The record-union., 1899-03-25
THE BALLOT BILL.

I1e alleged DemOcfdllc eApouSuL III
journalism in San Francisco and the
Mayor of the metropolis are very much
put out that the reform election bill
should have passed, and express the
hope that it will not become law. It
is case of spilled milk with them If
they knew of SO many reasons against
the parallel column ballot, why did they
not make them loudly known while the
bill was before the houses? 1t is worthy
of note that all the objections raised
by the San Francisco Mayor and the
EXAMINER are threshed over straw.
The old system of preparing the ballot
originated in California. It was purely
theoretical
about that than the editor of the Ar
gonaut,'' who was the inventor of the
perforated line and Identification num-
Der on the ballot. Very early in the
history of the reform ballot law he and
JaIssss G. Mcguire were foremost in
pusning the reform. Both were and
are Democrats We do not know how
they stand upon the question now re-
garding the ballot form. But they VIII
agree that the present form was ex-
detrimental. theoretical and widely diff
ferent from the Australian system. The
new bill is the result of years of ex-
perience- Early In the debate of the
subject, and before we had adopted
the present system, this journal favored
the parallel column form of ballot.
Later other journals took up the mat
ter, and for twelve years the question
has been one Of frequent controversy.
1t cannot be claimed, therefore, that
any one suffers now by surprise. Indi-
ana. Iowa and New York have tried
the parallel column system, and SO far
as that form is concerned it is a sue
cess, and does not open the door to any
of the Ills of which Mr.. PheIan fears.
The chief objection, however, raised
to the parallel column form is that it
does not enforce upon the voter indie
pendent voting, or, rather, it is not so
conducive Of independent voting. But
we cannot grasp the meaning Of that
argument, since to us it seems just as
easy to select names from parallel col
umns upon a single ballot sheet as to
select candidates from one long row
of names. There is no quicker presen-
tation to the eye of the names Of
Brown (Rep.),
Jones {Dem.),
Smith (Pop.),
Thompson Gnd.),
When printed in that order, than if
presented upon a common horizontal
line thus:
Rep. DEM Pop. Ind.
Brown Jones. Smith. Thompson.
But the average, man with intelli
gence enough to vote, will not be both
cred in stamping his will opposite any
name OF his choice in either case. It
is, however, objected, especially by
Mayor Phelan in an open letter to the
Governor, that the present law is I'M
derstood by the people, and that
changes will tend to confuse them
This is scarcely worthy Of discussion,
since the changes do not affect the sys-
tenn to such a degree as to confuse a
child The principles of secret voting,
Of stamping ON .'X'' opposite the name,
and Of folding the ballot sheet so as to
expose the Identification number re-
main.
1t is, however, urged that old polit-
ical parties are given an advantage by
the column system, while other candi-
dates Endorsed nominees" are
grouped in a column for that purpose;
that careless and Indifferent voters as
rule follow the line of least resist
ance, and will stamp down column
rather than skip about and pick ous
names here and there. But that where
all nominees for an office are grouped
by name under the office title, there Is
perfect equality, and the voter may wei
be inclined to read the list and pick his
men. But that argument cuts both
ways. Under the present system ths
names are arranged alphabetically. and
ii the careless voter takes the line O.
least resistance, then he will more Otter
vote Tor the name which first greets hi'
~ than 70 follow down the list and