The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1891-02-03
The Important Question.


1t is entirely Improbable, because need:
less, to speculate as to the manner In which
the Australian system will work. The Aus.
tralian system is no longer an experiment.
1t has been tried in half dozen different
States, and wherever 1t has been introduced
in its original form 1t has proved an unquali-
fed success. In New York tho system was
complicated somewhat by the separate bal
lot amendment and the provision for pas
tiers, and In Connecticut modification some
thing similar to that proposed by Representa-
tive Thayer was adopted which has failed TO
work as well as was hoped. But wherever
the system was introduced. as In Massachu-
sets, In its original form, unamended by
demagogues. who were seeking to make it
unpopular or to interpose obstacles In its
path, there has been no cause for complaint
either on account Of cumbersomeness or
completely or cost 1t is waste of time
and breath, therefore, for the friends Of the
Clason bill to undertake to prove that the
System is practical and readily understood
by the voter.
The only question which is Of any impor-
lance is whether this system will conduce to
purer elections than the existing method, for
If it will certainly every honest man must
advocate 1t. OF course If, as some contend,
our elections at present are above reproach.
If, as some contend, there is no bribery, no
intimidation, no improper means used to af-
feet the voters, then they are pure already,
and OF course do not need publication. But
II, on the other hand, bribery and intimida-
tion are practiced, then 1t becomes impor-
tant to determine whether the Australian
system will diminish these corrupt prac-
tlces. AS to the facts about the character of
our elections, we do not intend to argue
long. The last legislature admitted prac-
tically that bribery existed and that 1t
was on the increase inasmuch as 1t
imposed new penalties on the briber and the
persons bribed. In 1880 the Republicans
claimed that three or four thousand votes
were changed by the liberal use of money.
The Democrats have alleged bribery and
intimidation at almost every election since'
that date. No doubt charges Of bribery and
intimidation made by party smarting under
defeat are liable to be much exaggerated, and
should be received with caution. Yet we,
are inclined to think that no man who Is
familiar with elections In this State will un-
dertake to deny that there is some bribery
and some intimidation. The extent of either
1t Is impossible of course to determine. Ad-
mitting then the existence of corrupt prsc-
tices the question remains, Will the Austria
liam system tend to diminish them? The
question has so frequently been asked and
answered that 1t seems hardly necessary to
answer 1t again. In order to intimidate
man into voting certain way 1t is absolute
ly necessary to be able to determine how he
does VOTE Under the Australian system
this cannot be known, and therefore intimi-
dation is impossible. As for bribery the
friends of the system do not claim that It
will be as potent against that as against in
timidation, but they do claim that it will
tend to diminish 1t inasmuch as people will
hesitate to pay for goods. whether the goods
be flour or voters, without their delivery is
fairly well assured. Under the Australian
system the briber can never know whether
the bribed has kept his part of the contract
or not. Therefore as compared with an open
system of voting where 1t was possible al
ways to determine this fact the Australian
system must be far more preventive against
bribery.
These are only two Of the advantages that
will follow from the Australian system,
There are many others quite as important.
But this ouoght to be enough to secure its
adoption by Maine legislature