The record-union., 1892-01-14
a CRITIC CRITICISED.

Mr.. J. B. Bishop, who wrote the
article in The Forum for January upon
1.-THE Secret Ballot in Thirty-three
States" writes to say that the RECORD
UNION mistakes his objection to the Cali
fornia ballot law. He does not base his
criticism upon the fact that a separate
municipal ticket is required, distinct
from the State ticket. He objects to the
apparent discrimination in our law
against the Independent voter. From
which we infer that he holds the clause
discriminating requiring five per cent
of the voters to petition in order to secure
place on the ballot for the independent
candidate, and that certificates of nomi-
nations shall be filed, if by conventions,
not less than forty, if by petition, not less
than thirty days prior to election, if for
State officers; if for county aud city
elections, twenty and thirty days
are the latest dates of filing. That
clause is not, it is true, all it should be.
but it is not so oppressive as may at first
appear, since in this State it would have
been impossible to secure the passage of a
reform ballot at all without conceding the
five per cent. to the opposition. But that we
werejustified in excepting to Mr.. Bishops
article is shown by the following extract
from it, which lacks clearness as to Just
what Mr.. Bishop means in clubbing our
law poor" He says:
The Pennsylvania law is second only to the
New York statute in the unfairness shown to
independent and thiTd-party candidates II
provides for blanket-ballot with the names
OF the candidates Of regular parties arranged
IN groups With the party name at the top
out requires the names of all other candidates
10 De arranged in alphabetical order IN a COM
mon group at the end of the ticket In addi-
Ilon 10 these determinations, il REQUIRES all
independent and third-party nominations 10
1e made so far in advance of election and un-
DER such conditions as to amount to q practi-
cal prohibition. This law is indeed an excel
lent illustration of the kind of statute which
tricky politicians consent to have enacted
when they desire TO bring into contempt the
reform Wnlch1t processes to enbody.
similar spirit is visible in the California
Jaw, IN winch most unjust discrimination is
haue against independent candidates, and
winch In some respects is q unique measure
IL provides for two blanket ballots one called
general ticket" and the other a .snIn ic1paI
Llcket." On each the names of all candidates
are TO be grouped in alphabetical order, and
they must be printed on paper of differing
UNITS, AT the top of each ballot the names of
ali the parties which have candidates below
are TO be arranged in a column and any
elector who desires to vote a straight ticket
without taking the trouble to mark the name
OF each candidate can indicate his choice by
placing single mark opposite the party
name. >
1t will be observed that. aft all, the
law is fairer than Mr.. Bishop oncedes,
since nominations by conventit ms are re-
quired to be made earlier than nomina-
tons by petition. Moreover, in a State
of such distances as in this it is necessary
that longer time should be given in which
to certify nominations, in order that the
notices to voters and the distribution of
ballots to Boards of Election may be
effected. The trouble with Mr.. Bishops
essay is that he does not specify what he
considers ''far in advance of election. -
We have disposition to be strictly Just to
the Forums essayist, but he will perceive
that the extract we quote is lacking in
detail necessary to save it from being
dogmatic.