
each. Those who want TO pick out can
didates from opposing tickets might
very properly be required TO check all
| the names they want to vote for, but
for the straight voter it is an oppressive
and very stupid eXaction, if it is
not meant to confuse and dis
courage a class of voters. In Mas
| SachdSettS, where the voter must
| know how to read, when this
reform was first adopted the provision
was to check each name. The effect
was that on the state ticket. with but
| ten names, 1900 voters failed to get to
the bottom. There was a gradual fall
ing away after the first name. There is
| to be a presidential ticket in this state at
| the next election, with nine names Oh it
| for electors. Nobody wants to scratch
one of these candidates, but if the Mas
| sachusetts disposition has any preva-
lence among the voters it would be easy
for the last names to lose votes, and in
an election as close as that of last wear
the result might be changed on a part
of the electors. The more difficult it is
| made to vote, the greater the number
who will shirk the duty. A useless task
imposed upon the voter is grave blum
der, if due only to the obtuseness of the
lawmakers. Other objections to this
feature of the act are not now consid-
cred.