The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1895-12-05
lst. As the law stands. . community.

4. yQto want or skilled advice. may be isx
= or extreme in precautionary measures.
! One city or town may. for fear OF injury
| to its business or commercial interests.
delay too long or suard imperfecdy. While
another city or town may become panic
stricken and act too hastily or radically.
Very many. perhaps all. Of the States,
exclusive Of Virginia. have boards OF
health. clothed with powers Of a practical
| character. and they are supported by fp-
| propriations Massachusetts appropriates
about $4,000: Illinois about $1,000: Ala
hama. sl3.ooo: Maryland. $500: North
| Carolina $500. South Carolina, 5000;
| Tennessee, 5000. Our statute provides
| expressly that our board "shall not Ia
any way be charge upon the State"
desire. i'm connection with the quest!oA
of public health, to direct you 90 tho
! consideration of the dangers that exist
from the breaking out OF infections and
! contagious in the penitentiary and jails
of the Commonwealth. There Is no au-
| thority to remove n convict or prisoner
from either who may contract cont0-
| gious disease. He cannot be taken from
! the prison walls TO an isolated place. but
must remain and possibly contaminate
the prison, unless II a felon or a prson~
! err under sentence for misdcmeanor, he ia
| pardoncd by the Governor, or. # a prison.
| er awaiting trial he Is discharged by tile
| court.
recommend that the Governor he au-
! thorized. upon the application of the Su-
| perintendent of the Penitentiary. or The
TAILOR of any county or city, 10 lirect
the removal of any felon or prisoner sery-
! ing a term, who may have contracted
| dangerous and contagious disease, 10
some place TO be designated by the SUI
perintendent or jailor In his application.
fer treatment, 10 be returrcl to the peni-
l,. f,.s1 ttH4IfH q
unless the term OF said feon or prisoner
shall have expired.
| recommend that similar authority 10
conferred upon the judges in the cases
OF prisoners awaiting trial
THE NEW ELECTION LAW.
The act approved March s. ,s9i. enti-
tied IAN act to provide fer the method OF
voting by ballot" and known as Tho
Walton law" has been vigorously as
called and earnestly defended.
I have given tse act careful considerd-
ton. and, in the performance Of my duty,
| shall express my views plainly and
frankly. The object Of all election lava
SHOULD be the ecurement OF ORDER It the
polls. and q free and untrammelled. pure,
and unpufchased, expression ot the VIII
of the people. through the medium OF The
ballot box.
II must be conceded that the system
which had prevailed In Virginia FOR years
prior 10 1894 had utterly failed 20 accom-
rlish the object just stated. " cannot
be denied that there had been much ,on-
fusion and disorder al tho voting places,
and that large sums OF money had been
used I'm every election TO corrupt voters
by all political parties and mems bal
lots had been purchased like stocks IN
the market. II cannot be denied that the
! weak in Will had been controlled by the
strong that they had been unduly In
nucnced and compelled for fear of class
or race. ostracism or persecution, TO re-
fleet the will OF others, not their own,
and deprived OF the free exercise OF the
right OF suffrage.
That this condition of sfails should
cease In the interests OF our institutions
had long been apparent to every honest
and right-thinxing citizen. The General
| Assembly. fully appreciating the danger
I to our institutions, which had been IN
creasing year by year. undertook tne
task Of reforming our laws Ia the m
terest OF pure elections, and the Wal
ton act was the result OF the combinei
effort and wisdom OF a majority OF the
Representatives.
Has the act accomplished the purpose
for which II was intended
| II has surely secured quiet. reaceabie,
and orderly elections. The excitement
confusion. and disorder. ana the badger
ing. pulling. and hauling Of voters lhat
prevailed to such "A disgusting extent,
have ceased II has rendered the use
OF money impossible, for the Vehal voter
can no longer be led to the polls by him
who has contracted for MS vote IL
has certainly secured the free, untram-
melted. and Impoverished ballot OF every
voter of Ordinary intelligence, for when
ne enters the booth he IS exempt from
J intimidation and the infiu- nee OF money,
class. and race and there prepares MS
own ballot with his own hand under
his own eye and none other
So far, the effect OF the Walton law
must meet with the hearty support OF
every citizen who values orderly elections,
! condemns the use OF money az the polls,
and desires a free Intrdmmellcd and
unpurchased expression of the VIII or
the people.
Now. as 10 the voters who are phys
ically or educationally unable 10 vote.
The statute provides that special con-
stable. who shall be an honest and dis
Greet person, and be able 10 read and
write" shall be appointed for each poll
ing-place in the State who. after being
duly sworn 10 faithfully discharge his
duty. shall "at the request Of any cleo
tor who may be physically or education
ally unable 10 vote render the eiector
such assistance as may be necessary III
preparing his ballot
II is 10 this provision OF the law mat
the most strenuous objection Is made by
the opponents OF the act IL IS commended
that under IL illltcrate and blind voters
are placed az the mercy OF the special
constable. This Is true. but ever since
the ballot system was adopted In virginia,
until the passage OF the Walton law All
mifcrate and blind voters were cOmpeh-
ed 10 rely upon others VINO were not ori-
GERS and were not under oath. 10 pre-
mare their ballots The Walton law
gives them a sworn officer. under heavy
penalty instead of a private citizen, un-
hound by the sanctity Of an oath There
can be no force in the objection 10 the
provlsion-only on the assumption that
the official, being Of Tho opposite party
of the voter. would probably prepare ne
ballot contrary TO the directions OF the
voter. in other words. that the speciai
constable, being Democrat or Repuph-
can. as the case may be, will likely pf-
, iure himself In the interests OF his
marty. This Is 4 most violent assuInp-
ton and. II carried TO lis logical con-
, cIusiOn. would cast discredit upon every
Judge who presides. and every witness
who testllies, IN a contested-elecron case
or other matter OF a political nature. II
would be TO hold that a judge cannot
, be trusted, nor a witness believed "v-
cause he may be corrupted, or may com
, nit perjury to subserve party ends ms
Is more than am willing 70 assume.
THE OBJECTION
Does the experience we nave had IN tho