Year: 1879

'1rauu-sometnfng that 10 frequently uOes
" especially in the Northern cities" is far
fetched, IL not absolutely ridiculous. The
secresy of the ballot does not necessarily
involve fraud, and for that matter nothing
fraudulent can occur with legal voter who
votes o single ballot in accordance with the
dictates of his own Judgment. The voting
illegally and in defiance of law and right,
or the duplication of votes representing
the same person, or q false count OF the
votes, involves fraud which might be per-
petrated as well under Uiud Uoce vote as
with the secret ballot. Hence the declaration
that the secret ballot was invented to fa-
"cilitate fraud" or when confined to its
legitimate Office can possibly result in such
wrong, is proposition which 1T will trouble
the sagacity and penetration of our cotem-
porary to establish in fact.


We can readily understand that those
who desire to control the votes of their fell
low-citizens, and to punish them, if under
their individual will they vote contrary to
the wish of him who aims TO exercise that
control, prefer au open ballot 1t is wise





exercise his own Judgment when he casts
his VOTE without subjecting himself to
persecution aud ostracism therefor There
would be no freedom of election if the citi-
zen should be trammeled with fear from
Others whenever he shall be called upon
to exercise the right of suffrage. The Vir-
giaidn very innocently asks: "Docs our
Washington contemporary believe that us
many Republicans would have voted for
"repudiation in Virginia as did so vote, if
lit had not been for the secret ballot?
If it does, we do not. In fact, we are al
together satisfied that more Of the re-
"spectable Republicans in this city, who
did not vote at all, would have supported
" the Republican repudiating nominees, if
they could have done so without its being
"known." In reply TO this interrogatory
we can only say that each legal voter
in Virginia had the perfect right to vote for
or against repudlation, just as his iudg-
ment should dictate, and for that act no
one but himself would be responsible, and
he only ut the bar of his own conscience.
1t was the privilege of any citizen of Vir-
ginia to decline voting, if he SO preferred,
and no one else has the right to
criticise or impugn his action, for
that would be direct infringement
of the rights of the citizen. Men often diff
fer in view and opinion and act diversely,
and that is their especial prerogative, with
which no other man has any legitimate
right to Interfere. Perhaps our cotempo-
rary, whose sympathies and views are
largely Virginiau, has never looked Mt this
question from such standpoint, and if not,
it is TO be hoped that he may change posi-
ton, expand his vision aud cultivate n
spirit of forbearauce aud tolerance toward
his fellow-men, recognizing the fact that
mans opinion and conduct are his own,
and Chat his neighbor has only the right TO
differ with him and leave him TO the re-
sponsibility of his own action. If Vir-
ginia forms part of free country filled
with free people, it should learn to accept
the situation and also to practice proper
spirit of liberation, which will secure TO
every citizen the right Of opinion and ac-
tiOn subject alone TO the law