The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1905-01-05


deposits OF s1i0. .s62. .231.4s.
This large sum Of money Is held In
trust for 1877. 1857 depositors. OF whom
13275l have less than $500 10 their
credit 23.274 have sums varying between
$500 and $1,000. and 1920 have sums
varying between $1,000 and upward. These
figures show that the savings institu-
tions OF the state are trusted by the
people and their popularity Is proven by
the large number who have entrusted 10
them the small sums below $500. This
confidence IL warranted by continued ex-
perience.
A BANK COMMISSIONER
These banking institutions are organ
ized under the laws Of this state. They
are believed 10 be conducted In accord
ance with law. so far as the Law pro-
vides The state has surrounded their
establishment with many precautions. II
has directed In what class Of securities
their funds may be invested. and II has
strict requirements for their liquidation.
But the state has made no provision for
Official and independent supervision dur
ing their life. This IL a serious omis
sion and one which should be remedied
al as early a date as Is practicable.
Therefore at this time I call the at
tention OF the general assembly TO the
necessity of providing for the appoint
ment OF a commissioner who shall be
given oversight and control Of ell saw
ings institutions doing business I'm this
state and an authority 10 examine 10
their condition and 10 use means. II
necessary. 10 fully protect their depos-
itors from loss. our neighboring states
have such officials who i'm many cases
are Of great assistance TO the institutions
themselves as well as to the depositors
In view ~ the large number Of citizens
who are interested I'm these institutions.
the great majority Of whom would suf
fer much I'm case OF loss. the state could
do nothing better than TO provide the
protection afforded by a careful and i'm
partial examination OF such institutions
NJ more or less frequent periods.
The law under which all elections In
this state for presidential electors. gen
eral officers. and members OF the gem
eral assembly are held was enacted in
1889. Since then II has been amended
in very few particulars. Its provisions
as whole remain practically the same
as they were when the law first went
into effect. Whatever amendments have
been made have not changed the form
of the ballot. nor have they placed new
requirements upon the voter; the method
OF expressing the voters choice has been
the same from the beginning
II has been noticed from the first that
the intended choice OF the voter was
sometimes nullifed by his own careless
ness I'm marking his ballot II has been
anticipated. however that this would he
overcome as the voter became more fa-
miliar with the ballot and his personal
duty. At first there was no cause to
doubt this confidence: the ballots cast
were counted I'm the old way. the first
announced results were accepted as final
and In very few cases were the ballots
reexamned or the count verified Since
the establishment OF the state returning
board. however. whose members carefully
scrutinize and count the ballots cast I'm
all general elections. IL has been found
that many voters are being practically
disfranchised. either through their own
carelessness or ignorance OF from causes
for which they are not personally re-
sponsible. While such cases may not
have been sufficiently numerous 10 change
election results, when allowance Is made
for the probable losses TO each of the
several candidates on the ballots they
have been so numerous as to Justify an
effort TO simplify the ballot or the
method OF Its marking. and perhaps both
The secret ballot so-called, should and
does produce three conditions II makes II
possible for voter to support the candi-
date OF his choice. free from intimidation
OF any nature; the voter is provided so
far as law can provide him. with means
OF expressing his choice In absolute Sc
crecy. The law gives TO every voter a
convenient method OF choice between can
didates; he can favor every candidate of
one party, or he can favor candidates OF
different parties The law makes Il exceed
ingly difficult for a dishonest voter 10 be-
tray his electoral trust because II makes
II difficult TO show that the vote bartered
was delivered as promised.
JUSTIFY THE LAW.
These three conditions alone would Jus
tfy the law. and nothing should be done
TO modify them. 1t is also self-evident
that a wide latitude must be allowed those
who count the ballots In determining what
are and what are not distinguishing
marks" which invalidate the ballots: no
set Of rules could be made which would
arbitrarily and yet Justly determine ex-
actly what chance mark is to invalidate
ballot This must of necessity be left TO
the men who count-wardens, election
clerks aldermen. or members OF the state
returning hoard. The sole purpose OF any
proposed amendment should be To render
easy the marking OF the ballot so plainly
that no mistake can he made as TO the
voters honest intent by those whose duty
II r. to count ballots whea-fHaFked-
The law cannot overcome neglect or care
lessneSS or improper motive, nut TX can DO
something To assist that large proportion
OF voters who appear to become confused
the moment they find n pencil I'm their
hands
with the purpose OF thus simplifying
the marking OF a ballot and thereby re-
moving the chief cause for the large num-
Der OF ballots pronounced defective. l
recommend the adoption Of such amend
meuts to our present law as will permit
voter to express his choice by single
cross for the several candidates nomin-
ated by any party. As ballots for state
officers are returned 20 one body. and
those for members OF the general assem-
bly 10 another. II would he necessary to
provide a single cross for each set of
candidates. But even this would greatly
simplify the marking Of tho ballots. and
thereby reduce the probable number OF
defective ballots.
I would also recommend that a law he
passed that sample ballots must he print
ed on a paper whose color is different
from that used for official ballots. The
epdip~ ~ samnle ha liots Of the same color