The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-11-03
THE CRoKER-JoSEs PLAN.

The advice Of Mr.. Croker and Chairman
gests revival of methods which have be-
come almost obsolete I'm recent years, and
which, Ii is TO be hoped, may never
come In vogue again Mr.. Croker says:
my advice to Democratic voters the coun-
try over is to congregate about the polling
places on the evening of election day, count
noses, and then, il the election returns for
Bryan do not tally with their count, to go
into the polling places and throw those fell
lows in charge of the returns into the
street" Chairman Jones says he sees moth
ing wrong in this advice. and suggests
baseball bat as peculiarly appropriate 20
render justice to a corrupt election Judge"
Now, although there is no foundation what
ever for the belief, let us concede that
those who give this advice do honestly be-
try to carry the election in some localities
by fraud. Let us admit, for the sake of
argument, that Messrs. Croker and Jones
think they have cause to fear that Repub-
lican election officers will attempt to tam
per with returns or cheat the Bryanites out
of an honestly won election. Would this
justify their advice to resort to violence?
Certainly not. The laws of every State in
the Union provide better legal remedy for
election frauds than seizing ballot boxes,
using baseball bats on their heads. Such
methods do not right a wrong, remedy o
fraud nor adequately punish the offenders.
Tho law provides a far better and moro
effective method The seizure OF ballot
boxes and polling lists by a mob would
probably result in multiplying the election,
so that neither party would get its deserts.
If a fraud had been committed it could not
be proved. The perpetrators would escape
unpublished beyond, perhaps, a pummeling
with baseball bats, which would be no ade-
quate punishment and those who had been
defrauded of their rights would have no
means of regaining them. The laws of
every State provide a mode of procedure
which, besides being legal and orderly, is
more effective. Moreover, the Croker-Jones
method contemplates n violation of law In
this. that in every State where the Aus
trali-n ballot law prevails all persons, ex-
cept election officers and challengers, are
required to keep fifty feet away from the
polls when not voting. How, then, couli
they follow Croker's advice to congregate
on and near enough to watch the progress
of the count? This in itself would be n
violation of law.
The plain truth is thar the advice of
Croker and Jones, whether they are honest
in giving it or not, contemplates a general
resort to such methods as have been used
very rarely, only in the worst localities
and scarcely at all in recent years, and
then only by Tammany ana the Democracy
of the South The adoption of their advice
would be long step backward toward the
worst practices that prevailed before the
enactment of the Australian ballot or any
of the advanced election laws of recent
years. The general adoption and practice
of the methods they advise would result
in rioting and boodshed, and would soon
make elections so disorderly and uncer-
tain that military force would probably be
necessary to preserve order. The resort to
violence by one party would be used as n
pretext to justify it by the other and, as
the party in power would control the mill
tary, there would always be a temptation
to go further than the law required to in
sure fair elections. This would be a far
more dangerous form of militarism than
maintaining the dag in the Philippines, yet
il would be the logical tendency, and in
time the inevitable result OF premeditated
violence at presidential elections. The
Croker-Jones plan involves some of the
greatest dangers that could threaten re-
publican government.