The record-union., 1891-09-17
UNJUsT1FIABLE CLASSIFICATION,

A New York magazine, the Century,
classifies the ballot reform laws of the
twenty-nine States that have now adopted
modified forms Of the Australian ballot
system. The California law is classed as
''bad,' the comparisons being good
fair, poor, bad" Searching for the
reasons upon which the California law is
stigmatized, we find that the one only
charge laid against it is that it does not
accord greater freedom for independent
nominations and individual candidates TO
get upon the official ticket. In all other
respects. therefore, we must assume that,
to the New York purist, the law is flaw
less.
The percentage of strength TO entitle an
independent party to place upon the
ticket is that it shall represent one
twentieth of the voting power on the
basis of the vote at the next preceding
general election. In other States, whose
laws are indorsed ''good" by the New
York journal, per cent. is the strength
required. So, too, the required number
of nominating petitioners necessary TO
place an individual candidate upon the
official ticket is somewhat greater in
California than in most of the States that
have adopted reform system. But if it
is for arguments sake admitted that our
ballot law is not, in these respects, suffi-
GENTLY liberal, it is still unjust to rank
our system among those worthy of being
dubbed bad" 1t appears to have been
overlooked that it was almost miraculous
that any reform law was passed at all by
the late Legislature. The opposition to it
was such that until almost the last hours
Of the session friends of the bill had very
little to encourage even a hope for its
passage. Indeed, had it not been for the
fact that the Democratic party had forced
the issue by positive pledge to pass such
a law, the bill would have been defeated
by the Republican majority. Even un-
der those conditions it could not have dis
posed of leadership opposition except by
a compromise that raised the percentage
standard of strength measurement re-
ferred to.
But it would have been a great achieve
ment had the percentage been placed
twice as high. With the old election law
embodying advantages known in but
few of the States, such as the "I0O-foot
limit within which tickets must not be
shown or their contents disclosed, and
with the uniform ballot system, it was
exceedingly difficult to convince Iegisla-
tors that a still higher class of reform
was desirable. Not all reforms are to be
accomplished at bound; in California it
would be very desirable to have the bal
lot law in the most approved form upon
our statute books, but if not every feature
deemed elsewhere essential to high ex-
cellence appears the fundamentals are
there. Our law, in insuring the COM
in depriving the boss and his lieutenants
of opportunity to cow the voter and die
tate the contents of his ballot, we have
achieved the chief purpose of the reform.
Without any reference whatever to nomi-
mating forces, the law would be an emil
nentiy good one, and as pioneer advo-
cate for it, the RECoRD-UNIoN enters its
protest against the law being stigmatized
as bad, because it is not as yet in accord
in every detail with the ideas of ex-
tremely radical reformers.