St. Tammany farmer. [volume] (Covington, La.) 1874-current, 1896-01-18

tary contributions to what in truth are
sales of nominations, excuses the submis.
sion Of official patronage to the Uistribs.-
ton of the machine, provides ample cover
for collecting a corruption fund, and,
through workers" at the polls. a con-
venient channel for disbursing the fund
in bribes.-- And rs corruption funds IN.
crease, masked in increasing demands
for legitimate expenses. assessments
grow, the price of nominations rises, indie
pendence is shackled and the organization
becomes more indifferent to party prin-
strengthens. Born of the necessity Of
volunteer machinery for preparing and
distributing ballots, it develops into q
powerful instrument, which, in the hands
Of political jobbers, enables them to buy
and sell office ''as the Praetorians sold
the Roman purple" Already, poor men
rarely obtain political advancement with
out assuming obligations to be redeemed
by official perfidy, and the obstacles to
unallied candidacy have become SO great
rs often to prevent and always to dis
courage Independent nominations.
This political monster would be de
strOyed by the Australian system. If the
State assumed it's function Of providing
ballots, there would he no necessity foE
workers at the pclls, and the excuse
fer raising, as well as the hest mode OF
using, corruption funds would disappear.
Assessments could not then be levied
upcn candidates, for when workers" at
the polls are not required, machines can
neither serve nor injure. Nor would
nominations be sold: for when candidates
stand upon an equality in respect to cleo
tion machinery, and there is no oppor-
tunity for bribins voters, organizations
merely as organizations have nothing
worth buying, while organixa tons as
representatives. of principles cannot be
approached through commercial chan
nels. Trafficking in office woul! be re.
placed by political discussion, the power
Of the machine by the voice of the party.
The evils of machine organization and
summarized as follows by William NJ.
WINS. than whom TO one has done more
intelligent, energetic and effective work
for electoral reform:
THE EVIL.
1. The necessity for voluntary printing
and distributing the ballot jus.iiies organ
ixation for this purpose.
2 1t practically vests the machine with
the monopoly OF the election machinery.
3. And as q consequences. with the mo-
4 II involves the necessity Of defraying
the expenses Of both printing and dis
tribution by means Of assessments on or
contributions by candidates. cffice-holders
S. Which facilitates bribery and corrup-
tion by ahording them convenient covers.
THE REMEDY.
!. The printing and distribution OF all
ballots at public expense does away with
the necessity of organization for this pur-
pose.
:. And will deprive the political ms.
chimes OF the monopoly OF an essential
part OF the election machinery.
3 1t will enable any body OF citizens
Of the number prescribed by law to have
the name OF their candidate printed o.
the same ballot with the names OF all
candidates for the same office. SO that be.
fore the law and before the voters All
candidates and all party organizations
win stand on a perfectly even footing.
4. This will dispense altogether with the
necessity Of all excuse for levytng po-
K And leave no legal cover for brib-
70 this system it is objected that by
recurring nominations to be made in adj
vance Of elections il denies a constitG ION
al right of voters to select candidates
from the whole body of voters. From
such eminent authority as Judges Cooley,
McCrary and Folger. and the highest
courts Of Pennsylvania, Massachusetts,
and New York, it may he safely inferred
that a restriction Of the franchise to can
didates nominated q short time before
election is a reasonable regulation and
not an unconstitutional interference; but
the inference is not necessary, since the
system allows each voter to reject all
ballot.
1t is objected, also. that BY requiring
the blind to expose their vote to election
officers. secrecy of the ballot il, as to
them, violated. Under our present sys-
tenn voting is not secret; it was, ficr that
reason, rejected by the British Parlia-
ment. and the Australian system adopted.
The object, now, 10 to secure secrecy. but
in aiming at that We are confronted with
class Of voters to whom exposure of
their ballots to somebody is necessary.
and m exception must be made in their
favor to prevent their disfranchisement.
What form which shah Be consistent with
the highest degree Of secrecy can that ex.
ception take? II allowed to carry their
ballots away, these voters fall into the
hands of irresponsible and perhaps Gis-
honest persons. and may b made. limo
Gently or Otherwise. insnumeuts for per
petiatirg some form az tho ~Taxmanian
dodge" II, for their benedt, Official bal
lots are generally circulated, all efforts tog
secrecy are frustrated. Aud If they are
permittcd to take I ''friend" into the
booth door is opened for the bribery Of
fully pretend to Be. unable 70 read Ec-
s3ish. Exposure Of ballots Unse - NJ.
sented II avesy Means that lnoo6aD1y