The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1901-03-19

TrFF AND nonsense! What
is there dishonest about the
~ party circle? Thrce-fourths,
yes. sevcn-cights of the vot-
ing citizenship of the country belong
to one or another of the recognized
political parties, are proud of their
party membership and when voting a
! ticket at the polls very rarely cut 1t.
/ Tho few for whom existing parties
are not good enough are always at
! Liberty to organize new ones and agi-
tate in behalf thereof until the new
| parties either expire of inutility or win
enough favor To live.
The objection to il is not that il makes it
| easy to vote straight party ticket, but that it
| pro, ideS two ways ior marking tho ballot, only
| one ot which can be- used but both OF which
/ are attempted at the same time by good many
I yutcrs, thus rendering their ballot yoid.--lbid.
! Possibly at the beginning, the party
circle caused some confusion but the
/ voters are now accustomed to it; they
look for it. and many of them would
be surprised and confused if it should
be removed. Require every voter to
mark separate cross opposite the
name Of every candidate for whom he
( desired to vote and you would multi
ply his chances of mis-marling his
ballot as many times as there We're Of
fees to be flied.
The experience of the past has shown that fully
IL pcr cent oi the ballots are thrown out because
! citizens have marked in the party circle and
tl,u marked individual names tho tickets
oi other plrticS.-lhid.
This has not been the experience Of
the past in Lackawanna county, but 1t
would unuucstionably be the eXper-
icncc of the future if the legislature
should require every voter to mark
separately for every candidate of his
choice.
There never was a good argument in favor OF
the party circle. 1t Is not required TO enable
the citizen TO vote straight ticket for either
party. As 4 matter OF TACT comparatively few
| intelligent electors want 10 vote an absolutely
straight ticket all the timc.-lhid.
There is the best of arguments for
a convenience to the large majority Of
voters and saves time.
Tic complaint that it would take more time
| to mark each cIudiditc than to put a mark in
| party circle i, without force II would require
| no more than a few seconds ior any voter cap.
/ able Of making u mark at all 10 mark every
name un the ballot il the grouping were made
in accordance with the ballot reform plan. Ibid.
Election officers know better. We
VIII wager that a majority Of the en-
ployes Of the Philadelphia Press, If
asked 10 mark large ticket without
using the party circle, would not only
take five 20 ten times the amount OF
time necessary under the old way, but
would spoil a larger percentage of
their ballots, and after a trial of the
pref osed Bedford ballot would vote in
favor Of the party circle.
The party circle only serves tho purpose o!
couIusiug the voter who is not experienced in
corrupt dichcrS and who having two ways ol
marking, is liable to use both and thus destroy
his ballot Ibid,
In other words, YOU think because
the majority wont look at things
through your glasses, the majority is
necessarily idiotic. This is a common
dclusion of reformers. They are al
ways clamoring for a change in meth
uds, forgetful that under any method
which is not positively dishonest. the
majority will have its way Just by
what halluclnatiOn the nsurgents
have reached the conclusion that the
abolition Of the party circle would re-
dound to their benefit, II, in fact, they
have that idea, we cannot imagine
The only tcnable hypothesis we can
devise is that they are simply finding
fault with the existing order of things
because it is not their order and be.
cause they have failed in their efforts
10 OVerturn il.
Owing to an abundant supply of pet
cats and dear little boys who huv,
been instructed in the use of the toy
rifle, the song of the first robin vii
not be heard in Scranton this year.
-