The San Francisco call., 1908-05-31

| i " the EultOT OF Inc Cdll. Inere
| is no dispute in the election COM
i mission at this time directly be-
| tween the use of ballots and vot-
| ing machines. The only question pre-
sented to us is whether the funds OF
the city shall in any way be invested
at this time in machine which there
| is no certainty that the commission
| can use, or whether we shall wait and
ask the next legislature so TO amend
the voting machine act as to enable
this city and any other city or county,
at Its option, to use a voting machine
which will permit the printing of the
names of the candidate only once upon
the machine ballot, as was specified in
the original Australian ballot law OF
1891. with the designation OF all the
political parties nominating him in the
same space. and thus secure voting
machine which can be used to a GER
tainty at every election
The present voting machine has
seven columns only. and If more than
seven political parties nominate tick
cts the machine can not be used. 1t
can not be known until 80 days before
election how. many tickets will be
named. There is. then. always a pos
sibility of legal questions as to the
legality Of the fling and of proceedings
In court to compel the printing of a
rejected ticket, and in a city OF the
size of San Francisco. with 500 or more
precincts, change of system from ma
chimes to ballots can not be safely
undertaken at a period so late. The
precincts must be different. The num-
ber of elective officers, the blank re-
turns and large numbers of details are
different in an election of ballots and
the commission can not undertake with
safety to use machines unless IL is GER
tain that the political parties can not
put them of commission at the last
moment by filing more tickets than
they will hold.
In 1906 San Jose, Sacramento and
Los Angeles were unable to use their
voting machines because more than
seven tickets were filed. In San Fran
cisco eight tickets were filed The le-
gality of the fling of some tickets was
so serious a question of law as to re-
quire a resort to the supreme court
When that court reached a decision ii
was too late to have held a legal cleo
tion by ballot if the court had upheld
the eighth ticket. 1t did not do so, but
the situation was too risky for any
election commission to be willing to
face again.
Now. the thing that has happened
may happen again. In fact there are
today in California seven political par
ties that 1T is known will file tickets
in this city for the November cleo
tion.
If any additional nominees appear
voting machines could not be used. In
addition the peoples party has nom:-
mated a national ticket. 1t has the
right to present ticket, and we have
no right to act upon any other pre-
sumption. There may be other inde-
pendent tickets.
From this it is seen that there is
no certainty that voting machines
could be used next November.
Now the reason why the present ma
chine is so easily overloaded and
thrown out of commission is because
many different political parties nomi-
nate very largely the same candidates.
and as the law entities each party to
a column and requires the names to be
printed in as many columns as there
are nominating or indorsing tickets,
the machine is easily overloaded by
comparatively small number of nomi-
nees.
A brief and an excellent change in
the law will prevent all this. Let it
be amended to provide that 'fn any
political subdivision where machines
are used it shall be optional with the
election commission to use machines
with party levers or to provide ma
chimes upon which the name Of a can
didate shall appear in but one space,
with the designation of all party nomi-
nations he has received Immediately
following in the same space and where
the nominees are SO placed upon the
machine ballot no straight party lever
shall be used, but each voter must turn
the key of each candidate voted for"