The record-union., 1896-11-07
THE BALLOT LAW.

We have no intention of impugning
tina motives OF our San Francisco con-
temporary, the Chronicle" We con-
oeda st To be sincere in It's views regard
ing the ballot law. But it will be re-
called that when the law was proposed
ttse 'Chronicle" bitterly and persist
ezSslyccposed Its adoption. It has never
glxou II any friendly glances since. In
thas Il has maintained it's consistency,
ana wekh that no one can find fault.
e9Dw that the election is over the
''Cnroutcle" returns to consideration Of
the sdsction Law. which 1t terms the
Awstzs.Ean ballot system, and claims
thS4 Us value az q medium for arriving
at the real sentiments OF voters was not
Demonstrated on Tuesday. The objec-
t1ons to the system our contemporary
raiaeE are that there Ia lack OF sirn-
pItnsty IN the preparation Of the ballots,
and as result many voterS are per-
picked. For instance some thought they
were voting for all the Republican cleo
tors when they voted for David A. Nc
Ktnlay. one of the electors, mistakfng
his name for that of the President-elect.
Again, great many voters ignored the
electoral ticket altogether, and others
mtstook the constitutional amendmen$
concerning city charters for the voting
space for and against the new city char
ter for San Francisco.
Perhaps we should ignore these objec-
tfons by our contemporary since 1t ap-
proves warmly Of the suggestion that
chs ballot or voting machine shall sup
plant the Australian system How
even, II Is well, since the subject will
be q prominent ors before the Legisla-
ture about TO convene, to point out the
ez-sor of ths argument Of the "Chron-
lola" Ln the frSt place what we have is
nca the Australian system. We have
moasae.a that system and changed It 50
THAI &C loses several original features.
This paper was the hrst TO suggest
sas adoption OF the Australian system.
and fcr some years was the only paper
to o1rrtend for It II made a thorough
study OF the system and advocated 1t
wsYn the knowledge of its practical
~ayse1ng In Australia We conceded
then. and do now, that as used in that
usauu&zy 1t would NOT be satisfactory
hcnA But the great essentials we have,
nsussdy. Che ballot clerks. the guard rail-
aszf chs inolosed booth.
The Record Union" has all along in
&aann that the Indiana system Is the
razn Of all, because Ii provides for vot-
ir@ cay g group. or an entire political
fsx, by having each political ticket ap-
p1sx un4s eT q distinctive heading. and all
fns tickets In parallel columns on the
eaIpx Thus the voter. however slow Of
Intelligence or stupid. could scarcely
mistake, and ND voter would be deprived
of rAs right to pick out individuals and
vote for whomsver he chose.
We have seen al. however 20 place our
oandsdaaes' names In alphabetical order
and afix political initials to indicate
tl1eeS party faith. The only exception re-
isxes TO rres.den Electors, which
Must appear IN group. No system is
rexpunssbie for the failure OF a voter to
ooauposasssad tho ballot He who votes
exxRn4 - be fn1elhgent enough to read
sbeonmos and ehs directions on the bal
ic4. II no does 80 he can scarcely make
arx rafstaka. II he votes for but one
ei1ctnY. when the black letter instruc-
taan before him tells him to vote for
nina he has no one to blame but him
ssn. That order Of voters will be just
m utsxuid when they stand before the
vuefnx machine with the list Of candi-
daaas staring them in the face, and a
knob or button opposite each name.
Ths ballot system as we have It, then,
.s not blameworthy for the failure of
voters to comprehend. Precisely the
sanao difficulty will appear, no matter
what system we adopt, because 1t is not
possible to ier.siate comprehension into
any intelligence
TIA "Chrunicls" claims that In tts