The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1903-12-16
Bribery.

Journal, takes position against "bri-
berry y"-that is to say, against the buy
Ing and the selling of votes of the
sovereign.
The President, too, speaks on the
subject of bribery, but refers to the
bribery of Congressman, Legislators
and others to whom have been dele
gated the power of the people.
There is wide difference between
the Journal and the President. The
President is right, but we are not
quite 30 sure of the position of our
Greenwood friend.
The citizen, ninety-nine times out
of a hundred, votes according to his
preferences or his interests. Not one
in hundred rises to the level of vot-
ing against his personal feelings for
the public good. And what is deemed
by one man for the public good is not
80 regarded by another.
For instance: Years ago the ques-
tion of dividing Abbeville County was
before the people. Didn't each man
votelaccording to his own interest and
for the welfare of his own Deighbor-
hood? In such cases were; not each
moved more or less from a motive of
gain? Were not all equally honest?
Again: If half dozen men are can
didates for office, is it not susceptible
of proof that when there is lacking
special reason for doing otherwise, a
very large per cent. of the people vote
for their neighbor candidate? Is, it
not good principle, and good politics
to do so?
While it would be crime, breach
Of trust, and dangerous thing for an
agent to be governed by selfish or
mercenary motives, where is the
wrong of the sovereign in exercising
his right to vote according to his own
interests, even if that interest be q
money consideration.
Why should not the hope of re-
ward govern? In any one of the
thousand ways temptation or interest
may be moving factor.
If it were wrong to sell votes and it
were a sin to vote more than once,
would street carnivals openly offer for
sale, and would voters buy dozens of
election tickets to the same person to
decide who should be queen?
If it were wrong to vote early and
often, would our church fairs hold an
election to ascertain the opinion of the
people as to who was the prettiest girl
or the ugliest bachelor in town?
In a fair election, would the church
authorities sell to any one person more
than one ticket, or one vote?
If, therefore, it is lawful to buy votes
or to sci, votes, at church fair, or at
street carnival, why not allow poll
ticians to take the church people as
guides and examples in politics?
But whether street carnivals and
churches speculate in votes or not,
why should not the great unmasked,
the heathen crowd, be allowed to sell
at least one vote-a single vote, not a
dozen?
Of course, if rich men and poor men
were to enter the race for office the
rich man would likely get the office il
votes were for sale, while the poor
voter would be enriched to the extent
of his bargain. 1t might be wrong tc
divide ones wealth with the poor
The rich mans rival candidate would
certainly object to his parting with
his coin during the election time, a. d
incidentally he would object to the
poor man receiving the cash which be
may greatly need.
Is it not true that good and pure
Christians sometimes inferentially ol
ostensibly barter away the vote of 8
whole congregation for small sub
scription to the church fund? Or, is
it not true, that an implied threat is
made at Withholding VOTES if the can
didate does give to the church fund?
When the sovereign asks the candi
date in election times for the loan of
quarter or half, is it not understood
that the candidates action will infu
ence votes one way or the other?
If church people are not willing te
sell their votes, why is it that candi
dates are promptly jumped on for con
tributions for their particular congre
CATION And if candidates did not
think they would gain votes by giving
money to church in which they were
not especially interested, why should
they be so willing to give? The plain
truth is, such contributions are based
on the assumption that votes will be
secured. If thus secured, is it not s
piece of corruption at the very foun'
tain head of the greatest purity?
While the President is right, we
think our good friend, the Greenwood
Journal, would break down time
houored custom of levying tribute for
church purposes. And if it is righ'
for churches to speculate on voters, OF
to corrupt the sovereign: the plain
everyday politician should be allowed
to buy all the votes that be can pay