Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1896-11-20
THE LEGISLATURE.
Continued from the first page)

casion demands. There is to be no general
term of the court at Montpelier as under
the system prevailing before 1893. The
senate judiciary committee held a public
hearing on the bill this evening. Letters
were read from five of the seven Judges
including Judge Tyler, all favoring the
present system of holding court at Mont
pelier. They believed that the court could
not only do better work by having a per
manent abiding place, but that the facil-
ties afforded by the state law library were
such that the attorneys trying causes could
i'll afford to dispense with them. large
number of lawyers were heard pro and con.
taking the time till near midnight. The
chief argument favorlng the proposed
change was that 1t was now so expensive
to try cause at Montpelier, by reason of
cost of travel and time, that a man who
was not we'll to do could not afford 20 car
ry his case to the court of last appeal. A
Woodstock lawyer had a $40 fishing case
nearly ready for the supreme court, which
could never go there under the present
system because his client was poor man.
Among those who appeared against the
bill were ex-Gov. Farnham, ex-Lieutenant
Governor Dale, Speaker Lord, w, w.
Stickney, j. II. Watson and o. NJ. Barber.
Elk Gov. Pingree was among those appear
ing in favor. The sentiment of the senate
at present seems to be about equally di-
vided.
The "PurltY OF the Ballot"
A bill which has taken several hours of
the time of the house is the one providing
that when person voting at an election
calls for assistance in marking his ballot,
and has reason to think that the person
rendering the assistance has not marked
the ballot correctly, he may show the bal
lot to the presiding officer and If the officer
shall find that the marking does not CORE
spond with the voters intention he shall
so state to the voter, who may deliver back
the ballot to the ballot clerk and receive a
new ballet for another trial. The person
assisting the voter wrongfully and the pre-
siding officer are made subject to a severe
penalty for divulging the matter. The
members from the large towns and cities
quite generally voted against the bill,
claiming that it was not called for by their
constituents, while the members from
some of the smaller towns claimed that it
was needed with them to preserve the
purity of the ballot. The arguments against
the bill were, mainly, that it destroyed the
secrecy of the ballot, and that no self-re-
speeding member of the board of civil au-
thority would wish to serve at elections il
conducted on the theory that the officers
were dishonest and that their work needed
revising. The bill passed the house by
quite majority, but the senate has taken
no action.
Two Elections Bills.
House bill No. relating to bribery in
caucuses and political conventions ha:
Just reached the senate after an unusually
stormy voyage through the house. AS II
now stands 1t provides that any person at
tempting by bribery, threats, promise Of
reward or undue influence to control or al
ter the vote of any delegate in any state
congressional or county convention, or II
any caucus for choosing delegates to sucf
convention, or for choosing a candidate fol
town representative, shall be fined moi
more than 5000; also that person whit
willfully aids person who is not vote
to vote in caucus shall be fined not exceed
ing 5000; also that person who is not
legal voter, or who is not member OF tn
political party that calls caucus, WIT
shall willfully vote therein, or who shal
cast more than one ballot at a time shal
be fined; also that all delegates to conven
lions shall be elected by ballot, and on tn
ing such conventions. The house passe
the bill rather under protest, feeling tina
there was no great call for it in Vermont
but still not wanting to go on recor
against it, The same feeling will probaol
carry 1t through the senate.
The bill providing that in elections to
town representative the ballot box shout
be turned at o'clock and the person hay
ing the largest number of votes shoul
then be declared elected, came up as
special order Tuesday afternoon and wa
refused a third reading. The author
the bill. il is said, has several times taile
to receive a majority of the votes OF n
town for representative, and decided Uni
there was something decidedly wrong wit
our majority system OF election. ouccee
ing in getting to Montpelier this year,
introduced plurality election bill and n'
largely spent his time in its adVocac
Some time ago it was announced Inat
majority of the house were pledged III
favor. but when it came up for acti'
Tuesday it was found to have OuC We
small support. The author OF the D
spoke nearly an hour in its behalf, whit
doubtless partly accounted for its smi
vote. Mr.. Bunker, the representative fro
Peacham, in opposing the bill said that
felt stronger in his position in the nou
because of the knowledge that a MAJOR
of his constituents had sent him there
turns out that Mr.. Bunker was elected
the unanimous vote of his town.
bill providing for the removal OF tne st'
house fence, which passed the senate
the vote of Lieut.. Gov. Fisk, was
killed in the house Tuesday. Mr.. Pow
of Morristown did the business with
cetious speech, while no one spoke IN
vor of the bill.