The record-union., 1897-02-12
THE VOTING MACHINE PROPOSE
TION.

The question has arisen in the matter
of adopting the voting machine whether
that and the ballot law can both re-
main. 1t is understood that the law
officer of the State thinks that either
one or other must obtain, but that both
must be general, one and not dual, and
that il cannot be delegated to counties
or cities or towns to adopt which ever
they please.
If this information is correct it is op-
posed to the views Of other lawyers
who have given the matter study. 1t is
opposed to what has become law in
several States, where both the ballot
system and the machine system are in
use. We are not saying that the States
law officer is incorrect. His views upon
constitutional law are worthy Of too
much respect to be put aside out Of
hand. But here is the situation; both
the reform ballot system and the ma
chine system are now recognized by the
Constitution. Whether it is meant that
one or the other shall be used, but not
both, is the question.
But it would seem that a law might
be framed that will name certain ma
chimes as lawful to be used, prescribing
for instance that they may be used in a
certain class of elections, while for
others the ballot system shall prevail.
This will give California opportunity
TO do what the people clearly intended
should be done when they adopted the
constitutional amendment providing
that machines may be used. Two years
of trial would determine If the machine
system is what is claimed for it, and
nhen, If desired, the application Of it
can be made general.
AS 1t is now, we prescribe for certain
elections to be held with variation from
the strict letter Of the reform ballot
system. Repeatedly laws declare that
such and such an election shall be held
as nearly as practicable or as occasion
will permit, according to the general
ballot system, thus recognizing depar-
tUre from it where strict compliance
would be hardship. True, these laws
may fly in the face of the law officers
opinion that we must have one genera
system and cannot have a divided one
If he is correctly reported to us.
OF course his desire must be to have
the expressed Will of the people a.
made manifest in the constitutional
amendment made effective. The ques
ton is bow can this be done? We prob
ably express the common thought of III,
people when we say that the hope L
that the Legislature will see it's way
clear to the passage of an Act that viii
provide two ways of holding an elec
ton, one by the ballot as we now have
1t. and one by the use Of certain ma
chimes to be named, and for the use o
which strict and explicit legislative di
rection shall be given in the Act.
To remove the objection that tn
Legislature cannot delegate TO subordi
nate authority the power to choos
which method it will employ, let Ger
tam classes OF elections De oIdei'SQ heI'
under the machine, and certain unde
the existing system. This would b
general in application and possibl,
point a way out Of the difficulty an
enable the experiment to be tried whicI
the people have indorsed by the adop
tion of the constitutional amendment.
We confess 10 a strong conviction
that a general law may provide tw
distinct methods Of taking vote. tn
employment of either of which may b
left to the discretion Of counties o
cities. Unless there is clear constitu
tional inhibition Of such plan, IL wi
lead the Legislature out of the difficult
and accomplish that which all the peo
ple desire and give us two years i
which to test the machine syster
fairly
While the Constitution declares tina
all elections shall be held by ballot