The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-09-20
The COST ISLARCE
That Is Voting Machine Bug
abOO, City Officials Say.
Machine Company Agents Say
Boards Estimate Excessive.
PORTER ESTIMATES $4,000
c. w. Hull Disagrees and Places
Cost at $4,000.
Informal Meeting TOday-Offi.
ciaI Report Tomorrow.
PORTER ESTIMATES $4,000
why is a voting machine ?

Why a voting machine?
That is the question bothering those
in the city hall today. Incidentally,
the proposition of whether or not the
city is going to buy some of them 10
bothering the board of election super
visors, Commissioners WATSON. Porter
and Newland. not a little. Visitors
could have stepped into the office OF
any of the three and seen a man with
disheveled hair and a furrowed brow
burrOwing into a confusion of paper
on which was figures. Often they
visited each other and compared notes
and then went back to solitary con-
finement to thresh out some new
phase.
In short, all that stands in the way
OF voting machines being purchased
and used in the next city election is
the cost of them. Agents for the VoI-
ing machine company say it can be
done with practically no extra burden
on the taxpayers. Members of the
beard of election supervisors think
otherwise.
This afternoon an informal meeting
of the members of the city commits
sion and representatives of the voting
machine company was scheduled for
8 O'Clock. When the meeting opened
representatives of the company prom
ise1 tC tell the commission members
how they could buy the machines and
lay for them with little effort. the
board of election supervisors, 10
whom the proposition of the purchase
was rercrred for investigation, will
report officially to the city commits
sion as to their findings tomorrow
with recommendation that the city
buy he machines or that the matter
be temporarily or permanently de
fer1ed.
Commissioner Porter, one of the
supervisors. is not enthusiastic over
the purchase. Il want the machines"
he said l think everyone else does,
take about ninety machines costing
for purchase and maintenance about
$4,000"
Charles w. Hull. representative of
the machine company, does not agree
with these figures. SiXty-five ma
chimes, he claims, costing $4S,750, will
be sufficient. Members of the COM
mission say he made that proposition
to them. Hull also says the money
can be raised with little effort and
points out that there will be a big
saving in the cost of elections.
Figures compiled by Commissioners
Newland and WATSON today show the
| cost of the 1915 March primary'to the
! city was $1,325.59 and the cost of the
following election was S1.53S.03 Fig
ures showing the cost of an election
wherein voting machines are used will
NC submitted dnO considered late IDlS
afternoon.
Commissioner WATSON says the only
thing standing in the way of purchase
is the cost. Newland is noncommittal.
However, all say the question of where
the money is coming from is big bug
aboo.
Representative of a voting machine
company appeared before the city
commissioners this afternoon and pro-
duced figures showing that if the city
should purchase voting machines in
| fifteen years Its total remaining in
vestment would be only S5,1648S
These figures were based upon the
proposal that the city buy seventy
five machines at a total cost of S56,-
! ESQ. The representatives held that
the difference between the first cost
and the $5,164.S8 investment at the
end of fifteen years would be made. up
by the savings on intervening cleo
tions. They represented that the saving
on each biennial election would be So
06O.4O. However. the cost of a city
election as estimated by the repre-
sentatives of the voting machine com
panies is almost double the cost as
estimated by the city commissioners