The Portland daily press., 1898-10-25
THE BALLOT LAW.
Mr.. mclaughlin Wants the Pure Australian
System.
TO the Editor of the Press:

40 tn6 E0at0f o. tn6 tTeSss
The PRESS has apparently taken the
alarm at the storm of Indignation that IS
sweeping over the state against our faulty
ballot system. and is stoutly defending IL
against the attacks of it's critics.
II interpret the mind of the PRESS
correctly, it defends, the Epresent system,
not for any love for the present system,
but for fear that If the present ballot law
are repealed, we shall go back to the old
pull. hauling method, or lack of method of
voting
Now it.seems that the PRESS should
take higher ground in regard to the pres
emit law, and Instead of defending it, for
fear we shall return to a former less
satisfactory condition, it should unite In
calling for it's repeal, SO that it may be
superseded by something better.
There are but very few, who would
return to the old and Anticipated methods
of voting but the general dissatisfaction
with the present complicated method of
voting is so great among so large part
of our voters, that unless more perfeci
way" is pointed out to them they will
sweep away the present disoFedit system
and give US nothing in it place, but the
old free-for.all way of voting is worse
than the present system.
Public opinion In this state is not very
we'll informed In regard to scientific
ballot methods, and the greater part OF
the voters suppose that our somstimes
led 40 y,c1l nt la 40 the II.
inc Australian system, and II 1t proves
unsatisfactory there is nothing to do but
to return to the old system, If the present
one Is repealed.
But the law in this state Is not the
genuine Australian law, that has been In
constant operation in Australia since 1856
and is now and has been, in unopposeo
colonies including Canada for years as
we'll as in France and Italy and other
European governments. Neither is our
sy stem anything like the Australian sys
tenn.
A number of our states have adopted
what they call the Australian system, but
the only state to adopt the Australian
/ know, is Massachusetts, and that Is the
only state that has no trouble with the
The Secretary of State there in reply to
letter Of inquiry informed me that he
had never heard any criticism there OF tbs
voting system and that the defective bal
| lots were so smalEt they wereInever tax
| en- account OF while under the New York
system which closely resembles. ours, the
Secretary of State in response to similar
letter of inquiry informed me that in New
York CITY alone, 5000 votes were thrown
out as defective, and in other cities nearly
as great proportion. Any system OF
1 voting that is in any degree complicated
will certainly disfranohise many voters
and 1t should be the duty of the state to
give the voter the most simple system
that theory and practise have discovered,
and that this is the law as 1T is in Massa
| chusetts, there can be no reasonable
doubt, and with the permission OF the
| PRESS will explain the difference be.
| tween the Australian system as prsctiseo
/ in Massachusetts and our system ant
wherein lies the great superiority OF TIT
| former.
In the Massachusetts, system the names
of the different candidates for the saInt
office are grouped alphabetically, aon'
above the other, and the voter marks II
the space to the right of the name h,
wishes to vote for, while there is an ADDED
line below to put any name rather thar
the regular nominees above. Thus with
this ballot at our September election thu
part for candidates for governor woult
appear as below:
l