The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1894-11-14

and they desire to have this ballot bear
the certificate of the proper recording
officer that it is an honest ballot, that
it is what it purports to be, and can be
voted with eyes shut without danger of
cheating the voter. They desire, it is
further assumed, that the ballot shall
be made as simple as is consistent with
efficiency in carrying out its fundamen-
tai purpose; that all quirks and compli-
cations that may confuse voters, or tend
to disfrsnchisement shall be avoided,
and they want the privilege of cast
ing this ballot under such regulations
as shall protect any voter from espion-
age by persons who may have an inter-
est of any kind in the manner of his
voting. There may be some people in
Vermont who are opposed to any law
embodying these rights and privileges,
but, if there are, it is reasonable to as
sumo that they constitute-in numbers
"a very small minority of all the peo-
pie; in influence, however, and in
power to control or shape public SEMI.
ment and action, they may be more
formidable than in numbers.
The great objection to the existing
law is not in its principle, but in
its completely and cumbersomeness.
These faults operate to disfranchise
voters. A blanket ballot like that
which confronted the voters at the late
election is something appalling to
the mass of voters. Persons who are
expert in clerical work might find no
difficulty in voting it straight" but
the great majority of voters would find
it necessary to proceed with extreme
caution in order to escape the danger
of making a mistake that would, in
whole or in part, invalidate his exercise
of the right OF suffrage. A minority, it
was shown by the result of the voting
at the last election, were unable TO
steer successfully between this Scylla
and Charybds of the legislatures Great
ing, although the way was marked by
buoys, and sunk in the seas of disfran-
chsement. 1t is no sufficient conclu-
sion of this mater to answer that a
man that couldn't mark that ballot in
accordance with the requirement of the
law should have no right to vote. This
dctum of the critics would disfranchise
some better citizens than the critics
themselves. The essential features of
the law should be retained, but they
should be rendered operative through
more simple forms and requirements.
The assembled wisdom of the state
should embody men enough of honest
and sincere purpose competent to effect
this needed simplihcation, without i'm
pairing its efficiency or despoiling it
of its virtue.
A strong protest comes up from many
of the smaller towns against the propo-
sition to limit the application of the
law to towns having a population of
1000 or more. 1t is true that in many
OF these towns the chief end OF this sys-
tenn of voting will find conditions m eet
for its application, possibly in the same
proportion as in the larger communi-
ties. The rural boss is sometimes insid-
ious in his methods and tyrannical in
his requirements, possibly quite as
much so as his urban brother. A Law
in this matter of voting that places GER
tain fundamental requirements, to Sc
cure the purity of the ballot, upon one
community must place every other
community under the same constraint
as to an honest exercise of the suffrage.
In any event, whatever changes may
be made, the state should take no retro
grade ste p so far as the principle of the
secret ballot is affected. Anything,
even the existing law, is preferable to
the split ticket, vote hawking, BULLDOG
ing and browbeating that often char
acterized an election under the old 60
as-you-please system.