The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1904-12-17
CHANGE IN BALLOT LAW.

over the country 1cSdr0AnS the DdIlOt
laws. It is by no means confined to
Kansas. Illinois, Nebraska, Missouri
and other states are comparing their
ballots with those of other states and
wondering if they cannot be improved.
What is known as the Australian
ballot is in use in practically every
state in the union, but hardly a state
has the real Australian ballot. They
are all notifications, and some of
them are modified great deal.
The real Australian ballot gives no
hint to the voter concerning the party
of the different candidates. The can
didates for each office are grouped to-
gether and there is nothing to denote
their politics.
Probably the nearest approach to
this ballot in the United States is the
Massachusetts, ballot, which is just
now receiving a great deal of atten-
ton In Massachusetts, the candidates
for each Office are grouped together,
but each has the name of his party
after his name. There is no way to
vote straight ballot by making a
single cross. but the voter must make
a cross after the name of each can
didate for whom he wishes to vote.
ballot is so arranged that a single
square does duty for all presidential
electors.
The Massachusetts, ballot makes
each candidate stand upon his own
merits, except that it gives the voter
a chance to pick out the candidate of
his party for those offices where he
knows nothing about any of the can
didates, not even their names TIE
names of the candidates are placed
on the ballot in alphabetical form.
Thus for the office of governor the
Massachusetts, ballot in the recent
election was arranged like this, count
a square at the end of each line:
Governor. Mark One.
NJ. T. BERRY Socialist Labor
OLIVER w. COBB. Prohibition
VIM. L. DOUGLAS. Democratic
The theory of the real Australian
ballot is that it compels the voter to
inform himself regarding the various
candidates for each office in order to
vote as he may wish. He must know
the names of the candidates of his
party in order to vote a party ticket.
The Massachusetts, law allows the
voter to pick out his party ticket with
out knowing the names of the candf-
dates previously, but it compels him
to look over the candidates for each
office, and he is therefore more
thoughtful about voting than he would
be If he could vote a straight party
ticket with only a single mark and
without knowledge of the various
candidates.
Colorado has the Massachusetts, idea
as to the grouping of candidates by
Offices instead of by parties, but its
ballot is extremely bulky because of
the great amount of waste space on it,
1t also affords an opportunity for the
ticket without requiring the
careful consideration of the voter. At
the top of the ballot is sentence sim
liar to this:
Il hereby vote a straight. -. bal
lot except where otherwise marked"
The voter can write in the name
of his party in the blank space, and
his ballot will count for all the candi-
dates of that party. If, however, he
wishes to scratch some candidate on
his own party ticket and vote for the
opposition, he makes a cross after the
name of the opposition candidate,
which takes his vote away from all
other candidates for that Office.
Illinois, Missouri, Kansas and other
states have the names of the candi-
dates arranged by parties instead of
by offices. Thus all the candidates of
4 party are placed in a single column.
and it is possible to vote a straight
party ticket by placing a single cross
at the head of that particular ticket.
This is an incentive for the straight
ticket. In Kansas technicalities are
TrfH ~
make it difficult to vote anything ex-
cept straight ticket. Thousands of !
ballots were thrown out and not count
ed at the recent election because of |
these technicalities.
In commenting on the ballot ques-
ton the Chicago Tribune, the leading
Republican paper of Illinois, says:
1.-THE effect of the Massachusetts,
ballot is to abolish the party column |
arrangement of the Illinois ballot In
he latter all the Republican candi-
1ates are in one column, the Demo- |
cratic in another, and so on. This
by columns is what |
makes the straight ticket the easiest |
% vote. 1t requires much more effort |
md thought to vote a split ticket than |
L straight one. The Illinois voter who, |
n the last election, placed a cross at
he top of the Republican column |
yoted not only for Roosevelt and Fair
banks but for thirty-eight other can
1idates for various offices. To ac-
the same result on the Mas
,achusetts ballot he would have to
make thirty-nine crosses instead of |
,ne. On the Massachusetts, ballot each
office requires separate and distinct
attention from the voter.
1.-THE question as to which form of /
ballot is the preferable resolves itself |
nto the question as to whether bal
OF should, by its arrangement, place
| premium upon partisanship. The