THE
AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM
AS
EMBODIED IN THE LEGISLATION OF
VARIOUS COUNTRIES.
Mii^ an f^istorical 3Introtiuctton,
AN- APPENDIX OF DECISIONS SINCE 1S56 IN GREAT BRITAIN,
IRELAND, CANADA, AND AUSTRALIA.
Irt>
By JOHN H. WIGMORE,
OF THE BOSTON BAR.
Sccontr 5Etrition,
REVISED AND ENLARGED.
BOSTON:
THE BOSTON BOOK COMPANY
Oct., 1889.
k:^
Copyright, 1889,
By John H. Wigmore.
University Phess:
John Wilson and Son, CAMBriDCE.
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.
The success of the first edition of this volume, and the
progress of the ballot reform movement during the past
six months, have made it desirable to issue another edi-
tion, which shall so far as possible represent the present
stage of the movem(?nt. The new features of this edi-
tion are : —
1. A detailed account of the movement in almost every State
and Territory' since Januaiy, 1889.
2. A sumraar}- of the legislation of 1889.
3. An appendix containing a collection of decisions since 1856,
interpreting the ballot acts of Great Britain, Ireland,
Canada, and Australia.
4. Otber appendices, containing estimates of speed of voting
and expense under the Australian s^'stem, suggestions
as to Ballot Leagues, an account of the Rhines Voting
Machine, etc.
The reform will no doubt be adopted in other States
during the winter of 1889-1890; and those who have
information as to the movement, whether successful or
not, are again requested to send to the address below a
copy of the bill or statute, and some account of the his-
tory of the agitation.
iv PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.
The editor's thanks are due to the numerous persons, in
all parts of the country, who have been kind enough to
furnish him with information from time to time. As obvi-
ous reasons make it proper in many instances not to make
public the sources of information, and as a partial acknowl-
edgment of favors received would be invidious, he has
refrained from making acknowledgment in type of those
to whom he is indebted.
J. H. W.
Court House, Boston,
Sept. 2, 18S9.
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION.
Workers in the field of foreign statutory law must in
this country frequently be at a loss for complete materials
of recent date ; and in preparing the following pages the
editor has not been able to consult the statutes of New
Zealand since 1883, or of Tasmania and Western Australia
since 1884, or to obtain complete information as to legis-
lation in Victoria and New South Wales since 1885, or in
several European countries since 1886.^ These deficiencies
are to some extent unavoidable in an American work. No
complete set of Australian reports and statutes exists in
this country. Pasinomie is not to be procured in Boston,
probably not in the United States. The Annuaire de legis-
lation etrangere, published by the Societe de legislation
comparee^ does not appear until twelve months or more
after the year with which it deals (the volume for 1886
lias only recently reached this country) ; and the Bulletin
published by the same society, though its reports are as
recent as can reasonably be expected, has by no means the
exhaustive character of the Annuaire. To prepare a com-
plete notice of foreign legislation to date is perhaps not
possible, in the nature of the case, in any country.
It is believed, however, that the only changes, if any,
that are likely to have occurred, are the possible adoption
of the Australian system in other European States, and
a revision of the Tasmanian statutes, which have served
since 1858.
1 The British American statutes have been consulted as follows: British
Columbia to 1887, Manitoba to 1888, Northwest Territories to 1886, Ontario
to 1889, Quebec to 1888, the Dominion of Canada to 1887, Nova Scotia to
1887, New Brunswick to 1888.
CONTENTS.
Page
Preface iii
Introductory Skktch of the History of the Austra-
lian Ballot System , . . . . 1
STATUTES :
Part I. Massachusetts 58
Notes on Parallel Provisions (of the
various Acts) relating to the same
Subject 74
Part II. South Australia ... 90
Part III. Queensland 97
Part IV. Great Britain and Ireland 107
Part V. Belgium 127
Part VI. Kentucky 138
Part VII. New York 144
Part VIII. Summary of Statutes in other Coun-
tries: —
A. Tasmania 158
B. New Zealand 159
C. Victoria 160
D. New South Wales 160
E. West Australia 161
F. Dominion of Canada 162
G. Quebec 165
H. Ontario 168
VIU CONTENTS.
Part VIII. Summary of Statutes (continued) Page
I. Nova Scotia 170
J. Manitoba 170
K. British Columbia 171
L. Northwest Territories 171
M. Luxembourg 171
N. Italy 172
O. Norway 174
P. Austria 174
Q. Other European Countries 175
K.. Connecticut 176
S. Indiana 177
T. Minnesota 178
U. Missouri 179
V. Montana 179
W. Rhode Island 180
X. Tennessee 181
V. Wisconsin 181
Z. Bills Introduced Elsewhere 183
Appendix:
I. Summary of Decisions since 1856 in Aus-
tralia, Canada, Great Britain, and
Ireland 185
II. Speed of Voting, Expense, etc 200
III. The Rhines Voting Machine 201
IV. Ballot Leagues 203
V. The Election of July, 1889, in Miles City 204
VI. Summary of Party Votes upon Ballot
Reform 205
INTEODUCTION.
Where a community has reason to believe itself
to- be numbered among the enlightened ones of its
age, and its institutions to be pre-eminent among
those of civilized mankind as types of liberty and
progress, it relaxes (it may be) the constant strain
of high endeavor ; an easy complacency settles upon
it ; and it awakes one day to realize that a commu-
nity having no pretensions to as conspicuous a rank
among nations has grasped the torch of progress,
and now leads the way with intelligent and ad-
vanced methods, pointing the path for its more
eminent fellows to pursue.
With some such reflection as this must England
and our own commonwealths look upon the history
of ballot reform in the past fifty years. Before rep-
resentative government in Australasia had an exist-
ence, corruption, fraud, and intimidation (to name
none of the less palpable evils that beset an election)
thrived abundantly in Great Britain and Ireland, and
even in our own country had begun to take root.
But it was reserved for stripling states, when to
them in their turn the exigency came, not merely to
apply, but to invent an effective remedy, and to indi-
2 INTRODUCTION.
cate a cure for at any rate the grosser evils that pre-
vent an election from being what at the least it should
be, the free and accurate expression of the opinions
of the electors. It is proposed in the following in-
troductory pages to sketch the history of the measure
known as the Australian ballot system, as it passed
from state to state in Australasia, on to the mother
country in Europe, thence westward to Canada and
eastward to continental countries, and finally w^est-
w^ard again to these United States ; and in conclu-
sion to take up, briefly, the reasons underlying its
effectiveness, and the application of its principles to
political conditions in this country.
I.
That the system is by birth Australian has once,
and once only, been questioned. In 1869, when the
British Parliamentary Committee were considering the
introduction of the secret ballot, and were examining
witnesses from all parts of the world, it was told^
that in the little town of Maryport, in Cumberland,
a similar method of voting had for many years been
in successful operation, and it was the grievance of
the burgesses of the old town that Australia, far from
deserving the credit of an invention, had been only a
borrower, without acknowledgment, of the Maryport
method, doubtless carried to the colonies by some
native of the town.^ Whether the method used in
1 Testimony of Francis Taylor, Report of Com. on Pari, and Mun.
Elections, Pari. Papers, 1868-9, vol. viii. p. 525.
2 That a town of Maryport appears on the map of Queensland per-
haps adds to the plausibility of this claim.
INTRODUCTION. 3
Marjport was in fact a similar one, and whether it
antedated the colonial system, may be dismissed from
our consideration ; for there can be little doubt that
the latter was purely indigenous, that its details were
prepared and marked out independently, and that no
other system was searched for, referred to, or known
by the framers of the law. This we have upon the
authority of the father of the measure, Francis S.
Dutton, member of the Legislature of South Australia
from 1851 to 1865, and during that time twice at the
head of the government. The secret ballot was first
proposed by him in the session of Legislative Council
of 1851, before representative government and uni-
versal suffrage had been granted to South Australia.^
At that time the usual attendant vices of open elec-
tions already flourished in the young colony. Eiot-
ing and violence, bribery, intimidation, and coercion,
were only too common, — even more so, some said,
than in England. But for several years no action
was effected in the direction of reform. In 1856
came the Constitution, granting popular representa-
tion and manhood suffrage. From 1857 to 1859
Dutton was a member of the government, and im-
mediately used the opportunity to advance his favor-
ite measure. No commission of inquiry was appointed,
but with the aid of Chief-Justice (then Attorney-Gen-
eneral) Hanson, the details of a plan were elaborated
and a bill introduced which, after receiving modifica-
tions and additions in the House, became a law under
the name of the Elections Act, 1857-8 (No. 12), and
^ Pari. Papers, supra, p. 353.
INTRODUCTION.
typifies the system which has since spread to two
other continents. ''I can safely say," said Button,
many years later, standing before the Marquis of
Hartington's committee, " that no act of my poUtical
life has given me so much satisfaction as what I did
fifteen or sixteen years ago with reference to the
ballot system. If that is possible, I am more strongly
in favor of it now. after fifteen years' experience,
than when I introduced it before 1 had any experi-
ence about it." It so happened that Colonel (since
Sir) Robert Richard Torrens (then recently the
author of a system of registration of land titles which
has earned him an international reputation and has
stimulated Canada and Great Britain to efforts in
the same direction) was at that time also a mem-
ber of the Government, and, imbued with the argu-
ments of Lord Palmerston and John Stuart Mill, had
strenuously opposed the introduction of the secret
ballot. That its results completely converted him
we learn from his own confession.^ He came to
believe that the system he had opposed ^vas " the
best and most rapid and fiicile mode of carrying on
elections." The new machinery worked with " the
greatest smoothness, ease, and economy." We have
his testimony that the aspect of elections w^as com-
pletely changed. Rioting and disorder disappeared
entirely. The day of polling saw^ such quietness
that a stranger would not realize that an election
was going on. Intimidation by landlords and dic-
tation by trades unions alike ceased. Canvassing,
at least upon an organized plan, was practically
1 Pari. Papers, 18G8-1S69, vol. viii.
INTRODUCTION. 6
given up. Perhaps Mr. Dutton's most significant
statement (and yet the one most difficult for us to
picture) is that the very notion of exercising coer-
cion or improper influence " absolutely died out of
the country." The united sentiment of the colony
accorded with these views, and has ever since sus-
tained without dissent the policy of the act. By the
Ballot Act of 1862 (25 Vict., No. 13) its principles
were applied to all elections to public bodies other
than the Legislative Council and the Assembly, and
thus became applicable from time to time in mu-
nicipal elections; and by the District Councils Act
of 1876 (39 Vict., No. 43) and the more recent one
of 1887 (oO Vict. No. 41), the system was applied to
rural government also. The statute governing legis-
lative elections has from time to time been revised
(Elections Act, 1861, No. 20; Elections Act, 1870,
No. 18 ; Elections Act, 1879, No. 141), usually with
reference to the suffrage qualification and the regis-
tration of electors ; and the ballot system of thirty
years ago now extends to all elections alike — mu-
nicipal, rural, and legislative — in the colony.
In Victoria an almost simultaneous movement took
place in favor of the secret ballot. The project was
introduced by Mr. William Nicholson, and the minis-
terial opposition to it speedily resulted in a change of
government. Nicholson, at first unsuccessful in form-
ing a ministry, afterwards became Chief Secretary,
and at the head of the government carried through
the measure in 1856, two years after the Constitution
had created a representative legislature. The oppo-
6 INTRODUCTION.
sition to the secret ballot came mainly from the Con-
servatives (as was the case later in England), and
from a few prominent Liberals; but after its working
in practice was seen, the Conservatives were thor-
oughly converted, and the country as a unit declared
in its favor. Bribery and corruption seem never to
have existed in Victoria to such an extent as in neigh-
boring South Australia. But other evils politic w^ere
not wanting. The new system secured quietness
and convenience, and abolished the tumult and wild
disorder which formerly prevailed. The various
phases of intimidation disappeared ; ^ and a personal
canvass, that formerly indispensable feature of a
British election, became almost an unknown occur-
rence.^ Electioneering is largely confined to holding
public meetings, at which the merits of candidates
and of measures are discussed. About 1861 the op-
eration of the secret-ballot system was extended to
other than parliamentary elections by the Local
Government Act (No. 176). In 1869, upon the re-
organization of county and municipal government, it
w^as re-enacted by the Shires Act (No. 358) and the
Boroughs Statute (No. 359) ; and was perpetuated,
when these provisions were again fused into one stat-
ute, in the Local Government Act, 1874 (No. 506).
As applied to parliamentary elections, it is now con-
^ For instance, "The ballot has saved many a man from having
his mortgage foreclosed upon him, as was the case under the old sys-
tem." — Melbourne Gazette, 1S5G, quoted in '■'■Facts about the Ballot,"
published by the Ballot Society, London, 1857.
2 This is corroborated by the statement of Mr. Nicholson in " Facts
about the Ballot," supra. See this pamphlet for a full account of the
adoption and success of the system in Victoria; see also " The Ballot
a Conservative Pleasure," by Sir A. H. Elton, London, 1857, pp. 30, 31.
INTRODUCTION. 7
tained in the Electoral Act of 1865 (No. 279). Dur-
ing more than thirty years of the operation of the sys-
tem, only sixteen decisions of the Supreme Court were
asked for the construction of the acts containing it.^
The new system spread rapidly in the land of its
birth. It was adopted in Tasmania Feb. 25, 1858, by
the Parhamentary Elections Act (21 Vict., No. 32),
which has ever since served without revision ; and in
1865 the Rural Municipalities Act (29 Vict., No. 8)
extended the method to elections other than parlia-
mentary. In the same year, 1858, New South Wales
entered the ranks, and applied the new system to its
parliamentary elections (22 Vict., No. 20). Subse-
quent statutes embodying the subject are the Muni-
cipalities Act, 1867 (31 Vict., No. 12), and the
Elections Act, 1880 (44 Vict., No. 13). New Zealand
apparently did not adopt the new method in its es-
sence until 1870 ; for although a " Regulation of
Elections Act" was passed, bearing date August 19,
1858, by which only the officers of election and per-
sons actually voting were admitted to the polling-
places, yet the voter was still required, as in England,
to declare verbally to the polling-clerk the name of
the desired candidate, and no attempt w\as made to
require secrecy of those present at the time. We
must therefore say that not until the Regulation of
Elections Act, 1870 (33-34 Vict., No. 18), was bal-
lot reform adopted in New Zealand. Under the
^ No decisions since 1887 are accessible to the editor. The above
statement is of course made of those provisions only which form a part
of the electoral machinery peculiar to the ballot system, and not of
those parts of the acts relating to registration, etc.
8 INTRODUCTION.
Revising Act of 1881 (45 Vict., No. 12), and the
Municipal Corporations Act of 1876/ it is believed
that the secret ballot system is in vogue at all elec-
tions in New Zealand. In Queensland (which did not
receive responsible government until 1859), and in
West Australia (which still continues a crown col-
ony), the exact date of the introduction of the sys-
tem cannot be stated. In the Queensland Parliamen-
tary Elections Act, 1874, appear in substance the
same regulations afterwards re-enacted in the Parlia-
mentary Elections Act of 1885 (given in Part III.,
infra). By the Local Government Act of 1878
(42 Vict., No. 8), these principles were applied to
municipal elections, and by the recent Divisional
Boards Act of 1887 (51 Vict., No. 7) their operation
has been extended to the choice of what correspond
to county officers; so. that all elections are now
conducted according to this system. In West Aus-
tralia, legislative elections are now held under the
Ballot Act of 1877 (41 Vict., No. 15), based on the
Elections Act of South Australia and embodying its
essential principles. Whether in the Election Act
of 1870 (33 Vict., No. 13) similar provisions already
existed, the editor has not been able to ascertain.^
^ This the editor has not been able to consult.
2 A few words of contemporary testimony as to the working of the
system in Australia may be of interest. They are taken from an
interview published in the "Boston Herald " of Dec. 29, ISSS, with a
prominent Australian then stopping in Boston.
" It has been said tliat the new system will lead to confusion and
delay at the polls. Has this been the case in Australia? " was the first
question.
'• Not at all. . . . Very little work is done near the polls in the iu-
INTRODUCTION. 9
Meanwhile, the good results of the Australian sys-
tem of voting had reached England, where thought-
ful men were anxiously looking for some solution of
the problem of pure and tranquil elections. The
earliest method of choosing members of the lower
terests of the several candidates ; it may be said none at all. The
campaign is conducted much the same as in the States, by means of
meetings, pamphlets, and flyers. Work at the polls is impossible, and
it does not pay to work at the distance prescribed by law."
. . . ''Is the system of voting now in use generally accepted as
satisfactory and regarded as permanent in Australia."
"Yes; I think so. I have never known any serious opposition,
nor of any attempt to essentially modify it."
. . . "In regard to the nominations, all who desire to be candi-
dates offer themselves as such. This does not lead, as might be sup-
posed, to a multiplicity of candidates and a disastrous splitting of the
party vote. The Australian is a pretty sensible fellow, and does not
encourage candidates who have no chance. Before the day of election,
the contest is usually narrowed down to two candidates for each
office."
The speaker illustrated the true freedom of voting attained under
the system by citing facts coming under his knowledge in England.
" The reform was pushed most vigorously by the Radicals, who
expected lar<;e gains in voting strength from the increased privacy
afforded by the new method. . . . The new ballot law did prevent this
undue influence by the employing classes, but it also made impossible
bull-dozing and terrorism by caucuses and committees. The result of
this twofold influence was different from that expected by the Radical
leaders. Undei- the protection afforded by the absolute secrecy of the
ballot, more voted against them than for them. The voters attend
the Radical meetings and shout themselves hoarse; but when the day
of election arrives they go to the polls and, unknown to the Radical
committees, vote for the Conservative candidates. This explains why
some districts in England, in which it is impossible to hold a Conser-
vative meeting without a row, return that party's nominees by large
majorities. Rather than be ostracized and maltreated by their com-
rades, many of the workingmen join hands with the Radicals before
the election, but vote as they choose at the polling-booths, and they
very often choose to stand with the more conservative elements of
societv."
10 INTRODUCTION.
House. — used at a time when, as is probable, all the
freemen of the shire had a voice in the selection, —
was by the view or show of hands, usually in an
open, unenclosed space, or by some similar rough
process.^ Not until after a statute of 8 Henry VI.
(1429), restricting the county suffrage to 40-shilling
freeholders, do we hear of a poll being taken. As
late as the sixteenth century the show of hands was
still regarded as sufficient in law, and, though grad-
ually a change was insisted upon, not before the stat-
ute of 7 & 8 Wm. HI. c. 125 (1696) was the right
to demand a poll finally established. In other re-
spects, also, the antiquated methods were only slowly
adapted to modern needs. An election frequently
lasted eight or nine days. In one instance early in
this century the polls were open in Mayo County for
fifty-seven days ; though later laws limited the dura-
tion of a poll to two days in the country and one day
in the boroughs. The usual process was this : The
voter entered the polling-booth, gave his name to the
poll-clerk, and, if successful in replying as to his qual-
ifications, was required to declare aloud for whom he
voted, and the clerk checked a vote for that candi-
date opposite his name in the poll-book. The poll
was technically only an adjournment of the elections,
which began with what was in fact the nomination of
candidates in open meeting. If a poll was demanded,
which happened as a matter of course when more
than one candidate appeared, the election was de-
clared adjourned, and the poll took place at the ad-
1 Cox, Antient Parliamentary Elections, p. 105.
INTRODUCTION. 11
journment.^ By the first half of this century (and
matters became worse as eacli decade passed) serious
abuses had flistened themselves upon this system.
The development of industrial and social conditions,
the increase of popular influence, the gradual shifting
of political contests from the battlefield and the
court to Parliament and the polls, — these causes,
with others, resulted in placing an inordinate strain
upon the outgrown methods. Ever since its first
days, indeed, in the time of Henry VI., the
open poll had shown its failings. One is half
amused to read the ingenuous complaint pre-
sented in 1451 by certain freemen of Huntingdon-
shire, protesting against the election of two knights
returned for the shire, and telling a tale of armed
opjDonents, who threatened violence at the polls,
" and soe wee departed for dread of the inconven-
iences that was likely to be done for manslaughter." ^
Other documents of the times suggest to us that
even the credit of havins; orio-inated " countino;
out " methods and falsification of returns, with
other characteristic practices, may upon investiga-
tion be taken from the American ward politician ;
for in a preamble to the statute of 23 Henry VI.
c. 14 it is regretfully recited that " divers sheriffs
of the counties of the realm of England, for their
singular avail and lucre, have not made due elec-
1 Before the reform of 1872 the practice had been adopted in certain
boroughs of voting by delivering to the poll-clerk voting-papers signed
by the elector and containing the name of the preferred candidate. The
varying procedure was reducible substantially to these two tj'pes.
2 For early instances of corruption, see Grego's Hist, of Pari. Elec-
tions (1886), p. 8.
12 INTRODUCTION.
tions ; " ^ and this passage is not without its com-
panion instances. From this time on, but more
abundantly as our own century was reached, vio-
lence, corruption, fraud, and intimidation in all
its phases and varieties were frequent, — in one
place or at one time more or less noticeable than
at another place or time, but always increasing,
and, especially in the larger cities and their en-
virons,^ resulting finally in a condition of affairs
which was described by high authority as " fright-
ful." One of the commonest facts of British elec-
tions, before 1872, was the controlling mfluence
exercised by large customers over tradesmen of
all sorts. Landlords intimidated their tenants, and
marched detachments to the polls to vote in
their interests. In one place employers coerced
their workmen ; and in another the trades unions
coerced their members. Worse than all, and hardly
to be believed, in larger cities hired mobs often
patrolled the streets, keeping away hostile voters
and intimidating those who ventured to the polls.
A Conservative mob or a Radical or Liberal mob,
or both, were in some places a common feature of
an election. On one occasion which may serve as
an example, some 500 out of 2,000 Conservative
voters were prevented by demonstrations of violence
from giving their votes. Just as present political
methods in our large cities should not be taken as
^ This word here signifies the ministerial act of certifying to the
result of the election.
2 See 3 Edw. I, c. 5; 7 H IV., c. 14; Coke, 2 Inst. 168; Cox, aiite.
8 See the testimony before the Bi'ibery at Elections Committee,
Pari. Papers, 1835, vol. viii.
INTRODUCTION. 13
types of political conduct in every part of the re-
public, so these instances are not to be regarded
as representing the condition of things throughout
Great Britain. But that they could exist at all un-
der the British electoral system was reason enough
for a reform. From time to time the secret ballot
had been demanded by men of influence as a possible
remedy. James Mill and the Benthamites, Peel,!
O'Connell, Bright, Lord Russell, Grote, MacaulayJ
— all these names are associated with the efforts'
of the first half of the century.^ But secret voting
has in England always had to encounter a special
argument of predominant influence. It is difficult to
sum it up in a few words, but its burden is that the
open vote tends to create and maintain the self-
respect of the voter, and that the secret vote is the
parent of hypocrisy. The strength of this sentiment
1 The following passage-at-arms -will serve to show the vigor with
which the movement was carried on in controversial literature: —
" Objection 26: That Publicity is the main essence of the represen-
tative system. Ans. Is the elector's being kicked the main essence
of the representative system? Is the elector's being bribed the main,
essence of the representative system? If they are, the publicity which
secures them may be so too. Some people think that if the voter has
a right to vote, he has a right to vote without being kicked. Some
people think that if he is to choose a legislator for the public, it is
good he should do it with as little chance of bribery as may be. Some
even go to the length of thinking these are of the main essence. Will
anybody tell us how the voter is to do better for being either kicked or
bribed? But it is good that the voter should go through great tribu-
lation. In the Life of Alexander by Quintus Curtius is the story of a
man who, after giving his evidence to the best of his ability, was put
to the torture, to see if he ' would say the same under torment.' In
like manner, with the %'oter it is held necessary to see whether he will
vote the same under torment." From Fallacies against the Ballot, with
the Answers: published by the Ballot Society, 1855. See also Grego,
ante, c. xiv.
]4 INTRODUCTION.
among many of the more thonglitful men in England
is something which perhaps has not been appreciated
in this country.-^ We may conceive that to enact
compulsory secrecy in voting will to some conserva-^
tive Americans perhaps appear a step too far ; but
the denial of even an optional secrecy such as we
now enjoy is a policy which to many of us would
be almost incomprehensible.
In the elections of 1868, however, matters reached
a climax, and the month of March, 1869, saw a com-
mittee appointed, with the Marquis of Hartington
in the chair, to inquire into the existing methods. of
conducting elections, in order to provide further
guarantees for the " tranquillity, purity, and free-
dom " of parliamentary and municipal elections.^
The committee held sessions during three months,
unearthed various accounts of corruption and intimi-
dation at the previous elections, and examined wit-
nesses from Australia, the United States, France,
Italy, and Greece, steadily endeavoring to secure
some comprehensive solution of the problem. They
reported, in July, 1869, only the evidence taken be-
fore them, but upon reappointment, in the session
^ See an article by James Mill, in 13 Westminster Rev. 1. See
also Edinb. Rev. 1S53, pp. 572, 610. This feeling still lingers here
and there in England with all the vitality of a traditional sentiment,
and it was probably to its influence that the seven years' limitation of
the original Ballot Act was due. See 115 Westm. Rev. 443 (1881).
Indeed no stronger evidence is needed of the merits of the act than
the fact that the secret ballot is not in accord with the traditions of
British politics, and is retained in the British electoral system purely
for the immense benefits which it is seen to secure.
2 Pari. Papers, 1868-1869, vol. viii. ; 1870, vol. vi.
INTRODUCTION. 15
of 1870, they reported a recommendation that the
secret ballot be adopted. The fruit of the move-
ment was the Ballot Act of 1872, brought in on Feb.
20, 1870, by William E. Forster, Secretary Bruce,
and Lord Hartington, and recommitted and amended
from session to session for more than two years, until
on May 30, 1872, it passed the Commons, and sub-
sequently took its place among the statutes as 35 &
36 Vict., c. 33, — based substantially on the South
Australian method, but modified, enlarged, and care-
fully applied to the circumstances of its new home.^
Fortunately we are not without testimony as to its
operation. Four years later, on the motion of Sir
Charles Dilke, a committee was appointed, with that
noted Liberal as chairman, "to inquire into the work-
ing of the machinery of the Ballot Act."^ They
gave the subject a thorough investigation, and sum-
moned, among other witnesses, the town clerks of
Leeds, Manchester, and Liverpool, leading returning
officers, and election agents of both parties. The
general and emphatic verdict was that a thorough
change for the better had taken place. "All those
disorders," said Sir Joseph Heron, town clerk of
Manchester, " that used to occur under open voting
have ceased altogether. . . . Any one walking
through the borough would not know the fact that
an election was going on ; everything is so perfectly
peaceful;" and yet " it was notorious that, taking the
city as a whole, there was more interest felt in the
elections than had been known for very many years
^ For a more detailed account of the movement, see " The Ballot
in England," by Edwin Goadby, Pol. Sci. Quart., Dec, 1888.
2 Pari, Papers, 1876, vol. xii.
16 INTRODUCTION.
past." To the change in regard to the purity of the
election he bears the strongest possible testimony :
" I believe that such a thing as bribery does not ex-
ist at Manchester ; " though it was in these large
cities that the disorders of the previous decades had
reached their extreme. " The ballot is a blessing to
us," said the town clerk of Leeds, Mr. Curwood ;
and this testimony was corroborated on all sides.^
The course of legislation since 1872 indicates very
1 Some fears had been expressed that the new method of marking
the vote would have difficulties for the less intelligent voters, but the
result showed this to be groundless. In a test vote taken by anticipa-
tion in Manchester in 1870, the total number of votes cast was 11,475,
and of these only 80 were void for insufficient marking. At the
Leeds election of 1874, out of 31,793 votes, only SG were void for un-
certainty or failure to mark; in the Kent election only 32 votes out of
23,000 were lost for uncertainty; and at Liverpool, in 1874, where
37,000 voted, the uncertain ballots were only 193 in number. These
figures show a proportion of lost votes probably much lower (as poll-
ing-inspectors would testify) than the unknown number of miscar-
riages which occur in our pi-esent system in the awkward use of
gummed pasters, or in attempting to erase individual names. All the
English figures above quoted were those of the first election under the
new system at the places named, and of localities where the illiterate
vote reached its extreme, and in this light are even remarkable. There
was also some testimony that at the election of 1876, with an increase
of nearly 10 per cent in the number of voters, the number of votes
rejected for the above reasons became smaller, showing that improper
marking is not a constant attendant of the system, but as familiarity
increases, tends to disappear. Australian experience also testified that
very few votes were lost by mistake or informalities. In regard to the
multiplicity of names upon a single ballot, it should be added that
the conditions of English elections permit comparison with our own, for
at School Board elections there are sometimes as many as 25 candi-
dates. As respects polling arrangements under the new system, it
was found that at the time of greatest pressure (and that under the
cumbrous English provisions for taking the votes of illiterates) votes
could be received at the rate of from 150 to 200 per hour, and this
even where only four private compartments were provided at each
polling-place.
INTRODUCTION. 17
clearly the degree to which the Ballot Act com-
mended itself to the British people. In 1873 the
Elementary Education Act (36 & 37 Vict., c. 86)
provided for its application to the election of school
boards;^ and in 1884 the Education Department, by
a General Order, combined its operation with the
new method of cumulative voting-. In 1875 the
rules relating to municipal elections were revised by
the Municipal Elections Act (38 & 39 Vict. c. 40)
and in 1882 were placed, without material change,
in the Municipal Corporations Act (45 & 4G Vict,
c. 50). The Ballot Act was limited to expire Dec.
31, 1880, but it has been regularly continued in
force from year to year,^ and may now be regarded
as a permanent element of the English electoral sys-
tem. In Aug., 1888, it was applied to county elec-
tions by the Local Government Act, 1888 (51-52
Vict., c. 41), so that the entire field of elections in
England and Wales, if not in Scotland and Ireland
as well, is now covered by the Australian system of
balloting.
Its success in this quarter had far-reaching results.
The adoption of the system by Great Britain gave
it a standing which it could not otherwise have had,
and communities afflicted with like evils came to
^ Tn 1870, the Education Act having given the Education Depart-
ment power to hold elections in its own way, the ballot had been
used at the School Board elections in London (Pari. Papers, 1884-85,
vol. xi., Report of Com. on School Board Elections (Voting)).
'•2 43-4-1 Vict , c. 48; 44-45 Vict., c. 70; 45-46 Vict., c. 64; 46-47
Vict., c. 40; 47-48 Vict., c. 53; 48-49 Vict., c. 59; 50 Vict., c. 5;
50-51 Vict., c. 63.
18 INTRODUCTION.
study the remedy which had there found favor.
Naturally, the new method next appeared m British
America. It was adopted by the Legislature of
British Columbia, Feb. 21, 1873 (Ballot Act, 36 Vict.
Xo. 6), by the Legislative Assembly of the Province
of Ontario, March 24, 1874 (Ballot Act, 37 Vict,
c. 5); by the Dominion (Canada) Parliament, May
26, 1874 (Dominion Elections Act, 37 Vict., c. 9) ;
by the Legislature of the Province of Quebec, Feb.
23, 1875 ; by the General Assembly of Nova Scotia,
May 6, 1875 (Statutes 1875, c. 26) ; in the North-
west Territories, Dec. 18, 1885, by the Lieutenant-
Governor in Council (Ordinances, 1885, No. 2) ; and
by the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, May 18,
1886 (Election Act, 1886, c. 29). Li British Colum-
bia a revision took place in 1877 (Ballot Act, 1877,
No. 19), and in 1881 (Municipalities Act, 1881, No.
16) the system was applied to municipal elections.
In Nova Scotia the original act now appears as Rev.
Stat. 1884, c. 4. In Manitoba the Municipal Act
1886 (c. 52, May 28) adopted the system for mu-
nicipal elections ; and in 1888 (Election Act Amend-
ment) a revision of the general act of 1886 was made.
Subsequent Dominion legislation has applied the sys-
tem to local option upon the temperance question
(Canada Temperance Act, 1878, 41 Vict., c. 16). In
Ontario it was immediately extended to municipal
elections (38 Vict., c. 18, Dec. 21, 1874). In Quebec,
where municipal elections have been governed by
the Municipal Code of 1870, enacted while the old
system was in force, the application of the Australian
INTRODUCTION. 19
system to the city of Quebec by the charter recently
granted (July 12, 1888, 51-52 Vict., c. T8), shows
the growing demand, here as elsewhere, for the ex-
tension of the system to all manner of elections.^
In Belgium also a remedy was needed for degen-
erate elections. The title of the Act of July 9, 1877,
" Sur le secret dii vote et mr lesfraudes elecioyales,'' sug-
gests the state of things which brought the subject to
the attention of the legislature.^ Party spirit has
always been high in Belgium. The great parties,
Liberal and Catholic, were very evenly divided in
this kingdom of six million souls, and the contest for
the small number of votes which carried the balance
of power gave birth to all forms of corruption, — to
fraudulent registration, illegal voting, intimidation,
1 The following extracts from a letter by a Nova Scotian election
officer, appearing iu "The Nation" of Jan. 10, 1889, will be of
interest: —
In Canada the Australian ballot system has been in force for the
past fourteen years. We have grown familiar with it, and what
astonishes me is how any one can call it complex, or having once seen
it could possibly endure to work with any other. . . . There are no
provisions preventing persons congregating about the polling-booth.
In practice it is found that the small polling district and the secret
voting do away with all temptation to rioting. In former times here,
with open voting and a few large sections, we had furious fights about
the booths. ... As to simplicity of working, there was a little diffi-
culty at first, though nothing like what was predicted. But now very
few mistakes are made or votes thrown away. ... As to preventing
bribery, it is not such a success as we should like. It has done a good
deal; nevertheless, the most of our bribable electors, especially in the
country, make it a curious point of honor to vote the way they have
been paid to. The Corrupt Practices Act ... is far and away more
effectual than the ballot.
Halifax, N. S., Dec 28.
2 The ballot already existed in name, but only in the ineffective
form used in France and the United States.
20 INTRODUCTION.
improper influence, false counting, marked, altered,
and suppressed ballots.^ The modifications of the
electoral law since the time of the constitution (1831)
had been only recently codified in the Electoral Code
of 1872 ; but England's example inspired a fresh
movement of reform, and the Premier, Malon, after
a careful study of the Ballot Act of 1872, and suit-
able modification of its provisions, brought in, and
succeeded in passing, the Act of July 9, 1877, —
adopting substantially the English system in a much
less cumbrous piece of legislation, but containing
some unique improvements. This law applied only
to national elections, but was in the succeeding year
applied also to provincial and municipal elections ; ^
and with the exception of one or two minor amend-
ments (noticed in Part V., infra), has remained
unaltered. In 1882 the various statutes were con-
solidated into a supplement to the Electoral Code
of 1872.^ In 1879 Belgium's diminutive neighbor,
the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, in the law of
May 28, bore witness to the efficient working of the
Belgium measure by adopting it almost in its en-
tirety ; * and five years later, when the laws relating
to elections were revised and codified, proved its
own satisfaction with the system by applying it to
municipal elections.^
^ Annuaire de legislation etrangere (Paris), vol. xvii., 1877, p. 512.
2 Annuaire, etc., vol. xviii., 1878, p. 466.
8 Supplement au code alphabetique des lois politiques, etc., par H.
Wyvekens (Brussels, 1882).
* Annuaire, etc., vol. ix., 1879, p. 592.
fi Act of Mar. 5, 1881; Annuaire, etc., vol. xiv., 1881, p. 527.
INTRODUCTION. 21
Whether compulsory secrecy attended the ballot
system introduced into Piedmont by Charles Albert
in 1848, and into the kingdom of Italy in 1860 by
Victor Emmanuel, the editor is not aware/ Cavour,
who took an important part in the framing of the
law, w^as always a champion and defender of at least
permissive secrecy of voting ; for it was, in his con-
viction, the only safeguard against clerical intimida-
tion. But w^hen the extension of the suffrag-e and
electoral problems generally were discussed in 1881-
82, and the question of the method of voting was
reached, it would seem that the example of England
and Belgium in pronouncing in favor of compulsory
secrecy was in the minds of the framers of the law
of 1882, and that its careful and detailed provisions
for compulsory secrecy w^ere influenced by the pre-
vious European legislation based on the Australian
system. The electoral reforms of 1882 were com-
prised in the Acts of Jan. 22 and May 7, after-
wards published as one by royal decree of Sept. 14.^
They contain the essence of the Australian system.
It will be noticed, how^ever, that nominations are not
required to be previously communicated to the au-
thorities, since the official ballot is blank, and is writ-
ten upon by the voter himself,^ the candidates being
made known beforehand at public meetings held in
their interest, or by other methods of publication.
\ See Pari. Papers, 1868-69, vol. viii., Test, of John W. Probyn,
p. 583; Orlando, La Riforma Elettorale (1883), pp. 243-247.
^ Aunuaire, etc , vol. xii., 1882, p. 503.
3 A reading and writing qualification is imposed by the same Act of
1882. According to Orlando, supra, secret voting is a success in Italy.
22 INTRODUCTION.
It remains to notice, in transatlantic governments,
the adoption by Norway, in 1884,^ of compulsory
secrecy in voting. The time-honored custom in Nor-
way, under the Electoral Act of 1828, had been to
vote, at the pleasure of the elector, viva voce or by
a signed ballot. In 1884 a system was adopted^
nearly resembling the Italian method, but requiring
the use of an official envelope ; although, inasmuch
as the voter procures his ballot for himself before
entering the polling-place, the method is hardly
to be considered as completely in accord wuth the
Australian system.
The electoral statutes of certain other European
countries sometimes contain resemblances to the
essential features of the Australian system. In Aus-
tria, for example, a blank official ballot-paper is
used, and the vote is privately written ; in Hungary
and Greece pre-appointed nominations are required ;
but since in none of these states has the Australian
system been adopted in its entirety, nor does the
presence of this or that feature seem to have any
historical connection with the Australian method, it
would not be proper in this place to refer at length
to those laws.^
In the Prussian Landtag the demand has been
made, from time to time, for a secret ballot. In-
timidation is common enough to need preventive
1 Act of July 1 ; Annuaire, etc., vol. xiv., ISS-i, p. 624.
2 See Part VIIT.
3 See further, Part VIIT., infra, and Charbonnier, Organisation
electorale de tous les pays civilises, Paris, 18S3.
INTRODUCTION. 23
measures of some sort; and, though the Government
has as late as March, 1888, again failed to grant the
reform,^ it is probable that the movement must suc-
ceed before long.
In France a ballot reform bill was introduced in
the early part of March, 1889, but failed to pass?
The history of ballot reform in our own country
is as yet brief, but is full of earnest and successful
action on the part of its friends. It is no longer the
result of a merely local and casual demand, but has
become a great popular movement.
Reform based on the Australian or English system
seems first to have been advocated by a member of
the Philadelphia Civil Service Reform Association in
1882, in a pamphlet entitled " English Elections,"
and by Mr. Henry George, in the " North American
Review" for March, 1883. It is also claimed by Mr.
Robert Schilling, editor of the Milwaukee " National
Reformer," that he advocated the reform in his jour-
nal as early as 1881.
The first direct efforts at legislation seem to have
been made in Michigan. In January, 1885, a bill
embodying the Australian ballot system was intro-
duced in the lower house of the legislature by Mr.
George W. Walthew, of Lansing. It was lost by a
vote of 23 to 44 {in favor ^ 8 Republicans, 15 Demo-
crats; opposed, 24 Republicans, 20 Democrats). In
1887 Mr. Walthew's bill, remodelled, was again
offered by Mr. Judson Grenell, of Detroit. It passed
^ Bulletin de la soc. de legisl. comp., June, 1888, p. Gil.
2 The editor has not been able to obtain a copy.
2i INTRODUCTION.
the House hy a vote of 57 to 32 {in favor, 47 Repub-
licans, 10 Democrats ; opjjosed, 20 Republicans, 12
Democrats). In the Senate 17 votes were necessary
for its passage, and the bill received only 14 upon the
first vote. After amendment it received 19 votes; but
this occurred upon the last day of the session, and too
late for the appointment of a conference committee.
In the session of 1889 three bills were introduced,
and ultimately a law was enacted. It is, however, a
compromise measure (resembling the Wisconsin stat-
ute of 1888 infm), and not at all satisfactory.^
In Kentucky a bill drafted and introduced by
Arthur M. Wallace, Esq., of Louisville, was enacted
Feb. 24, 1888. A constitutional provision requires
viva voce voting at State elections, and the law ap-
plies only to municipal elections in Louisville. It
passed in both branches of the Legislature with only
one dissenting vote (in the House), the parties
standing as follows : Senate, 32 Democrats, 6 Re-
publicans ; House, 70 Democrats, 25 Republicans.^
1 To ]\Ir. Walthew belongs the credit of having offered the first
measure of the kind in a legislature in this countrj\ His bill (sug-
gested by the Canadian system) was received with curiosity and ridi-
cule, and only the most strenuous efforts secured it a hearing. In
1887 Mr. Grenell's measure received the support of all the labor jour-
nals and of the Detroit "Evening News" (Ind.), all the partisan
papers standing in opposition. At this session nearly all the Demo-
crats were hostile to the measure, the legislature having a large
Republican majority in each branch. Public opinion in 1889 was
strongly in favor of the reform, and the measure which has been
adopted will probably be replaced by something better.
2 The success of the bill was due to the efforts of its introducer,
Mr. Wallace: its active support came entirely from the Democrats.
Until the testing of the law took place there was no marked public
sentiment in its favor ; but it proved an undoubted success at the first
INTRODUCTION. 25
In New York the movement had its rise simul-
taneously in several different sources. Mr. William
election held, and has certainly accomplished the results which were
expected from it. " The election last Tuesday," writes a correspond-
ent in " The Nation " (Dec. 13, 1888), " was the first municipal elec-
tion I have ever known which was not bought outright. As a matter
of fact no attempts at bribery were made."
The following letter testifying as to the operation of the law
appeared in the Boston "Advertiser" and the Boston " Globe" of
Jan. 11, 1889: —
The law was apparently difficult and intricate. It had been pre-
dicted that the election would end in confusion and disorder. The
chief local newspaper had given the project but cold support. Yet the
event confounded all; it was administered with practically uniform
ease and success by election officers who certainly did not rise above
the average in intelligence. ... I have heard of no case in which a
ballot was thrown out in the count because of the failure of the voter
to understand what was required of him.
In addition to demonstrating its perfect practicability, the election
tested the power of the law to prevent bribery. It can hardly be pos-
sible that there is a city in the Union where open corruption has been
more generally practised than in Louisville.
We do not admit the fact of its corruption without great regret ;
nor would we desire to be lulled into any false security respecting the
efficacy of the means just tried to stamp it out. But it is an undenia-
ble fact that in the late election there was, except in one place, no
corruption successful, and but little attempted, and that with this evi-
dence of its successful working the chances have greatly lessened that
bribery will be tried.
Other objections that had been urged failed wholly to be justified.
In no case, as far as I can learn, was there any delay in recording
votes. A compartment is provided for every one hundred and seventy
five voters, whereas the IVIassachusetts law provides one for every
seventy-five, and yet the accommodations were in every case ample.
So far from interfering with the process of voting, I should not be
surprised if actually less time were required than by the old viva voce
system.
Again, the counting of votes proceeded apparently with perfect
ease. The results of the election were published in the papers the
following morning with the accustomed fulness; nor did the official
count, so far as I know, require more time than was the case under
the old method.
In some of its details the law may be improved, but in all essential
^l'}^^
26 INTRODUCTION.
M. Ivins, of New York, in " Electoral Reform, and
the History of the Yates-Saxton Bill," says : —
During the winter of 1887 the Commonwealth Club of New
York, which consists of men of all shades of political faith, devoted
a half-dozen meetings to the public consideration of the failure of the
law to protect the suffrage, and at the end of the season appointed
a committee of well-known and able lawyers and public men of large
legislative and administrative experience to draft a bill for pres-
entation to the legislature. Every one of these men was especially
qualified for the work to do which he was appointed, and the com-
mittee as constituted consisted equally of Democrats and Republi-
cans. This committee was subsequently joined by a like committee
of the City Reform Club, appointed for the same purpose, and after
many months of careful study prepared a measure which, after being
approved by the Commonwealth Club, the Reform Club, the City
Reform Club, and the Labor Party, was presented in the Assemljly
about the middle of the session of 1888, and known as the Yates
Bill. Mr. Saxton and Mr. Hamilton had already presented bills
looking to the same end. These bills were all referred to the
Assembly Committee on Judiciary, and what was subsequently
known as the Yates-Saxton, or Saxton, Bill was reported to the
House. The bill, as reported, was substantially the Yates Bill
with a few amendments adopted from the Hamilton and original
Saxton bills.
The measure passed both Houses by the following
vote : House, in favor, 65 Republicans, 10 Demo-
particulars it is beneficent and effective, and we have seen enough to
fix it firmly in the confidence of the people.
Abram Fi.exner.
Louisville, Ky., Jan. 3.
The decision in Rogers v. Jacob, 11 S. W. Rep. (Ky.), 513, as to the
unconstitutionality of the section preventing illiterates from receiv-
ing assistance in the compartments expressly sustains the remainder
of the law; and the defect will probably be remedied by the adoption
of the Massachusetts illiteracy clause. See an article by the writer
on the constitutionality of the various acts in the "American Law
Review" for October, 1SS9.
INTRODUCTION. 27
crats ; opposed, 1 Republican, 35 Democrats j Senate,
in favor, 18 Republicans, 2 Democrats ; opposed, 8
Democrats. A veto was, however, interposed (June,
1888) by Governor Hill (Dem.).' In 1889 the Sax-
ton Bill was amended, and once more introduced,
and as amended received the indorsement of a com-
mittee of the Young Men's Democratic Club of New
York (Feb. 18, 1889). The bill again passed by the
following vote : House, in favor, 73 Republicans •
opposed, 44 Democrats ; Senate, in favor, 18 Republi-
cans ; opposed, 11 Democrats. Governor Hill again
vetoed it (May 13). As long as the present gover-
nor remains in office, further efforts for the reform
will be useless ; but there is no doubt as to the
popular conviction upon the subject.
The legislation of 1888 in Massachusetts was
based on a popular movement even stronger and
more widespread than that which made itself felt
in New York. The first bill was introduced in the
House by Mr. Elihu B. Hayes, of Lynn. Meanwhile
a committee, including Messrs. Morrill Wyinan, Jr.,
and Richard H. Dana, of Cambridge, with others,
had held meetings during the winter of 1887, and
prepared a bill which was afterwards accepted by
Mr. Hayes in lieu of his own. Petitions were re-
ceived from the Common Council of Boston, from
citizens of Boston, Cambridge, Chelsea, Fall River,
Ljam, Newton, Somerville, Taunton, Worcester,
1 See a pamphlet by Louis F. Post (reprinted from the New York
"Standard") containing an able answer to this veto ("Standard"
Office, New York, 188SJ, and Ivins' "Electoral Reform."
28 INTRODUCTION.
and many of the rural districts, asking for similar
legislation. The press as a whole supported the
measure, and the labor organizations were as a
rule in favor of it. The particular objects sought
were principally greater freedom in casting the
vote and greater opportunity for independent can-
didacies. The evils of bribery and machine rule
were here less noticeable than elsewhere. The
subject was laid before the joint committee on
election laws, of which Mr. Henry H. Sprague
was chairman on the part of the Senate, and Mr.
Alpheus Sanford on the part of the House ; and
it received exhaustive consideration. The Com-
mittee had before them the four bills above
mentioned, — the Saxton bill of New York, the
Michigan bill (introduced in the legislative session
of 1888 in Micliigan, but lost through a failure of
the two branches to agree), and the British, Cana-
dian, and Australian statutes ; and from this abun-
dant material it was endeavored to shape a law
which should be efficient and permanent, adapted
to the electoral system of the State, and containing
in its details the best features of previous legisla-
tion. The bill reported by them was supported by
members of both leading parties, headed by Mr.
Hayes in the House and by Mr. Sprague in the
Senate. It was enacted in the House by a vote of
121 to 41, and in the Senate without a division, and
was approved by the Governor May 30, 1888.^
^ This was not the first time that the secret ballot had applied for
admission to the Massachusetts statute book. The early ballot law
INTRODUCTION. 29
In the session of 1888-1889 a few perfecting
amendments were made ; but the repeal of the law
of 164:7, under which the vote was cast " by wrighting the names of
the persons Elected, in papers open or once foulded, not twisted nor
rowled up, that they may be the sooner perused " (Colonial Laws,
1672, " Elections," p. 47, reprint of 1887), was passed at a time when
the distinction between a compulsory and an optional secrecy had not
become important. By the year 1850 there was need enough for a
measure of reform, and the Know-Nothing party took up the cause of
the secret ballot, perhaps, to some extent, for the reason that secrecy
in the political opinions of its members was almost necessary to tlie
success of the movement. In 1850 a legislative committee, with
Amasa Walker at its head, reported strongly in favor of a system of
compulsory secrecy, which provided for furnishing official envelopes to
all voters, and for counting no ballots not contained in the envelopes.
This plan became a law in 1851 (c. 226), a coalition of Democrats and
Free-soilers passing it by a small majority. The law seems to have
worked well during its brief existence; although it is evident that
practically it contains nothing to prevent bystanders from ascertain-
ing what ballot is put into the envelope. But, in 1853, the Whigs
again controlled the legislature, and on February 24 mortally wounded
the new law by making it optional to demand or not an official enve-
lope, as the voter pleased. To request an envelope thus ticketed the
voter as clearly as could be wished. In May, 1853, a convention sat in
Boston to propose amendments to the Constitution, and compulsory
secrecy in voting was recommended as one of the amendments. The
people, however, failed to accept it. In 1855 the American party car-
ried the State, and, again passing the envelope bill in the House, were
defeated in the Senate by one vote. At the time Charles Sumner was
first elected to the United States Senate, an incident occurred on the
joint ballot which created much comment at the time, and was used as
an argument for the effectiveness of the secret ballot as a gauge of real
conviction and a guarantee of liberty of action. After twenty-five
fruitless ballotings, a motion was carried to place each ballot in a
sealed envelope. Sumner was then elected on the twenty-sixth ballot.
The optional envelope law is still in force in Massachusetts, but it is of
no practical value, and is seldom taken advantage of.
The foregoing facts are drawn partly from two interesting pam-
phlets, — one a letter from Amasa Walker to the Ballot Society of Lon-
don, published by them in 1855 as Tract No. 5; the other, a modest
essay by Edward L. Pierce, of Milton, published in the Boston " Post "
of Aug. 2, 1852, republished in the Dedham " Gazette," July 30, 1853,
entitled " Secret Suffrage," afterwards reprinted by the Ballot Society,
30 INTRODUCTION.
was refused without a division. A Ballot Act League
including leading members of all parties has been
formed for the purpose of enforcing the law and
securing a fair trial for it at the ensuing election in
November, 1889/
In Wisconsin, as a result of efforts towards reform,
a law was passed in the session of 1887 regulating
the conduct of elections in cities of more than 50,000
inhabitants, and incorporating some of the features
of the Australian system. In 1889 legislation in-
volving the latter system in its entirety was broug^it
forward and placed on the statute-book without a
dissenting voice in either branch of the legislature.
The Republicans were in the majority in both
branches, and the Milwaukee "Sentinel" (Rep.) was
the leading advocate of the reform. The author of
the bill which became law was Senator H. A. Cooper,
of Racine. The first election under the law will be
the municipal election of April, 1890.^
with notes by James Mill, and containing an excellent accoi;nt of the
ballot in classic times and of the history of the ballot reform move-
ment in England down to 1855.
^ The Constitution of the League will be found in the Ap-
pendix, IV.
2 The original bill (for which ]\Ir. Cooper's was substituted) was
introduced by Senator Theodore Fritz (Labor) of INIihvaukee. A
tliii-d was offered by Representative JNIillard. The law of 1888 (known
as the " Keogh law "), applicable to Milwaukee alone, and prohibiting
ticket-peddling at the polls, was also brought forward again by its
author, ]\Ir. Edward Keogh, in a form applicable to the whole State.
The Labor press, especially the "National Reformer," edited by
Robert Schilling (who claims, indeed, that the Australian system was
advocated by him as early as 1881), earnestly supported the movement
for that system. Owing, it is said, to fear of too great opposition
from the professional politicians, the provisions of the Cooper bill did
INTRODUCTION. 31
During the first half of 1889 the further progress
of the reform has been as follows : —
I. — Legislation Enacted.
Rhode Island. — In May, 1888, at the short session
of the legislature at Newport, a bill embodying the
Australian system was introduced in the House by
Edwin C. Pierce of Providence. The bill went over
until the session beginning in January, 1889, when
it was passed in the House (February 21) unani-
mously, in the Senate (March 15) by a vote of 29
to 5. The parties on this vote stood as follows:
in favor, 23 Republicans, 6 Democrats ; opposed, 5
Republicans. As finally amended it went into force
June 1, 1889, the first regular election under it
occurring April 2, 1890, for the choice of State
officers.^
not apply to Milwaukee, and an amendment making it applicable was
voted down. This may explain the facility with which the bill passed.
A determined effort is being made by partisans whose interests the
new law menaces, to embarrass its operation and secure its repeal, —
for instance, by distributing through the State a copy of Governor
Hill's objections to the New York act. Apparently the full danger to
machine politics was not realized at the time that the bill was suffered
to pass without opposition.
1 The advocacy of the Australian system by the New York " Stand-
ard," and by the Providence "Journal" (Alfred M. Williams,
editor) and Providence " Telegram," had contributed to create a pub-
lic sentiment in favor of the reform, which took shape after the
exposures of corruption in the election of April, 1888, and the intro-
duction of Mr. Pierce's bill in May, 1888, in the organization of the
Rhode Island Ballot Reform Association, with Dr. William Barker as
president, and Mr. Alfred Dawson as secretary. Through its efforts
thousands of signatures were obtained, and many public meetings held,
in behalf of the reform. The press generally, and representatives of
both parties, came forward in support, though only the strong popular
6Z INTRODUCTION.
Indiana. — In this State a bill was passed early in
the spring of 1889 by a vote of 35 to 13 in the
Senate, and 64 to 21 in the House. The party lines
were drawn as follows : Republicans, in favor, 8
senators, 12 representatives; opposed, 12 senators,
21 representatives. Democrats, in favor, 27 sena-
tors, 52 representatives; opposed, 1 senator. The
first election under the system will take place in
November, 1890.^
feeling restrained many machine politicians from offering open opposi-
tion. In the legislature the prominent supporters were Messrs. Pierce
of Providence, the introducer of the bill, Barney of Providence, Freeman
of Lincoln, Blodgettof Pawtucket, Gannon of Burrillville, and Barstow,
in the House, and Mr. Owen of Scituate, in the Senate. Corruption
methods in Rhode Island, having found favor even with men of high
standing and honorable reputation, have had an especially pernicious
and degrading influence upon civic affairs; but the movement of the
past year has embraced all occupations and interests, and the step
forward, considered in its moral aspect, seems to be a determined and
permanent one.
^ The immediate impulse for reform came in the reaction from the
extraordinary corruption which, as the political contests in this State
usually become close and bitter struggles, has prevailed during the last
decade, and culminated at the election of November, 1888. During
the last year or two, occasional suggestions have been put forth in
favor of the Australian system, most of them originating in the infor-
mation published by the New York " Standard." Immediately after the
election of November, 1888, the Indianapolis " Sentinel " (edited by Mr.
S. E. Morss) began an enei-getic and persistent agitation in favor of
the system, and by printing all accessible literature upon the subject,
by opening its columns to letters upon electoral reform from all parts
of the State, and by advocating the reform editorially, both in season
and out of season, it made the adoption of the system the foremost
topic of attention. The Democrats, as the defeated party in the
national election, and the especial (though by no means the guiltless)
sufferers from the corrupt methods employed, naturally took the lead ;
and when the legislature met in January, 1889, a bill embodying the
Australian system, drafted by several prominent Democrats of Indian-
apolis, was introduced in the Senate by Mr. James M. Andrew, of
INTRODUCTION. 33
Missouri. — Ballot reform bills were introduced
early in the session of 1889, on the part of the
Civil Service Reform Association and of the Single
Tax League, — that of the former being introduced
in the Senate by Mr. Samuel P. Sparks, of Johnson
County, and that of the latter in the House by Mr.
Champ Clark, of Pike County. The Sparks bill
was ultimately enacted (May 3) by a vote of 22 to
8 in the Senate, and 84 to 38 in the House. The
first election under it will occur in November,
1890.^
Paoli, and in the House by Mr. Curtis. A dozen or more bills of
similar content were subsequently introduced by other members, but
the bill reported and passed was the amended Andrew bill, so called.
The greater portion of the Republican press opposed the bill, while
the entire Democratic press supported it. A legislative caucus coerced
refractory Democrats and indorsed the bill. The principal debate was
in the Senate, with Senator Barrett, of Fort Wayne, in charge of the
bill, and Senators Armston and Logsdon as prominent advocates.
The new law was obtained by the efforts of the younger Democrats,
aided by the press. With many conservatives, and with the mere
politicians, it is not in favor; but it has the firm basis of a popular
demand, and will endure in all essential parts.
^ The vote by parties the editor has not been able to secure. The
bill was a Democratic measure (the Democrats being in the majority),
though supported by leading Republicans. At first the passage of the
measure seemed easy ; but a strong Republican opposition developed,
and to secure the Senate it was necessary to confine the application of
the law to cities of more than 5,000 inhabitants.
The Sparks bill was prepared by the committee on legislation of
the Civil Service Reform Association, consisting of George A. Madill,
Edward Cunningham, Jr., and John F. Lee, Esqs. Prominent also in
the movement were Charles C. Allen, chairman executive committee
Civil Service Reform Association, and H. Martin Williams of the
Single Tax League. Mr. Clark's bill passed the House, but he ceased
to press his own measure, and lent his aid to that of Mr. Sparks.
The movement was supported by the St. Louis " Republic." " Globe-
Democrat," and " Post-Despatch," and by other journals. There is a
general sentiment in favor of the new law.
3
34 INTRODUCTION.
Tennessee. — Early in the session of 1889, Mr. J. H.
Dortch, senator from Fayette County, introduced a
ballot reform bill. A Democratic caucus indorsed
the bill by a two-thirds vote, but dissatisfaction was
expressed, and another caucus was held, with the
same result. The bill then passed by a vote of 17 to
14 in the Senate, and 59 to 8 in the House (where
the Republicans made every effort, though without
success, to prevent a quorum). The party com-
plexion of the vote was : Democrats, in favor, 17
Senators, 59 Representatives; oiiposed, 5 Senators.
Republicans, in favor, none ; ojyposed, 9 Senators, 8
Representatives. The municipal election, in January,
1890, will be the first to be held under the law.^
^ Xo organized movement took place in Tennessee. The Memphis
"Appeal" (edited by J. N. Keating) throughout the year 18S8 advo-
cated the Australian system and called attention to the legislative
action in New York, Massachusetts, and Kentucky. The lack of a
popular agitation for the measure and the absence in it of a pro-
vision for the assistance of illiterate voters were made the ground of
some criticism in the legislature. The opposition within the Demo-
cratic ranks came largely from the rural districts, and the operation of
the bill as passed is confined to the populous counties. Public opinion
now seems to have received the law with favor; and it is considered
that Tennessee's example will have great influence upon the other
Southern States. Fraudulent counting, the lavish use of money by
rich candidates, and, no doubt, the existence of a purchasable ele-
ment in the ignorant colored vote, have been calling for a remedy.
The limitation of the present law to specific districts and the failure to
provide for illiterate voters may, however, wreck it upon the consti-
tution ; while in its operation it may be embarrassed by the recent
registration law and by the new act requiring State and Congressional
ballot-boxes to be placed one hundred feet apart.
The Democratic press, led by the " Appeal," supported the meas-
ure with a few exceptions; the Republican press opposed it. The
prominent advocates in the House were Messrs. Clapp (speaker),
Morris, Palmer, and INIyers ; in the Senate (where a bare coustitu-
INTRODUCTION. 35
Connecticut. — At the legislative session of 1889
nine ballot reform bills were introduced, all of which
included features of the Australian system. The bill
prepared by Hon. S. M. Hotchkiss, Commissioner of
Labor Statistics, with the assistance of W. F. Henney,
Esq., of Hartford, and introduced in the House
by William B. Glover, of Fairfield, was finally
reported (unanimously) on May 9. It passed the
House (May 22) by a vote of 183 to 9 {opposed, 5
Republicans, 4 Democrats) ; and on May 27 passed
the Senate by a vote of 15 to 5 (opposed, 1 Repub-
lican, 4 Democrats). On June 7 it was vetoed by
Gov. Morgan Bulkeley (Rep.). The House, after
passing it again by an overwhelming majority, re-
considered its action, out of respect to the governor,
and on June 11 an amendment was adopted making
it inapplicable to municipal elections. In the Sen-
ate a ruling (sustained by a vote of 19 to 2) was
made on June 13, that a vetoed bill could not be
amended, and in this way the bill was lost. Towards
the end of the session a compromise bill was sub-
sequently adopted and received the governor's sig-
nature. The municipal elections of October, 1889,
will be the first held under this law.^
tional majority was obtained), Messi's. Lea (speaker), Dortch (the
author of the measure), McDowell, Crews, and Myers.
^ The efforts for ballot reform in this State were headed by
the Commissioner of Labor Statistics, who in August, 1888, began
by securing the insertion in the Republican platform of a plank in
favor of the compulsory secret ballot. The Democratic Convention
indorsed the same princijsle. Mr. Hotchkiss also advocated the Aus-
tralian system in his official report for 1S8S, and circulated copies of
his proposed bill. The press of all parties, led by the Hartford " Post "
86 INTRODUCTION,
Montana. — Early in the session of 1889 a ballot
reform bill was introduced in the Legislative Council
by Will Kennedy, member from Jefferson County,
and shortly before the close of the session it was
passed by a unanimous vote ( 7 Republicans, 3 Demo-
crats) in the Council, and a vote of 18 (all Republi-
cans but one) to 1 (a Republican) in the House. On
October 1, 1889, the election for the adoption of a
constitution and for the choice of State officers will
be held under this law.^
(edited by J. Addison Porter), joined in the movement, the Hartford
" Telegram " alone opposing it. Frequent hearings were held by the
legislative committee, and petitions in favor of the Hotchkiss-Henney
bill poured in from all parts of the State. In the discussion of the bill
one of the principal points of dispute was the form of the ballot and
the choice between grouping candidates by parties and grouping them
by offices. The vote in the House on June 10 in favor of the latter
system stood 102 to 82.
The act passed is of course entirely unsatisfactory as a permanent
ballot reform measure (see Part VIII). This bill, after the failure of
the Hotchkiss-Henney bill on June 13, and the subsequent rejection, on
June 19, of the Cleveland envelope bill, with others, was elaborated on
the night of June 19 (by a conference including, it is said, Repre-
sentative Chapman, Senators Cleveland and Hall, Judges Lynde, Har-
rison, and others), and was introduced on June 20. It was clearly a
compromise measure, and owed its existence largely to the desire to
redeem party pledges.
Here as elsewhere the professional politicians have opposed the
reform by indirect and secret methods ; but the popular wish for the
new system has been more decided and more clearly expressed than in
any other State, and it will beyond doubt be adopted in its entirety
as soon as the present governor retires.
I The Montana law is practically the work of Mr. "Will Kennedy, a
Republican member of the Council, who was indebted for his sources
of information to the New York '< Standard." After earnestly advo-^
eating the system, in the winter of 1SS8, in the Boulder "Age"
(edited by himself), he received the co-operation of the Montana Sin-
gle Tax Association, then recently formed to advance the reform.
Among those who originated the movement were also W. E. Brokaw,
INTRODUCTION. 37
Minnesota. — Early in the session of 1889 a ballot
reform bill was introduced by Representative John
A. Keyes, of Winona. There was no opposition of
parties in regard to the measure, and it passed in the
House by a vote of 63 to 17, and in the Senate with-
out a division (the legislature being Republican).
The municipal elections of March, 1890, will be the
first to occur under this law.-^
In Dakota the reform received strong support from
the Dakota Farmers' Alliance, in whose platform it
was advocated. A bill introduced in the Legislative
Council by one Welsh was passed (the Republicans
being in the majority in both branches), with only 5
now of Bristol (S. D.), S. F. Ralston, Sr., of Marysville, and J. M.
Clements. Information was circulated, press opinions were invited,
and petitions containing several thousand signatures were secured.
The brief time, however, before the session of 1889 for advocating the
measure, gave little prospect of success. The introducer of the meas-
ure by voting against a Republican registration bill at a previous
session had incurred the enmity of the Republican managers, and
such liostility, direct and indirect, as the measure received was to some
extent based upon its authorship, and not upon its merits as a ballot
reform measure. Persistent efforts, however, led by Mr. Kennedy,
removed all opposition in the legislature. The final votes were virtu-
ally unanimous, for the al)sentees (seven in number) were all in favor
of the bill. The press at first was indifferent, the Republican portion
in part hostile; but since the passage of the law general approval has
been expressed, and a majority of the papers have done it the espe-
cial honor of printing it in full. For an account of the election of
July 25, 1889, in Miles City, see Appendix V.
1 Mr. Keyes had been in communication with Mr. Judson Grenell,
of Detroit, and papers upon the subject had been read by the former,
and by Mr. Frank Houston, before the Republican Club of Winona.
Mr. Kej'es was appointed to draft a bill for introduction, and was
afterwards elected to the legislature. The press of both parties
favored the measure, and it found even stronger support than was
expected among the people of the State. A second bill was intro-
duced by Senator Schaffer, but failed to pass the House.
38 INTRODUCTION.
dissenting votes. While on its way to the governor,
however, it was stolen by some person unknown, and
the theft was not discovered until too late to be
remedied.^
II. Bills passed hy one Souse^ hut not reached in the other.
Neiv Jersey. — The history of ballot reform in New
Jersey includes the formation of a Ballot Reform
Association in December, 1888, the passage of a
bill by the lower house of the legislature by a vote
of 46 to 2, and the failure to pass the gauntlet of the
Senate. The vote in the House stood : In favor, 28
Eepublicans, 30 Democrats; opposed, 2 Democrats.
In the Senate the bill was referred to the Committee
on Elections, and was never reported.^
1 A bill had also been introduced by the President of the Coun-
cil, Smith Stimmel, a member of the Alliance, but a disagreement
of some sort occurred, the bill was withdrawn, and the Welsh bill
passed. Common suspicion in Dakota has identified the perpetrator
of the crime as one of two or three persons, but no one has been
brought to justice.
In the South Dakota Constitutional Convention of 1889 an ordi-
nance (introduced by S. S. Peck, of Castlewood) applying the Austra-
lian system to the constitutional election of October was defeated by
a vote of 27 to 34, the machine politicians being responsible for its
defeat. Nevertheless it is confidently expected that a ballot reform
measure will find a place in the North Dakota Constitution, and in
the statutes of the first South Dakota legislature. The people as a
whole are thoroughly in favor of the system.
2 Though several minor efforts for reform have been made in New
Jersey by Labor and Single Tax organizations, it required the corrup-
tion attending the November election of 1888 in that State to stimu-
late an organized effort. Those who met in Newark to form the
Association were Messrs. E. W. Nellis, D. M. Kane, Read Gordon,
Herbert Boggs, and John A. Craig. There was at that time a pre-
vailing ignorance of the subject which prevented success ; but the
Ballot Reform Association will in the ensuing winter have a wider
INTRODUCTION. 39
Colorado. — Through the agency of the Single Tax
organization a petition for ballot reform was pre-
sented to the legislature of 1889. A bill was intro-
duced, passed the House, and was favorably reported
by the Committee of the Senate ; but through the
neglect of the latter body it failed to reach the final
stages.
III. B'llh not reached in either House.
Orer/on. — A bill was prepared by Mr. S. B. Riggen,
of Portland, and introduced in the Senate, in the
session of 1889, by Mr. J. P. Wager, but after
reference to ii committee was never heard of. The
length of the legislative session in this State is only
forty days ; but the fate of the bill in this case was
probably due to the opposition of the Eepublican
politicians in power.-^
Kansas. — A ballot reform bill, drafted and intro-
duced in the House by Mr. C. J. Jones, of Garden
organization and a stronger influence, and success is expected. A bill
prepared by Mr. Boggs was indorsed, and was introduced in the House
by Mr. Kane. The Senate Committee on Elections, to whom it went
after its passage in the House, was composed of ^Messrs. ^lallon (Dem.)
of Passaic County, Miller (Rep.) of Union County, and Adrian (Dem.)
of ^Middlesex County. The first had before election promised the
Association, in writing, to support any ballot reform bill, and the sec-
ond was committed in favor of the bill by the legislative caucus of his
party (who were in the minority, and had agreed in caucus to support
it). The committee's failure to report the bill therefore involved a
breach of faith on the part of two members.
1 Electoral corruption in this State is said to be widespread. Bal-
lot reform is being constantly agitated by the Single Tax League,
which is growing rapidly, and at the next legislative session, in two
years, it is expected to accomplish something. The "East Ore-
gon i an " (Dem.), of Pendleton, was alone among the press in advo-
cating ballot reform.
40 INTRODUCTION.
City, in the session of 1889, and based upon the
Massachusetts law, was unanimously reported by the
Judiciary Committee, with the recommendation that
it pass ; but the session of the Kansas legislature is
limited to forty days, and the bill expired on the
calendar.^
Texas. — A bill was introduced in the legislative
session of 1889, by John M. Melson, of Sulphur
Springs, and was favorably reported by the com-
mittee to which it was referred. Owing to the
length of the session (ninety days only), the bill
did not come before the House for action.^
IV. Bills Rejected.
Nehraslia. — Ballot reform in this State was stren-
uously urged, and failed by a few votes only to
receive legislative sanction. A bill introduced early
in the session was passed in the House on March 12
by a vote of 63 to 18. In the Senate it was indefi-
^ Such discussion and support as the reform has received has been
mainly in the Labor journals. It is not favorably viewed by the Re-
publican politicians now in power. Purchase and intimidation of
voters in this region undoubtedly exceed all bounds. One correspond-
ent speaks of the " wholesale system of stuffing ballot-boxes in Wes-
tern Kansas," and declares that " one half the population expect to
be paid for their votes, especially in county seat elections." Not-
withstanding this state of affairs, " we are not in as bad shape as we
were a few years ago."
2 The press of the State as a whole favored the measure, and the
people have become interested in the reform. Here, as elsewhere, the
need for it is clear. " The elections in most of our border counties,"
says one correspondent, " are worse than failures."
The most prominent advocates of the bill in committee were Samuel
R. Frost of Corsicana, J. J. Rhodes of Millett. R. II. D. Sorrell of
Wharton, and Albert Stevenson of Weatherford.
INTRODUCTION. 41
nitely postponed, on February 21, by a vote of 19 to
12. The party attitudes appeared as follows : Re-
[publicans, in favor, 51 Representatives, 11 Senators;
\opposcd, 11 Representatives, 14 Senators. Democrats,
\m favor, 12 Representatives, 1 Senator ; opposed, 7
Representatives, 5 Senators.-^
Arkansas. — A bill partially embodying the Aus-
tralian system was introduced by Senator James P.
Clarke, of Helena. It passed the Senate, but was
lost in the House by a vote of 34 to 46 (15 not
voting). In the affirmative were 34 Democrats; in
the negative, 25 Republicans (including 15 Labor
representatives), 21 Democrats.^
1 The bill was drafted by Messrs. Hitchcock and Estabrook, mem-
bers of a joint committee of fourteen, appointed by the Typographical
Union, the Central Labor Union, and the Knights of Labor, to organ-
ize the movement for reform. This committee had been appointed at
the instance of four members of the Typographical Union (also mem-
bers of the Single Tax League), — Messrs. Charles Abernethy, Percy
Pepoon, John C. Thompson, and John E. Emblen, — who had first
nret for consultation in Omaha in December, 1888. Two mass-meet-
ings were held in January, and great popular interest was shown.
The reform was advocated by the Omaha " Herald " (Dera.), " World"
(Ind.), " Republican " (Rep.), and " Dispatch " (Rep). A bill which
was to have been introduced by Representative Olmstead, of Hastings,
was withdrawn in favor of the Omaha bill. Messrs. Olmstead and Ber-
lin in the House, and ]Mr. Norval in the Senate, were earnest supporters
of the measure. INIessrs. Abernethy and Thompson had charge of the
bill on behalf of the joint committee from the Labor organizations.
Nebraska is at present a high-license State ; and it is said that the
possibility of an increase under the secret-ballot system of the Pro-
hibitionist vote upon an amendment, to be submitted in 1891, involv-
ing the question of prohibition, materially injured the interests of the
reform. Its prospects in the nest legislature, however, are thought
to be very good.
2 The Clarke bill was a substitute for one introduced by the joint
committee on election laws. It failed in the House principally through
the opposition of the Speaker (Mr. Hudgins, of Boone County). The
42 INTRODUCTION.
California. — Here four ballot reform bills were in-
troduced in the session of 1889. One, prepared by
a committee of the Young Men's Democratic League,
reached and passed a third reading in the House by
a vote of 55 to IT on March 1 ; but on reconsidera-
tion (by a vote of 34 to 25) it was lost on March 4
by a vote of 26 to 47.^
subject of ballot reform was but little discussed by the press of the
State; its principal advocate was the "Arkansas Gazette," of Little
Rock. Undoubtedly the absence of any defined public opinion upon
the subject had much to do with the action of the legislature.
The laws of Arkansas relating to elections must soon be revised.
The constitutional prohibition of a registration law will probably dis-
appear, and other electoral reforms will be added.
The division of the negro vote is sought by the Democrats, and it
is believed that the cause of its present unity is a system of intimida-
tion from which compulsory secret voting would relieve them. The
northern counties, which have only a small negro vote, and do not feel
this necessity for ballot reform, cast 16 of the 21 Democratic votes
against the measure.
1 An analysis of these votes is interesting. The first vote stood:
in favor, 25 Republicans, 30 Democrats; opposed, 10 Republicans, 7
Democrats. Upon the vote to reconsider, the figures were: affirmative,
19 Republicans, 15 Democrats; negative, 11 Republicans, 14 Demo-
crats. Upon the final vote the parties stood: in favor, 11 Republicans,
15 Democrats; opposed, 21 Republicans, 26 Democrats. It is hard
to say, therefore, upon which party the responsibility for the final
action rested. The motion to reconsider was made by a Republican.
The four bills came from different sources, each being prepared
in ignorance of the others, — one by Joseph Leggett, Esq., of San
Francisco, for the Federation of Trades and Labor Organizations;
another by Mr. Ostram, of Sutter and Yuba counties; a third by Mr.
Tully, of San Benito; and the fourth by the committee of the Young
Men's Democratic League, two members of which, Messrs. F. I.
Vassault (secretary of the Civil Service Reform Association) and
]\Ir. F. K. Lane, afterwards led the movement for the reform. The
Federation's information was obtained fi'om the New York "Stand-
ard." They regarded the reform as advantageous to the candidacy of
Labor representatives; while public opinion generally, so far as it was
aroused, was obliged to concern itself (as is noticeable in most locali-
ties west of the Mississippi) more with the grosser evils preventing an
INTRODUCTION. 43
Maine. — Early in the session of 1889 a bill was
drafted and introduced in the House by Mr. Wm. II.
Looney, of Portland. By a vote of 6 to 4 the Com-
mittee on Legal Affairs, to whom it was assigned,
reported unfavorably. On February 14, upon a mo-
tion to substitute the fiivorable minority report, the
bill was lost in the House by a vote of 35 to 104.
The vote stood : in favor, 19 Democrats, 16 Repub-
licans ; opposed, 104 Republicans. In the Senate the
bill ^vas defeated by a vote of 10 to 11 (the Senate
being entirely Republican).^
OJiio. — Here ballot reform was excluded with its
foot upon the threshold. A bill introduced in the
Senate, at the session of 1889, by Mr. Vincent A.
Taylor, of Cuyahoga County, failed on February 27
by a vote of 15 to 9, 19 being necessary for passage.
Upon reconsideration on March 6, the bill was again
lost by a vote of 16 to 9. Three members who
honest count than with bribery and other more subtle forms of corrup-
tion. Measures aimed at the former were passed at this session.
The Sacramento " Record- Union " (Ind. Rep.) was the leading
supporter of the ballot reform measures, while the San Francisco
" Alta " (Dem.) was the only important opponent. In the House
earnest support was given, in addition to the members named above,
by James A. Hall of Watsonville and C. A Storke of Santa Barbara.
1 In answer to a question addressed in November, 1888, by the
Lewiston "Journal" to the members of the legislature, asking for
suggestions of needed legislation, a number declared in favor of ballot
reform, and the subject began to be freely discussed. Mr. Looney's
bill was supported by the entire Democratic press, and by the Repub-
lican press with a few exceptions. Petitions, numerously signed,
were received from all parts of the State, and the bill was indorsed by
the Young Men's Republican Club of Portland, and by representatives
of Labor interests. Popular opinion beyond doubt favors the reform.
The younger element of the Republican party is leading the move-
ment, and wath the aid of the Democrats (who will without doubt
44 INTRODUCTION.
voted in favor on February 27 were absent or not
voting on March 6. The latter vote stood : Repub-
licans, in favor, 14 ; ojyposed, 5. Democrats, in favor,
2 ; opposed, i}
Illinois. — In the session of 1889 bills were intro-
duced by Messrs. Hurst, Converse, and Jones, of the
House. The Converse bill was defeated ; the Hurst
bill, with features of the Jones bill incorporated, was
passed by the House by a vote of 119 to 13 [in
favor, 51 (?) Republicans, 68 (?) Democrats ; opposed,
13 Republicans). After reference to a committee
in the Senate the bill was pigeon-holed and never
reported.^
commit the party to the reform) will probably carry the measure at
the next session in 1891. The power of the Republican machine in
Maine is against the reform, and is an influence not to be easily over-
come. At a public hearing, the ])assage of the bill was earnestly advo-
cated, and no one appeared in opposition.
In the House Messrs. Looney, Chadbourne, and Fox, and in the
Senate Mr. Heath, were the principal advocates of the measure.
1 The bill was drawn by C. A. Potwin, of Zanesville, who had
been appointed in January, 1889, for the purpose, by the Ohio Single
Tax League. He was assisted by D. B. Lynn, Esq., of Zanesville,
and by Senator Taylor. Two other bills were introduced, — one by
]\Ir. Griffin, the other, a somewhat curious one, by Mr. Allen T.
Thurman. The latter bill applied to Columbus only, and was indorsed
by the Columbus Board of Trade. The Taylor bill was advocated
mainly by the Ohio " State Journal," Toledo " Blade," and Cleveland
" Leader," the Cincinnati " Commercial Gazette " opposing it bitterly.
Though the bill was well supported by petitions, little popular inter-
est was shown in it outside of the Labor organizations.
Some ballot reform measure will beyond much doubt be passed in.
1890. The Young Men's Democratic Club of Cincinnati has declared
in favor of the secret ballot, and the Democrats will probably indorse
the Australian system at the convention of 1889, and will make it
a party question should the Republicans fail to advocate it.
- The Republican managers were opposed to the reform, and secured
the defeat of the bill in the Senate. The press, led by the Chicago
INTRODUCTION. 45
Penmijlvama. — A bill drawn by a committee of the
Pennsylvania Civil Service Reform Association was
introduced, in the session of 1889, in the Senate by
Mr. John MacFarlane, of Philadelphia, and in the
House by Mr. Jesse M. Baker, of Delaware County.
In the Senate the bill was never reported from the
special committee of five to whom it was referred
after a fjivorable report by the Committee on Elec-
tions. In the House a vote w^as taken, on April 12,
upon a motion to make the bill a special order (that
being the only mode of reaching it before adjourn-
ment), and the motion was lost by a vote of 69 to
88 (47 absent or not voting). The parties were
ranged as follows : Republicans, in favor, 23, opposed,
87, absent, 33 ; Democrats, in favor, 46, opposed, 1,
absent, 14. Had there been a vote in the Senate,
the parties would have divided in nearly the same
proportion.^
*' Herald," " Inter-Ocean," and " News," advocated tlie measure,
though not actively. The people have become interested in the sub-
ject, and if the system works satisfactorily elsewhere, a law will un-
doubtedly be passed at the next legislative session.
^ As early as 1882 the Australian system of voting was advocated in
a short pamphlet on " English Elections," written by a member of the
Pennsylvania Civil Service Reform Association ; and the example of
Massachusetts in 1888 finally led to concerted action by the Association.
The members of the committee above mentioned were Hon. Wayne Mac-
Veagh, Alfred N. Chandler, Joseph Parrish, W. W. Montgomery, and
Stuart Wood. The Association took the lead in the movement for ballot
reform, and was joined by the Citizen's Municipal Association of Phila-
delphia, and by various Labor organizations. In the House ]Mr. Henry
Hall, of Mercer County, and Mr. Jesse M. Baker, were the leading advo-
cates of the bill ; in the Senate no one showed any special activity in
its behalf. A second bill, drawn by Mr. Fife, of Philadelphia, was also
introduced in the House by Mr. John H. Fow, of that city, but was
never enacted. With the press, the legislature, and the people alike,
there is as yet a general lack of interest in the reform. In Pliiladel-
46 INTRODUCTION.
Delcmare. — A bill drawn by Thomas R. Graham,
Esq., of Kenton, was introduced in the House, on
Feb. 27, 1889, by Mr. David S. Clark (Rep.), of
Kenton. After being delayed in committee, it was
called up for passage on April 24, and was defeated
by a vote of 7 to 14. The vote stood : Republicans,
in favor, 1, opposed, 13 ; Democrats, in favor, 6, op-
posed, 1}
Keiv Hampshire. — At the Constitutional Conven-
tion of January, 1889, the matter of ballot reform
was advocated by the Plymouth '' Record " (edited
by T. J. Walker) as a proper subject for action, and a
few other journals gave their support. At the session
of the legislature beginning in June, 1889, a bill was
introduced by Representative Oliver E. Branch, of
Weare ; but in spite of strenuous efforts on the part
phia the Democratic and Labor press, with most of the Republican
newspapers, have supported the movement; but a general failure to
comprehend the object and the methods of the new system has been
noticeable in the press generally. A Ballot Reform Association will
probably be organized, and will strive to create a strong public opinion
upon the subject. An able presentation of the subject has been made
by Charles C. Binney, Esq., of the Civil Service Reform Association,
in a pamphlet entitled "Ballot Reform Essential to Free and Equal
Elections," Phila., 1889.
1 There was no organized agitation in Delaware, although for the
past year or two the Australian system of voting has received more or
less discussion ; but there is every indication of success in the legis-
lature of 1891. In the November election of 1888, electoral corrup-
tion was undoubtedly widespread, but the Republicans, who carried
the legislature, naturally did not take the lead in demanding reform.
The Democratic press, notably the Wilmington " Every Evening "
(edited by George W. Humphry) and one or two independent Re-
publican papers, supported the Graham measure. Mr. T. F. Arm-
strong (Dem.), of Xewark, had also prepared a bill, but preferred to
support Mr. Graham's. The single Democratic vote against the bill
was so cast by a misunderstanding.
INTRODUCTION. 47
of Mr. Branch to secure favorable action, the subject
was referred (August 7) to the next legislature.-^
V. Subject discussed, but ho Legislation yet asked.
Maryland. — As yet the body of the people are
little, if at all, interested in ballot reform. There
has been more or less mention of the Australian sys-
tem by the press, a few indorsements of it by the
Baltimore Reform League, the Knights of Labor, and
other associations, but no journal has earnestly advo-
cated it, and no definite steps have yet been taken
in its behalf. The efforts of those citizens who would
be likely to lead in the movement for ballot reform
have been too much taken up with the task, as yet
not ended, of preventing by legislation the grosser
election evils — repeating, stuffing, false counting
and returning — to give their attention to the pre-
vention of bribery and intimidation, and to the
destruction of the power of the caucus and the
machine.
Iowa. — In this State preparations are being made
for securing the passage of a ballot reform law in
1890. In the press, particularly the Des Moines
" Daily News " and the Labor journals, the matter
has received some discussion. This reform may not
improbably become the principal local issue.^
1 The Committee reporting (by a vote of 7 to 5) against the bill
was composed of 7 Republicans and 5 Democrats ; 4 Democrats and 1
Republican formed the minority. The vote to refer to the next legis-
lature and to appoint a committee to prepare a bill for introduction at
that time was acquiesced in by Mr. Branch, who saw that more favor-
able action was impossible.
■•2 Such progress as has been made is largely^ud- to the- efforts of
/ ^ Of r^^■i ^ \
48 INTRODUCTION.
In Louisiana, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia
there appears to have been little or no organized
effort for ballot reform.^
VI. Other States and Territories.
In North Carolina and South Carolina the subject
does not appear to have been publicly discussed.
No word has been received from Alabama, Arizona,
Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Mississippi, Nevada, Neiv Mexico,
Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.
It would seem that before many years pass the
entire electoral machinery of the country will have
been reformed in accordance with the principles of
the Australian method. That system has now re-
ceived the approval of the legislatures of thirty-one
civilized States. Sixty-five times these different
legislatures have registered their approval of the
Mr. J. Bellangee, who described the system in the press, and made
a strong effort at the session of 1888 to secure legislative action.
Information has been circulated through the New York " Standard,"
and the new system has been indorsed by the Knights of Labor. The
movement is rapidly gaining strength, and it is said that defeat can
come, if at all, only through indirect and not open opposition.
1 In Louisiana the subject is receiving some discussion, and will
probably be before the legislature of May, 1890. In Vermont the
press has spoken of the new system with approval, but the people
seem to be satisfied with present methods. Nothing will at any rate
be done until the next session of the legislature, in October, 1890-
In Virginia the system has been described in the Richmond "Dis-
patch," but has not been publicly advocated in any way. In West
Virginia the press has agitated the question of electoral reform, and
circulars indorsing the Yates-Saxton Bill of 1888 were sent out by
the Electoral Reform League of Parkersburg. The subject has been
discussed by the Bar Association of West Virginia, and at the next
session of the legislature the subject of ballot reform will in all proba-
bility be brought up.
INTRODUCTION. 49
system by various enactments (exclusive of amend-
ments). The people who now conduct their elec-
tions by this machinery number upwards of eighty-
five millions ; within six months it has been adopted
by fifteen millions more. They are all citizens of
free States, living under constitutional government,
and enjoying representative institutions. So far,
then, as its previous adoption has a significance, the
system is shown to be neither an untested experi-
ment nor a questionable expedient drawn from dis-
similar political experience ; for it is not only well
tried and long tried, but tested and adopted under
political conditions and methods which we have in
common with all representative governments. It is
not the method of any one country or people, but
finds a home wherever a pure and sincere expression
of conviction is the constitutional mode of selecting
the makers and the administrators of the laws.
50 INTRODUCTION.
II.
It remains briefly to suggest the reasons for the
success of the Australian system, and a few of the
special benefits which it promises to American poli-
tics. Amid the minor variations of detail in the
numerous statutes, the cardinal features of the sys-
tem, as everywhere adopted, are two : first, an ar-
rangement for polling by which compulsory secrecy
of voting is secured ; second, an official ballot con-
taining the names of all candidates, printed and dis-
tributed under state or municipal authority. Either
of these may, on principle, exist without the other,
although the second is almost indispensable as a part
of the machinery for the perfect working of the first.
Each requirement, however, has an efficiency of its
own, and each operates against a special class of
evils.
Let us glance at the first. The conditions of life
among us now seem to be such that our statutory
prohibitions, to be effective, must aim to operate
chiefly by indirect methods. Statutes which seek
to prevent by imposing a penalty are in numerous
classes of cases practically of no effect, not only be-
cause satisfactory evidence of the violation is hard to
obtain, but because, through public indifference or
private favor, prosecutions for the offence are rare,
— perhaps also because the prosecution of single of-
fences cannot, in the nature of the offence, prove
any serious check upon its repetition ; perhaps also
for other reasons. Whatever the causes, it has be-
INTRODUCTION. 61
come apparent that the best results are to be reached,
when preventive legislation is planned, by taking one
of three courses : 1. By making the detection of the
offence absolutely certain ; 2. By taking away all
interest in its commission, or by making it profitable
to refrain ; 3. By making the offence physically im-
possible. These methods, of late, are frequent in
legislation, as an illustration or two will show. The
screen law in force in many states is based on the
first principle, and aims to make the sale of liquor so
open that any violation of law can instantly be
detected. The statutes requiring the registration of
pawnbrokers' transactions and the rendering of ac-
counts by public corporations, have a similar purpose.
Again, acting upon the third principle, we find, for
example, that the most effective way to prevent child
labor in factories is to require the presence of the
child at a school. If we look for an illustration of
the second plan, we are reminded of the fire-escape
and building-inspection laws, and the extreme diffi-
culty which is found in enforcing their observance ;
yet when the insurance companies but suggest an
increase of rates upon structures w^hich violate the
laws of safety, improvements are speedily made.
In short, we have begun to realize that the mere
printing of a penal statute is not the only step in
prevention, and that the modern method must be
the indirect method. The secret of effectively
reaching an evil by law is either to insure its
detection, to render it impossible, or to make it
unprofitable.
52 INTRODUCTION.
Tedious as it may seem to dwell upon so obvi-
ous a matter, it has extreme importance for us, for
this truth it is which underlies the effectiveness of
the secret ballot and its usefulness for our political
conditions. On the one hand it checks bribery and
all those corrupt practices which consist in voting ac-
cording to a bargain or understanding. No man has
ever placed his money corruptly without satisfying
himself that the vote was cast according to the agree-
ment, or, in a phrase which became only too com-
mon during the last campaign, without proof that
" the goods were delivered;" and when there is to
be no proof but the word of the bribe-taker (who
may have received thrice the sum to vote for the
briber's opponent), it is idle to place any trust in
such a use of money. In other words, take away all
interest in committing an offence, and the offence
will soon disappear. But this is trite and well-under-
stood, and, in England and Australia, it is not merely
a deduction made beforehand from our acquaintance
with human nature, but an established fact of expe-
rience. On the other hand, the marking of the vote
in seclusion reaches effectively another great class of
evils, including violence and intimidation, improper
influence, dictation by employers or organizations,
the fear of ridicule and dislike, or of social or com-
mercial injury, — all coercive influence of every sort
depending on a knowledge of the voter's political ac-
tion. Tumult and disorder at the polls, bargaining
and trading of votes, and all questionable practices
depending upon the knowledge gained, as the day
INTRODUCTION. 53
goes on, of the drift of the contest, — it would hardly
be necessary to argue in advance, even if England's
experience did not prove it, that these ^^I'^ctices,
wherever they have prevailed, must disappear. In
short, the secret ballot approaches these more or less
elusive evils, not merely witli the weak instrument
of a penal clause for this and that offence, but with
the effective methods of modern legislation. By
compelling the dishonest man to mark his vote in
secrecy, it renders it impossible for him to prove his
dishonesty, and thus deprives him of the market for
it. By compelling the honest man to vote in se-
crecy it relieves him not merely from the grosser
forms of intimidation, but from more subtle and per-
haps more pernicious coercion of every sort. By
thus tending to eradicate corruption and by giving
effect to each man's innermost belief, it secures to
the Republic what at such a juncture is the thing
vitally necessary to its health, — a free and honest
expression of the convictions of every citizen.
I pass to the other essential feature of the Aus-
tralian system, — a feature, if possible more impor-
tant to the cause of good politics. This character-
istic, it need hardly be said, is a development of the
traditional method of nomination in England and
Australia. But no long-meditated invention could
have been more apt or more efficient to reach certain
of the most pressing evils that attend our system of
nominations. A rehearsal of them at this place is
not needed, for they are familiar through experience
to all citizens of our larger cities, and through hear-
54 INTRODUCTION.
say, at least, to others.^ " To find the honest men,"
says Mr. Bryce, in his recent work on " The Ameri-
can Commonwealth," ^ " and having found them, to
put them in office, and keep them there, is the great
problem of American politics ; " and one of the great
reasons why they cannot be put there is, briefly, l)e-
cause the road is completely blocked ; the extra-
legal machinery which necessarily surrounds every
election is in the complete possession, in the large
cities, of a corrupt party machine, in too many
other places, of party managers having more or
less ignoble interests to serve ; and the plain re-
sult is that since we have no opportunity to vote
for the desirable men, we cannot of course elect
them.
" Our elections," sa3's Mr. Ivins, in his telling pamphlet on
" Electoral Reform," " are not elections in any true sense of the
word, and when we vote we simpl}' register our choice as be-
tween two or three men who have already been elected by a
machinery unknown to the law, a machinery which is really the
personal property of the few, and in which the many have no
right which the}' can enforce. The law being silent as to where
the ballots are to come from, as to who shall supply and pay
for them, and as to how they shall be distributed, a certain
few in the community have created a Machine to do all these
things, which the law necessitates, and does not provide for, and
1 See " jMachine Politics and Money in Elections in New York
City," by Wm. B. Ivins; "Money in City Elections," by J. B.
Bishop; A. C. Bernheim, in Pol. Sci. Quart, for March, 1888; F. W.
Whitridge, article on "Assessments," in Amer. Cycl. Polit. Science;
Dorman B. Eaton, article "Primary Elections," in tlie same work;
Theodore Roosevelt, in "Century" for Nov., ISSO; Henry George,
in 136 N. Amer. Rev. (1883) 201; Bryce, " The American Common-
wealth," ii. cc. 60-68, 88, 89.
2 Vol. ii. p. 385.
INTRODUCTION. 55
have therein- actually put an end to the veiy political equalitj'
which the ballot is supposed to preserve inviolable. . . . Be-
sides vesting the power of nomination in fee-simple in those
persons who practically own the machinery for printing and
distributing the ballots, the existing s^-stem amounts to an
almost complete exclusion from official public life of all men
who are not enabled to pay, if not a sum equal to the entire
salary of the office they seek, at least a very large percentage of
it. The poor man, the moderately well-to-do man, and the self-
respecting and conscientious man are thus at once cut off from
all political ambition, because the only key to success is wealth
or machine power."
It is clear that the evil maintains itself because of
the insufficiency of the election laws. Just so long
as the law sanctions a method under which the only
avenue to an election is through a nomination by a
caucus or a convention, so long must we fail to elect
the best men, for our hands are tied. " If a method
can be found by which all men can be given polit-
ical equality before the law, actually as well as
theoretically, the evil will die a natural death." To
compress the issue roughly into a phrase, — what
we need now is not merely free elections, but free
nominations also, — not merely a sincere and accu-
rate expression of opinion, but an opportunity to
nominate and to vote effectively for any one w^hom
we desire.
This is why the method of nominations open to
all and a place in the ballot free to all nominees is
an integral and invaluable part of the Australian
system of ballot reform. This is one reason wdiy
certain of the most glaring evils of popular govern-
ment in this country have never fastened themselves
56 INTRODUCTION.
upon tlie countries in which the method of open
nominations prevails. This is why the ballot-reform
movement promises to have effects far wider than
the mere achievement of a single reform. It is the
opening of a road (perhaps the only road) to the
whole field of political improvements. For, if we
solve by this means the great problem of our poli-
tics, if we are enabled to put honest and capable
men in office and to keep them there, we shall have
created legislative and administrative officers from
whom we may expect the intelligent and fair con-
sideration of those further improvements, — a sort
of consideration which is now only exceptionally
and (it may almost be said) accidentally accorded
to them.-^
1 Mr. Ivins' summing up of the case is clear aud succinct: "Let
us therefore try to summarize distinctly the causes of the evil, aud
note the remedies which they naturally suggest ; —
The Evil. The Remedy.
1. The necessity for voluntarily 1. The printing and distribution
printing and distributing the bal- of all ballots at public expense does
lot justifies organization for this away with the necessity of organi-
purpose. zation for this purpose.
2. It practically vests the Ma- 2. And will deprive the pohtical
chine with the monopoly of the Machines of the monopoly of an
election machinery; essential part of the election ma-
chinery.
3. And, as a consequence, with 3. It will enable any body of citi-
the monopoly of nomination, zens of the number prescribed by
law to have the name of their can-
didate printed on the same ballot
with the names of all other candi-
dates for the same office, so that
before the law and before the voters
all candidates and all party organi-
zations will stand on a perfectly
even footing.
INTRODUCTION.
57
4. It involves the necessity of de-
fraying the expenses of both print-
ing and distribution by means of
assessments on or contributions by
candidates, office-holders, or party
leaders,
5. Which facilitates bribery and
corruption by affording them con-
venient covers :
6. And debauches the electors by
leading them to become partisans
for pay, instead of lionestly and
from conviction performing their
duty as citizens.
4. This will dispense altogether
with the necessity of and excuse
for levying political assessments.
5. And leave no legal cover for
bribery. Tlie law can describe and
limit all permissible expenditure, and
compel the candidate or his agent to
make a sworn return with vouchers
to a proper public officer for all
disbursements. It may punish all
violations with sufficiently severe
penalties,
6. And prescribe that no elector
under pay of a party or candidate
shall be permitted to vote, thus mak-
ing it more the interest of candidates
and parties not to pay than to pay
for election services, and thus deter-
ring all honest electors from accept-
ing pay."
Wm. M. Ivins, in " Electoral Reform."
AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
I. MASSACHUSETTS.
Stat. 1SS8, c. 436, as amended by Stat. 1889, c. 413.
AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR PRIXTIXG AXD DISTRIBUTING
BALLOTS AT THE PUBLIC EXPENSE, AND TO REGULATE
VOTING AT STATE AND CITY ELECTIONS.
Be it enacted, etc., as folloics :
Section 1. All ballots cast in elections for national,
state, district, and county officers in cities and towns after
the first day of November in the year eighteen hundred
and eighty-nine, and all ballots cast in municipal elections
in cities after that date, shall be printed and distributed
at public expense, as hereinafter provided. The printing
of the ballots and cards of instructions to voters shall in
municipal elections in cities be paid for by the several
cities respectively, and in all other elections the printing
of the ballots and cards of instruction, and the delivery of
them to the several cities and towns, shall be paid for by
the Commonwealth, The distribution of the ballots to
the voters shall be paid for by the cities and towns respec-
tively. The term "state election," as used in this act,
shall apply to any election held for the choice of a national,
state, district, or county officer, whether for a full term or
for the filling of a vacancy, and the term "state officer"
shall apply to any person to be chosen by the qualified
MASSACHUSETTS. 59
voters at such an election. The term " city election "
shall apply to any municipal election so held in a city,
and the term " city officer " shall apply to any person to
be chosen by the qualified voters at such an election.
NOMINATIONS OF CANDIDATES.
Sect. 2. Any convention of delegates, and any caucus
or meeting of qualified voters, as hereinafter defined, and
individual voters to the number and in the manner here-
inafter specified, may nominate candidates for public office,
whose names shall be placed upon the ballots to be fur-
nished as herein provided.
Sect. 3. Any convention of delegates representing a
political party which, at the election next preceding, polled
at least three per cent of the entire vote cast in the state,
or in the electoral district or division thereof for which
the nomination is made, or any convention of delegates
who have been selected in caucuses called and held in
accordance with a special statute providing therefor, and
any caucus so called and held in any such electoral district
or division, may for the state or for the district or division
for which the convention or caucus is held, as the case ma}^
be, by causing a certificate of nomination to be duly filed,
make one such nomination for each office therein to be
filled at the election. Every such certificate of nomina-
tion shall state such facts as may be required as above for
its acceptance, and as are required in section five of this
act ; shall be signed by the presiding officer and by the
secretaiy of the convention or caucus, who shall add
thereto their places of residence ; and shall be sworn by
them to be true to the best of their knowledge and belief,
and a certificate of the oath shall be annexed to the cer-
tificate of nomination (rtf), (a)
Sect. 4. Nominations of candidates for any offices to p.^5i.°^
be filled by the voters of the state at large may be made
by nomination papers signed in the aggregate for each
candidate by not less than one thousand qualified voters (a') (n')
of the state. Nominations of candidates for electoral dis- Queens.,
60 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
Gt. Br., A.§ 1; tricts or divisions of the state may Le made by nomination
ibbi' ^^ ' papers signed in the aggregate for each candidate by quali-
x^Y^f 5; ^^^ voters of such district or division, not less in number
mil Note 2, than onc for every one hundred persons who voted at the
next preceding annual election in such district or division,
but in no case less than fifty (a). In the case of a first
election to be held in a town or ward newly established,
the number of fifty shall be sufficient for the nomination
of a candidate who is to be voted for only in such town or
ward (a) ; and in the case of a first election in a district
or division newly established, other than a town or ward,
the number of fifty shall be so sufiicient (a). Each voter
signing a nomination paper shall add to his signature his
place of residence, with the street and number thereof, if
any, and each voter may subscribe to one nomination for
each ofifiice to be filled, and no more. Women qualified
to vote for members of the school committee may sign
nomination papers for candidates for the school committee.
The nomination papers shall before being filed be respec-
tively submitted to the registrars of voters of the cities or
towns in which the signers purport to be qualified voters,
and each registrar to whom the same is submitted shall
forthwith certify thereon what number of the signatures
are names of qualified voters, both in the city or town for
which he is a registrar, and in the district or division for
■which the nomination is made ; one of the signers to each
such separate paper shall swear that the statements therein
are true, to the best of his knowledge and belief, and the
certificate of such oath shall be annexed, and he shall also
add his post-office address.
Sect. 5. All certificates of nomination and nomination
papers shall, besides containing the names of candidates,
specify as to each, (1) the office for which lie is nomi-
nated ; (2) the party or political principle which he repre-
sents, expressed in not more than three words; (3) his
place of residence, and, in case of a nomination for a cit)''
office, with street and number thereon, if any. In the
MASSACHUSETTS, 61
case of electors of president and vice-president of the
United States, the names of the candidates for president
and vice-president may be added to the party or political
appellation.
JSect. 6. Certificates of nomination and nomination
papers for the nomination of candidates for state offices
shall be filed witli the secretary {b) of the Commonwealth (6)
at least (c) fourteen days previous to the day of the elec- Qu^JIfJ.^.'ny^:'
tion (c?) for which the candidates are nominated. Such ^^\^-[-'3^.' 5*^'
certificates and papers for tlie nomination of candidates i^eig., § luo;
for the offices of mayor and of aldermen in cities shall n: Y., §4.
be filed with the city clerks (6) of the respective cities at (c)
least ten days (c2) previous to the day of such election, p!^87."'^'^ '
and for the nomination of candidates for all other city (,j)
offices at least six days (c?) previous to the day of such q;,4'iS''''4 %'
Sect. 7. The certificates of nomination and nomination i-i, t), § i (ji);
papers being so filed, and being in apparent conformity Ky!!'§ 2;
with the provisions of this act, shall be deemed to be valid, ^' ^'' ^ ^'
unless objection thereto is duly made in writing. Such
objections or other questions arising in relation thereto in
the case of nominations of state officers shall be considered
by {e} the secretary of tlie Commonwealth and the auditor ^g)
and attorney-general, and the decision of the majority of d^'§^['[3^- ^^1,^}
these officers shall be final. Such objections or questions Note 13, p. sr.
arising in the case of nominations of city officers shall be
considered by {e} the board of registrars of voters, together
with the city clerk, if not a member of such board, and
the city solicitor ; and the decision of a majority of these
officers shall be final. In case such objection is made
notice shall forthwith be mailed to the candidates affected
thereby, addressed to their residences, as given in the
certificates of nomination or nomination papers (/), and (c')
^ OC6 JN OTE Jo.
to any party committee known to the secretary or clerk,
as the case may be, as specially interested in the nomina-
tion. It shall be proper for the officers above named, in
the decision of any question as to the proper political
62 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
or party designation of candidates, to distinguish between
candidates nominated by certificates of nomination, and
those nominated by nomination papers.
Sect. 8. Any person whose name has been presented
(/') as a candidate may cause his name to be withdrawn (/)
(it. BiC,''a, §1, from nomination, by request in writing signed by him
n'y.'', §11. and acknowledged before an officer qualified to take ac-
knowledgments of deeds, and filed with the secretary of
the Commonwealth ten days, or with the proper city clerk
five days, as the case may be, previous to the day of elec-
tion ; and no name so withdrawn shall be printed upon the
ballots. No nomination published and posted as herein
provided shall be subsequently omitted as invalid.
Sect. 9. All certificates of nomination and nomination
papers when filed shall be open under proper regulations
to public inspection, and the secretary of the Common-
wealth and the several city clerks shall preserve the same
in their respective offices not less than five years.
FORM OF BALLOTS.
Sect. 10. All ballots for use in state elections shall be
prepared by the secretary of the Commonwealth, and all
ballots for use in city elections shall be prepared by the
clerks of the several cities respectively. Every general
ballot, or ballot intended for the use of all male voters,
which shall be printed in accordance with the provisions
of this act, shall contain the names of all candidates whose
nominations for any offices specified in the ballot have
been duly made and not withdrawn in accordance here-
with, and shall contain no other names. Except that in
the case of electors of president and vice-president of
the United States the names of the candidates for presi-
dent and vice-president may be added to the party or
political designation ; the name of the city or town in
which the candidate resides shall be added to the name
of each candidate on ballots for state offices ; and the
MASSACHUSETTS. 63
street, with street number, if anj^ on which a candidate
resides, shall be added to the name of each candidate on
ballots for city offices ; and there shall also be added to
all the names of candidates their party or political desig-
nation. The names of candidates for each office shall be
arranged (^) under the designation of the office in alpha- {g)
betical order, according to surnames, except that the names Qut^nt'^'^y!'
of candidates for the offices of electors of president and g'-'^^-vJ.'j^'^'
vice-president shall be arranged in groups, as presented in ^^ji?., §§ ii-i,
the several certificates of nomination or nomination papers. Ky., § 4;
There shall be left at the end of the list of candidates for ami Notk 4,
each different office as many blank spaces as there are ^" ~'^'
persons to be elected to such office, in which the voter
may insert (A) the name of any person, not printed on the (M
ballot, for whom he desires to vote as candidate for such N^yv^, §'i3;
office. Whenever the approval of a constitutional amend- p.'ss^*^^^^^'
ment or other question is submitted to the vote of the
people, such questions shall be printed upon the ballot
after the list of candidates. Special ballots in cities, con-
taining only the names of candidates for the school com-
mittee, shall also be prepared in like manner and printed
for the use of women qualified according to law to vote
for members of the school committee. The ballots shall
be so printed as to give to each voter a clear opportunity
to designate by a cross mark [X] in a sufficient margin at
the right of the name of each candidate, his choice of can-
didates and his answer to the questions submitted, and on
the ballot may be printed such words as will aid the voter
to do this, as " vote for one," " vote for three," " yes,"
" no," and the like. The ballot shall be substantially of
the length now required by law (^) and two or more times C'l
such width. Before distribution the ballots shall be so 13^11. 'ami not
folded in marked creases that their width and length (1884','c" 209"''
when folded shall be those of the ballot now required by ^ ^^^'
law. On the back and outside when folded, shall be
printed " Official Ballot for," followed by the designation
of the polling-place for which the ballot is prepared, the
64 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
date of the election, and a fac-simile of the signature of
the secretary of the Commonwealth or city clerk who has
0') caused the ballot to be printed (/). The special ballots
Queens., §71; printed m Cities tor the use oi women qualmed to vote for
Gt. Br. ,A, § 2,
B, § 24;
Belg., §§ 123,
lol;
school committee shall contain the additional indorsement
that they are for such use only, and shall be on tinted
V Y^Va/' paper, but of a different tint from that of specimen ballots,
and Note 7, Exccpt as otherwise herein provided, ballots shall be printed
^' ' in accordance with the existing provisions of law.
Sect. 11. All ballots when printed shall be folded as
hereinbefore provided and fastened together in convenient
numbers in packages, books or blocks, in such manner
that each ballot may be detached and removed separately.
A record of the number of ballots printed and furnished
to each polling-place shall be kept and preserved by
the secretary of the Commonwealth and the several city
clerks.
Sect. 12. There shall be provided for each voting
place, at which an election is to be held, two sets of such
general ballots, each of not less than one hundred for
every fifty and fraction of fifty registered male voters
(i) therein (^), and likewise two sets of such special ballots.
Queens.! Vas^ ' ^ach of not less than one hundred, for every fifty and
Kv., § 3; fraction of fifty women qualified to vote for school com-
Queens., § 58;
Kv., § 3;
N: Y.; § 16.
mittee therein: and it shall be the duty of the registrars of
voters in each city or town in which an election for state
ofiicers is to be held, to certify to the secretary of the
Commonwealth, at such time as he shall require previous
to any such election, the number of male registered voters
in each voting precinct or in each town which is not
divided into voting precincts.
INFORMATION TO VOTERS.
Sect. 13. The secretary of the Commonwealth, in case
of a State election, and the several city clerks, in case of
city elections, shall prepare full instructions for the guid-
MASSACHUSETTS. 65
ance of voters at such elections, as to obtaining ballots,
as to the manner of marking them, and the method of
gaining assistance, and as to obtaining new ballots in place
of those accidentally spoiled, and they shall respectively
cause the same, together with copies of sections twenty-
seven, twenty-eight, twenty-nine, and thirty of this Act to
be printed in large, clear type, on separate cards, to be
called cards of instructions ; and they shall respectively
furnish the same and the ballots for use in each such elec-
tion. They shall also cause to be printed on tinted paper,
and without the fac-simile indorsements, ten or more
copies of the form of the ballot provided for each voting
place at each election therein, which shall be called speci-
men ballots, and shall be furnished with the other ballots
provided for each such voting place.
Sect. l^. The secretary of the Commonwealth shall,
five days at least previous to the day of any election of
State officers, transmit to the registrars of voters in each
city and town in which such election is to be held, printed
lists containing the names, residences, and party or politi-
cal appellations of all candidates nominated as herein pro-
vided for such election, and to be voted for at each polling
place in each such city and town respectively, substan-
tially in the form of the general ballot to be so used
therein ; and the registrars of voters shall immediately
cause the lists for each town or voting precinct, as the
case may be, to be conspicuously posted (?) in one or
more public places in such town or voting precinct. The
secretary of the Commonwealth shall likewise cause to be
published (Q prior to the day of any such election, in at
least two newspapers, if there be so many, published in
each county, representing, as far as practicable, the polit-
ical parties which, at the preceding election, cast the
largest and next largest number of votes, a list of all the
nominations made as herein provided, and to be voted for
in such county, so far as may be, in the form in which
they shall appear upon the general ballots.
5
bb AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
(/) Sect. 15. The city clerk of each city shall foar days
Qu*eenl^'§§ 50,' at least prior to the day of any city election therein, cause
Gt'Br. B §9 to be conspicuoiisly posted (l) in one or more public places
E'lt'^Tiia- ^" ^^^^^ voting precinct of such city a printed list contain-
Ky°§5; ' ing the names, residences, and party or political appella-
'' ' tions of all candidates nominated, as herein provided, and
to be voted for in such precinct, substantially in the form
of the general ballot to be so used therein ; and he shall
likewise cause to be published (Z), prior to the day of such
election in at least two newspapers, if there be so many,
published in such city, representing the political parties
which cast at the preceding election the largest and next
largest number of votes, a list of all the nominations made,
as herein provided, and to be voted for in such city, so far
as may be, in the form in which they shall appear upon
the general ballots.
DELIVERY OP BALLOTS TO CITIES AND TOWNS.
Sect. 16. The secretary of the Commonwealth shall
send, separately and at different times or by different
methods, the two sets of general and special ballots,
together with the specimen ballots and cards of instruc-
tion printed by him, as herein provided, to the several
city and town clerks, so as to be received by them twelve
hours at least previous to the day of election. The same
shall be sent in sealed packages, with marks on the out-
side clearly designating the polling-place for which they
are intended and the number of ballots of each kind
enclosed ; and the respective city and town clerks shall on
delivery to them of such packages return receipts therefor
to the secretary. The secretary shall keep a record of the
time when, and the manner in which the several packages
are sent, and shall preserve for the period of one year the
receipts of the city and town clerks.
Sect. 17. The two sets of ballots, together with the
specimen ballots and cards of instruction printed by the
MASSACHUSETTS. 67
city clerks, as herein provided, shall be packed by them
in separate sealed packages, with marks on the outside
clearly designating the polling precincts for which they
are intended, and the number of ballots of each kind
enclosed.
Sect. 18. The several city and town clerks shall send
to the election officers of each voting-place before the
opening of the polls on the day of election one set of bal-
lots so prepared, sealed, and marked for such voting-place,
and a receipt of such delivery shall be returned to them
from the presiding or senior election officer present, which
receipt, with a record of the number of ballots sent, shall
be kept in the clerks' office. At the opening of the polls
in each polling-place the seals of the packages shall be
publicly broken, and the packages shall be opened by
the presiding election officer, and the books or blocks of
ballots shall be delivered to the ballot officers hereinafter
provided for. The cards of instruction shall be immedi-
ately posted at or in each voting shelf or compartment
provided in accordance with this act for the marking of
the ballots, and not less than three such cards and not less
than five specimen ballots shall be immediately posted in
or about the polling-room, outside the guard-rails. The
second set of ballots shall be retained by the respective
clerks until they are called for or needed for the purposes
of voting, and, upon the requisition in writing of the pre-
siding election officer of any voting-place, the second set
of ballots shall be furnished to such voting-place in the
manner above provided as to the first set.
Sect. 19. In case the ballots to be furnished to any city
or town or voting-place therein, in accordance with the
provisions of this act, shall fail for any reason to be duly
delivered, or in case after delivery they shall be destroyed
or stolen, it shall be the duty of the clerk of such city or
town to cause other ballots to be prepared substantially in
the form of the ballots so wanting and to be furnished ;
and upon receipt of such other ballots from him, accom-
bo AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
panied by a statement under oath that the same have been
so prepared and furnished by him, and that the original
ballots have so failed to be received or have been so de-
stroyed or stolen, the election ofiScers shall cause the ballots
so substituted to be used in lieu of the ballots wanting, as
above.
ADDITIONAL ELECTION OFFICERS.
(m) Sect. 20. Two inspectors, with two deputy inspectors,
cierk,'\and two additional to those now provided for (m), shall be appointed
Thrdeputy ^^^ ®^^^^ votiug preciuct in cities and in towns divided into
substit r^ '^^ voting precincts, and the provisions of law relative to in-
only, spectors and deputy inspectors shall be applicable to such
additional officers. Two of the inspectors acting in each
voting precinct shall be detailed to act as ballot clerks.
In towns not divided into voting precincts, two inspectors,
with deputy inspectors, shall be appointed, in accordance
with the provisions of law applicable to such officers in
.towns so divided, and the two inspectors thus serving shall
act as ballot clerks. The two ballot clerks detailed and
appointed as above in each voting precinct and town shall
have the charge of the ballots therein, and shall furnish
them to the voters in the manner hereinafter set forth. A
duplicate list of the qualified voters in each precinct and
each town not divided into precincts shall be prepared for
the use of the ballot clerks, and all the provisions of law
relative to the preparation, furnishing, and preservation of
check-lists shall apply to such duplicate lists.
VOTING SHELVES OR COMPARTMENTS.
Sect. 21. The officers in each city or town whose duty
it is to designate and appoint polling-places therein shall
s" Austr., § 54; ^^^^® the same to be suitably provided with a sufficient
GrBT'B^ue- ^^^'^''^sr of voting shelves or compartments (?i), at or in
Beig., § 117; which votcrs may conveniently mark tlieir ballots, so that
N" "y„ §20; in the marking thereof the}^ may be screened from the ob-
p'.^'so. '^^^ ' servation of others, and a guard-rail shall be so constructed
MASSACHUSETTS. 69
and placed that only such persons as are inside said rail
can approach within six feet of the ballot-boxes and of
such voting- shelves or compartments. The arrangement
shall be such that neither the ballot-boxes nor the voting
shelves or compartments shall be hidden from view of
those just outside the said guard-rail. The number of
such voting shelves or compartments shall not be less than
one for every sevent3'-five voters qualified to vote at such
polling-place, and not less than three in any town or
precinct thereof, and not less than five in any voting
precinct of a city (o). No persons other than the election (o)
officers and voters admitted as hereinafter provided shall Gt.Bi-.,'R§iG;
be permitted within said rail (p), except by authority of Ky°'"§ 1;^^^'
the election officers for the purpose of keeping order and ^" ^ •' § ^'^•
enforcing the law. Each voting shelf or compartment ^^^^^^^^^ ^^g.
shall be kept provided with proper supplies and con- Queens., §59:
veniences tor marking the ballots. Beig.. §97;
Ky., §17;
N. Y., §20;
PREPARATION OF BALLOTS. and Note 1,
p. 74.
Sect. 22. Any person desiring to vote shall give his
name, and, if requested so to do, his residence, to one of
the ballot clerks, who shall thereupon announce the same
in a loud and distinct tone of voice, clear and audible, and
if such name is found upon the check-list by the ballot
officer having charge thereof, he shall likewise repeat the
said name, and the voter shall be allowed to enter the space
enclosed by the guard-rail as above provided. The ballot
clerk (^) shall give him one, and only one, ballot, and his (q)
name shall be immediately checked on said list. If the ^y^."^"-' § ^^'
voter is a woman, she shall receive a special ballot contain- g^b"* B^^^50-
ing the names of candidates for school committee only, i^ei^., § 123;
. . Ky., § 7;
Besides the election officers, not more than four voters in N'. y.^§21;
excess of the number of voting shelves or compartments p^'siV'^^ '
provided shall be allowed in said enclosed space at one
time.
Sect. 23. On receipt of his ballot the voter shall forth-
with, and without leaving the enclosed space, retire alone
70 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
to one of the voting shelves or compartments so provided
(r) and shall prepare his ballot by marking (r) in the appro-
S.^Austr., § 58, ^^,^^^^ margin or place, a cross [X] opposite the name of
0^1^' a/I'] the candidate of his choice for each office to be filled, or
^' §2^! p' . by fiUinof in the name of the candidate of his choice in the
" Form of Di- jo -
rections for blank spacc providcd therefor, and marking a cross [x]
Beiff., A,§ 124, opposite thereto ; (r) and, in case of a question submitted
Kyi §'9; ^o the vote of the people, by marking in the appropriate
fnci^i'ol?9' margin or place, a cross [X] against the answer which he
P- ^^- desires to give. Before leaving the voting shelf or com-
partment the voter shall fold his ballot, without displaying
the marks thereon, in the same way it was folded when
received by him, and he shall keep the same so folded
until he has voted. He sliall vote in the manner now
(^) provided by law (s) before leaving the enclosed space,
hhnaml\t'^^ and shall deposit his ballot in the box with the official
ti^ presiding indorsement uppermost. He shall mark and deposit his
officer, who an- '- '■ . . ■, ^
nomices it in a ballot without uudue delay and shall quit said enclosed
officer in charge spacc as sooii as he lias voted. No such voter shall be
and repeats 'it,^ allowcd to occupy a votiug shelf or compartment already
?heVdepI°ks occupicd by another, nor to remain within said enclosed
•I'sbjiiiotossi, space more than ten minutes (f), nor to occupy a voting
shelf or compartment for more than five minutes in case
Ky., § 12; all of such shelves or compartments are in use, and other
'' ' voters are waiting to occupy the same. No voter not an
election officer whose name has been checked on the list
of the ballot officers, shall be allowed to re-enter said
enclosed space during said election. It shall be the duty
of the presiding election officer for the time being to
secure the observance of the provisions of this section and
of other sections relative to the duties of election officers.
Sect. 24. No person shall take or remove any ballot
from the polling-place before the close of the polls. If
s'\ 5 58 ^^y voter spoils a ballot (?^) he may successively obtain
viii.; ' ' others one at a time, not exceeding three in all, upon re-
nVig., "§ 125; ' turning each spoiled one. The ballots thus returned shall
Nfy., §'24. be immediately cancelled, and together with those not
MASSACHUSETTS. 71
distributed to the voters, shall be preserved and with the
check-list used by the ballot clerks, which shall be certi-
fied by them to be such, shall be secured in an envelope,
sealed, and sent to the several cit}^ and town clerks, as
required by law in the case of the ballots cast, and the
other check-list used.
Sect. 25. Any voter who declares to the presiding
election ofiicer that he was a voter prior to the first day
of May in the year eighteen hundred and fift3^-seven, and
cannot read (v), or that by blindness or other physical
disability he is unable to mark his ballot (v), shall, upon (,)
request, receive the assistance of one or two of the election fii^"^*''^ ^ '
ofiQcers in the marking thereof, and such officer or officers (^"'^BrBV26'-
shall certify on the outside thereof that it w^as so marked Beig.,§i23;
Kv.. § ]0;
with his or their assistance, and shall thereafter give noN'. y., §25;
information regarding the same. The presiding officer p. ss! '
may in his discretion require such declaration of disability
to be made hj the voter under oath before him, and he is
hereby qualified to administer the same.
Sect. 26. If the voter marks more names than there
are persons to be elected to an office, or if for any reason
it is impossible to determine the voter's choice for any
office to be filled, his ballot shall not be counted for such
office. No ballot without the official indorsement shall,
except as herein otherwise provided, be allowed to be de-
posited in the ballot-box, and none but ballots provided
in accordance with the provisions of this act shall be
counted (w). Ballots not counted shall be marked " de- (''•)
fective" on the back thereof, and shall be preserved, as Queens.,V76;'
required by section twenty-four. Beig.,' §§ m, '
PENALTIES. N^y!§§'i3,
,28: and Note
Sect. 27. A voter who shall, except as herem otlier- lo, p. 85.
wise provided, allow his ballot to be seen by any person
with an apparent intention of letting it be known how he
is about to vote, or place any distinguishing mark upon
his ballot, or who shall make a false statement as to his
72 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
inability to mark his ballot, or any person who shall inter-
fere, or attempt to interfere with any voter when inside said
enclosed space or when marking his ballot, or who shall
endeavor to induce any voter before voting to show how he
marks or has marked his ballot, or otherwise violate any
provision of this act, shall be punished by fine of not less
than five dollars nor more than one hundred dollars ; and
election officers shall report an}^ person so doing to the po-
lice officer in charge of the polls, whose duty it shall be to
see that the offender is duly brought before the proper court.
Sect. 28. Any person who shall, prior to an election,
wilfully deface or destroy any list of candidates posted in
accordance with the provisions of this act, or who, during
an election, shall wilfully deface, tear down, remove or
destroy any card of instruction or specimen ballot printed
or posted for the instruction of voters, or who shall during
an election wilfully remove or destroy any of the supplies
or conveniences furnished to enable a voter to prepare his
ballot, or shall wilfully hinder the voting of others, shall
be punished by fine of not less than five dollars nor more
than one hundred dollars.
Sect. 29. Any person who shall falsely make or wilfully
deface or destroy any certificate of nomination or nomina-
tion-paper, or any part thereof, or any letter of withdrawal ;
or sign any such certificate or paper contrary to the pro-
visions of this act ; or file any certificate of nomination or
nomination-paper or letter of withdrawal, knowing the
same or any part thereof to be falsely made ; or suppress
any certificate of nomination or nomination-paper, or any
part thereof which has been duly filed ; or forge or falsely
make the official indorsement on any ballot ; or wilfully
destroy or deface any ballot, or shall take or remove any
ballot outside of the enclosure provided for voting before
the close of the polls, or wilfully delay the delivery of any
ballots, shall be punished by fine not exceeding one thou-
sand dollars, or by imprisonment in the jail not more than
one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
73
^
Sect. 30. Any public officer upon whom a duty is im-
posed by this act, who shall wilfully neglect to perform
such duty (a;) or who shall wilfully perform it in such (f)
a way as to hinder the objects of this act (a;), shall be Queens., § 120
punished by a fine of not less than five nor more than one N.'Y.?V3h
thousand dollars, or by imprisonment in jail for not more p/so^*'^'"' ^^'
than one 3'ear, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
Approved May 29, 1888.
(a.)
FoKM OF Ballot used under the above Act.
(See the model at the end of the book.)
Polling Arrangements under the above Act.
The voter enters at the right-hand lower corner, receives his ballot from a
ballot officer (not shown in this sketch), and then goes to the shelves, where
he finds full instructions posted. He there marks and folds his ballot, and
on his way out deposits it in the ballot-box in front of the election officers,
as shown.
74 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
Note 1.
Presence of the Public at the Polls.
(Mass., § 21 ; S. Austr., § 59 ; Queens., § 59 ; Gt. Brit., B, § 21 ; Belg , § 97 ;
Ky., §§17, 18; N. Y., §§ 20, 32.)
The provisions intended to prevent disorder and undue solici-
tation at the polls vary in strictness: — 1. In Massachusetts
the public are excluded only from the railed space within the
voting-room ; that is, only fi'om a space reasonably sufficient
to ensure secrecy in marking the vote. 2. In South Austi'alia,
Queensland, Kentucky, Great Britain, and Belgium, the public
are excluded from the entire polling-room. 3. In New York,
the public are excluded from the railed space, and, in addition,
" electioneering," presumablj' including solicitation, canvassing,
etc., is forbidden within one hundred feet of the polling-room.
The strong objection to the exclusion of the public from the
entire room is that it leaves the purity of the election entirely in
the hands of the agents or inspectors of the respective parties ;
for in order to perpetrate almost every fraud it would onl}' be
necessary to buy up the election officers of the opposite part}'.
Still more undesirable is such a regulation in the interest of in-
dependent candidates, who in most States are not allowed to be
represented b}' separate inspectors ; the independent vote, b}'
an arrangement between the agents of the two leading parties,
could easily be disposed of (as a recent example in a far
western city indicates). Reasons of safety' make it absolutely
indispensable that access to a reasonable portion of the voting-
room should be permitted to any and every citizen during the
entire course of the election. If it is objected that the directions
by an illiterate to the officer for marking his vote are, as in the
English act, required to be made aloud in the presence of the
representatives of each party, and would be heard b}' every one
present, if the public were admitted, the answer is that these
can be and should be made privately in one of the compartments
to (as in Massachusetts) a single representative, selected by the
voter himself.
The best plan would seem to be, as in New York, to (1) ex-
clude the public from the railed space only; (2) forbid solicitation
or canvassing of any sort in the remainder of the polling-room,
and within one hundred feet from the exterior.
75
Note 2.
Number of Electors necessary for a Komination.
(Mass., § 4 ; S. Austr., § 48 ; Queens., §§ 48, 49 ; Gt. Brit., A, § 1 ;
Belg., §§ lOG, 155; Ky., § 2 ; N. Y., § 5.)
In determining the number of signatures nccessar}- to be
obtained in order to put a candidate in nomination, tlie single
object is of course to place all on a practically- equal footing,
and to impose onh' such restrictions as are necessary to prevent
the ballot from being encumbered with the names of unbalanced
persons and men of straw. But even though (as in INIassachu-
setts) a minimum of fiftj' be established, very few aspirants will
be found who cannot muster a sufficient number of names ; and
the better way, since the number of signatures is practicalh' no
hindrance, is to place the required number as low even as in
South Australia (two), and thus, while losing no benefit, avoid
even that appearance of exclusiveness for which the Massachu-
setts law has sometimes been attacked. The real restrictions on
the number of candidates will be found to be, as English and
Australian experience shows, public opinion and the interests of
the aspirants. The former will throw ridicule on a candidac}-
Mhich has no support ; and the latter will, as now, have a power-
ful deterrent influence wherever there is not some strong ground
for the candidacy.
A reason in England for fixing the number of signatures as
low as ten seems to have been the desire not to pledge or to
make public the political action of a larger number of electors.
This Avould be a serious consideration where, as formerly in
Greece,^ a nomination-paper must contain the signatures of one-
twentieth of the electors of the district ; and even under the
Massachusetts law, if three nominations for a citv council are
made in a ward containing 1200 electors or less, an opportunity
is offered for coercing loO electors into a virtual pledge which
the}- may consider morally binding upon them at the polls. It
would seem to be better to require as few names as possible, —
perhaps not more than ten, — thus losing nothing, and avoiding
certain probable disadvantages.
1 Pari. Papers, 1868-9, vol. viii., p. 416; for the present rule, see Part
VIII., infra.
76 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
In Queensland (§ 55) the device of requiring a deposit, to be
returned to candidates receiving one-fifth the vote of the suc-
cessful candidate having the smallest number of votes, has been
adopted for the purpose of limiting the number of candidates.
This may be expedient enough under the political conditions of
some communities ; but it is to be remembered that in this
country a candidacy may be hopeless as regards the election of
the nominee, and yet important and iiighly desirable as a means
of exhibiting the strength of a section of electors or of a partic-
ular movement, and of thus compelling the attention of the lead-
ing parties and the modification of their platforms and legislative
policies.^ The Queensland provision would bear unfairly, for
example, upon tlie labor vote and the prohibition vote in many
States, — to name no other movements whose only hope fre-
quently lies in emphasizing their gi'owing strength b}' the figures
of their vote and demanding a due consideration. It would
seem, therefore, that the plan of requiring a returnable deposit
is not adapted to our political methods, and that its adoption
would be ill-advised.
Note 3.
Acceptance of the JVbminatton.
(S. Austr., §48; Belg., § 107.)
An acceptance of the nomination is required b}' two only
of the seven principal statutes ; but it ought to be a general
requirement. In the first place, wherever a securit}' for the
expenses of election is required, an acceptance is desirable in
order to avoid disputes as to the responsibility of the candidate
or his noininators. Secondh', it prcA^ents the unauthorized use
of a prominent name, and the difficulties that might ensue in'
such a case. Thirdly, it places on record the deliberate deci-
sion of the nominee to appear as a candidate, and thus, while
not preventing a withdrawal for good reasons, it places the
burden of explanation upon one who withdraws, and throws
difficulties in the way of a withdrawal for improper reasons, and
of such " deals" and other political tricks as are now only too
common. In the same way, it tends to prevent the practice of
^ See Bryce, Amer. Commonwealtli, ii. 222, where the importance of
minority protests is touciied upon.
NOTES. 77
putting up a candidate for the sole purpose of withdrawing hhu
for a consideration to be received from opposing interests. Anj-
regulation which tends to make public tlie reasons for withdrawal
is a good one, for proper reasons will not fear publicity.
Note 4.
Arrangement of Contents of Ballot,
(Mass., § 10; S. Austr., § 55; Queens., § 58; Gt. Brit, B, § 22; D, § 1 (C) ;
Belg., §§ 114, 115; Ky., § 4; N. Y., § 14.)
The arrangement of the contents of the ballot offers a large
field for difference of opinion, although it may be suggested that
any intelligent arrangement will answer the purpose, and that
the importance of the different variations that have been adopted
is practicall}' not very great. Some of the more noticeable dif-
ferences of method will be commented on.
1. In the beginning the question presents itself whether the
names shall be arranged, as in Belgium and New York, in
groups representing tlie nominations of one party for all offi-
ces, or as in Canada (see Part VIII.), Kentucky, and Massa-
chusetts, in groups representing all nominations for the same
office, the order of names being alphabetical. The principal
consideration in favor of the former mode is that where a read-
ing and writing qualification does not exist, it greatl}' helps the
illiterate voter ; for this plan allows a vote to be given for all
the candidates of one part}' by making a single cross at the head
of the list, and as the illiterate will know beforehand the position
of his party list, he has only to make his cross there and the
matter is ended. This consideration would entireh' disappear
in view of the clause (which presumably would be found in most
statutes) permitting assistance to be given to illiterates by elec-
tion officers, were it not for a fact brought out by English ex-
perience. It is that many illiterates, di.sliking to make confession
and ask assistance, prefer to take the ballot and guess at the
name they wish to mark. If this class of voters could be shown
to include an}' appreciable number, their protection ought to be
considered ; although it may be questioned whether a plan other-
wise desirable should be rejected for the sake of those who, by
refusing to acknowledge the fact of their illiteracy, voluntarily
expose themselves to mistake. Another consideration in favor
78 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
of the first method is that the marking of the vote for those
who desire to vote an entire ticliet is simpler and speedier.
It is to be observed, however, not only that this gain would
not affect those electors who vote independently of part}', but
that for the voter who goes outside of the party ticket for so
much as a single name (and these voters may be roughly esti-
mated at one third or more of the whole number) this mode of
arrangement has no advantages, since he must in that case mark
individually each of the remaining party candidates for whom he
votes, though they fall short one only of the entire number.
A serious objection to the first method is that it ma}' in many
cases be impracticable. Any one who will refer to the discus-
sions in the Belgian Chamber ^ will see what disputes they fell
into, within a year after putting the system into operation, over
the expediency of this method. It applies well enough where
two parties only are in the field. But when independent candi-
dates are named, and other parties make nominations, its diffi-
culty is that it becomes cumbrous, and, unless the New York
system of printing separate ballots, six or seven in all, for dif-
ferent classes of offices, is adopted, it may prove absolutel}-
impracticable. Even the adoption of the separate ballot system
of New York might to some seem only the substitution of one
piece of unwieldy machinery for another, A second objection is
that where, as in many places at elections of local officers, the
national party lines are not drawn, this method becomes useless
and out of place. A list of candidates for all such offices is
usually nominated by a single convention or committee, but it
does not alwa^'s have coherency, and the personal merits of each
candidate generally determine the electors' action.
Other objections also suggest themselves. The first plan tends
to foster a sheep-like and unintelligent manner of voting for the
local offices. The voter quickly marks the entire list of his party,
and if on the same ballot are the names of candidates for the
lesser and local oflSces, whose needs are governed by perhaps an
entirely diflferent set of considerations, no suggestion of this is
brought to the voter's mind, but he is incited to judge the needs
of the nation and of the count}' b}' one and the same test of
pohcy and in one and the same mental effort. It may also
be suggested that in one or two ways it operates unfairly upon
1 Annuaire de le'gis. ctraiig., vol. xviii., 1878, notes to pp. 466, et seq.
NOTES. 79
individual candidates. It forces them to declare absolutel}' for
one pai't}' or another, while they ma}' in fact prefer to sail under
a compromise name, such as " Labor Democrat," and 3-et would
rather stand in a part}' list than be numbered among the inde-
pendents. It also handicaps a popular candidate for a lesser
office by (to a great extent) influencing the sheep-like voters of
the opposite party to overlook their own candidate for the lesser
office, and by thus confining the popular candidate to his strict
party vote, which may fall far short of a plurality. Moreover, the
list of independent candidates, as it appears b}' the side of the full
party lists, suffers in moral weight (for want of a better phrase),
htis a detached and uninviting appearance, depriving them of
that equal footing which it is the great design of the system
that everj' candidate should have. These ol)jections, it may
be answered, apply equally to the present system of voting by
tickets. The}' do ; and it is simph' because the people wish to
do away with the inequalities and injustice of that system that
we should hesitate to use a method of party lists which retains
some of the same imperfections. It is a method vastly in ad-
vance of the present system ; but it is not perfect, while the
plan employed in Massachusetts, Kentuck}-, and Canada, though
not perfect, is certainly free from the objections that have been
mentioned. Perfect equality upon the ballot-paper for all can-
didates is what should be insisted upon.^
2. In making provision for the benefit of illiterates, other ex-
pedients have also been adopted. In England, Belgium, and
Quebec (see Part VIII.), a number is placed to the left of each
candidate's name. In Ontario, for elections to the Provin-
cial Assembl}', each candidate's name is printed in a different
color (Part VIII.). In Belgium (Part V.) the Liberal names
are printed in blue ink, the Catholic names in carmine, and
the independent nominees in black. The plan of using figures
would seem a satisfactory one, although it would be prac-
tically useless where, as at most elections, a large number of
offices are to be filled, and the voter could not memorize the
1 It is well known that the party group method, as adopted by the New York
legislature in 1888 and 1889, was a compromise measure (one, at least, of the three
bills there introduced being not much more than a sop thrown to reform), and that
this method, as finally incorporated in the bill, would not be considered as the best
by the friends of the system, but only as the best that could be secured. Out of
the nine States adopting the system in 1889 only two have made use of the party
group arrangement (Indiana and Missouri), the others following the Massachu-
setts method. For a discussion of the constitutionality of the former, see " The
Nation," 1889 (C. C. Binney), and an article by the present writer in the American
law Review, October, 1889!
80 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
order of the names for each office. The color device is also an
effective one ; but it would be expensive, and is apt to foster a
rivahy based on partj* emblems rather than on party principles.
All these contrivances seem to be unnecessary wherever the elec-
tion officers are required to give assistance to illiterates, and
would cumber the ballot to no good purpose.
3. The Massachusetts ballot, an example of which is appended
to this volume, shows the feasibility of placing the names of all
candidates upon one ballot. If city offices are also to be filled
at the same election (a practice which ought to be discontinued,
as it has been in Massachusetts), or if presidential electors
(" useless cogwheels" that will before long be swept away) are
to be elected, the names ma}- be placed on a separate ballot, or
may be placed on an additional fold of the same ballot (as the
Massachusetts law provides). Whether the titles of the offices
should be placed, as in Kentucky (Part VI.) and Ontario (Part
VIII.), at the side of the group of candidates, or horizontally
above each group, as in Massachusetts, is not a matter of much
moment ; but the latter would seem to be the method most con-
venient, and most in accord with the present customary arrange-
ment, which should be followed so far as possible.
Note 5.
Arrangement of the Polling- Room.
(Mass., § 21 ; S. Austr., § 54 ; Queens., § 59 ; Gt. Brit., B, § 16 ; Belg., § 117 ;
Ky., § 8 ; N. Y., § 20.)
A very simple and inexpensive structure will suffice to furnish
entire secrec}' in marking the ballot.^ Perhaps the arrangement
shown in the illustration {siqjra, p. 73) is as good as an}'. In
Kentucky the compartment resembles a sentry-box, and the voter
enters and closes the door. It would seem that by this plan very
little light would be furnished for marking the ballot. There is,
however, a more serious objection. While the act of marking
should be screened from all observation, j'ct the person of the
voter should remain in plain sight. This is necessar}' in order
to prevent attempts at fraud, — substitution of non-official bal-
lot, exhibiting the ballot, etc. ; and is provided for b}- the Massa-
chusetts plan of arrangement. The voter's person should be in
sight, not on]}' while marking his ballot, but during the entire
"X ^ For specifications and estimates, see Appendix.
NOTES. 81
period from the time of receiving the ballot to the time of
depositing it; and therefore the plan sometimes adopted in
England (and provided for by the Wisconsin law of 1888)
of using one room for receiving and depositing the ballot, and
an adjoining room for marking the vote, is not desirable. The
simplest and safest arrangement seems to be that shown in the
illustration above, by which the voter, entering at one gate,
passes around and deposits his vote, without once retracing
his steps or leaving the room.
Note 6.
Delivei^ of the Ballot.
(Mass., § 22; S. Austr., § 58, IV.; Queens., § 71 ; Gt. Brit., B, § 50; Belg.,
§123; Ky., §7; N. Y., § 21.)
If the Massachusetts polling arrangement be adopted, the
ballot clerk will of course be the officer to deliver the ballots
to voters, while the presiding officer attends to the business of
receiving ballots. But this division of labor should in any case
be insisted upon. Three of the above statutes place both duties
upon the presiding officer ; but it is manifestly impossible that
while attending to his principal duty of questioning voters, re-
ceiving the ballots, and verifying the official mark upon them,
he can at the same time properly distribute ballots to those
applying for them.
Note 7.
Identification of Official Ballot.
(Mass., § 10 ; S. Austr., § 57 ; Queens., § 71 ; Gt. Brit., A, § 2, B, § 24 ; Belg.,
§§ 123, 151 ; Ky., §§ 4, 7 ; N. Y., § 21.)
An examination of the above sections will show the variety of
the modes adopted by the different legislatures for guarding
against frauds in connection with the ballot. Each method will
sufficiently suggest its special advantages or drawbacks ; but a
few points of difference may here be noted : —
1. Whether the official mark should be placed on all the
ballots before the opening of the polls (as in Massachusetts) or
upon each one immediate I3' before deliverv to the voter (as in
England) is a matter for some doubt. When there is a press of
voters, the placing of the official mark, if done at the time of
6
82 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
the deliver}' of each ballot, is apt to be hurried, and its inadver-
tent omission may disfranchise an innocent voter. For this
reason it was proposed in England, in 1876, to do awa}- witli
the official mark, or to permit it to be placed in advance on all
the ballots ; but neither proposal was adopted. Probably the
inconvenience in England largely resulted from the practice,
already referred to, of requiring the presiding officer to dis^
tribute and to receive ballots at the same time. The danger of
counterfeiting the design seems not to be greater under the
Massachusetts method, for in either case the block must be pre-
pared beforehand. AVhatever the method followed, a stamp is
better than the pencilled initials of the ballot clerk (as in S.
Australia).
2. The numbered counterfoil system requires a few words.
It is now in use in Great Britain, Ontario, W. Australia, and,
in a simpler form, in Victoria. Its principal purpose is of course
to be able to identifv the ballot of anj' voter afterwards proved
to have voted illegally- or to have been bribed, and to discard
his vote with certainty, saving, perhaps, the need of a new elec-
tion. It is cumbrous, however, and tends to create errors, and
the testimony in England, in 1876, was that its advantage was
not great. The plan (in use in Queensland and New Zealand)
of folding and gumming a corner of the ballot marked with the
elector's number, is tedious and not satisfactory. It is a ques-
tion whether, considering all things, the object is important
enough to require these precautions.
3. To prevent what has been known as the " Tasmanian
dodge," an ingenious device was adopted in Quebec (see Part
VIII. G.), and subsequently by the Dominion Parliament, which
checkmates what has often been supposed to be theoretically, if
not practically, possible. The "Tasmanian dodge" (which
appeared in Australia once only, in 1868, where it was imme-
diately detected, and has apparently not been attempted in
England), consists in sending in a voter who manages to deposit
a counterfeit ballot (or empty envelope, if an envelope is re-
quired, as it should not be) and' to bring out his own genuine
one ; which is then marked in ink by the local manager without,
and given to another henchman, who in turn brings out a fresh
ballot, and the process is repeated. In Quebec the election
officer as he gives out the ballot, places on the back of a coun-
terfoil or "annex" the voter's registered number; and when
NOTES. 83
the voter returns with the ballot marked, it is eas}' to see hy
comparing the number on the back of the "annex" with the
registered number of the person presenting it, whether it is the
same person to whom the ballot was delivered. Tlie annex is
then torn off and destro^-ed, and, while entire secrecy of voting
is preserved, the Tasmanian dodge is effectuall}' prevented, even
in theory. This device merits a wider adoption.
Note 8.
Assistance to Illiterates and to others.
(Mass., § 25 ; S. Austr., § 58, VII.; Queens., § 73 ; Gt. Brit., B, § 26 ; Belg.,
§ 123; Ky., § 10; N. ¥.,§25.)
Assistance is allowed to illiterate electors in Great Britain,
New York and Massachusetts, as well as in New Zealand, Can-
ada, and Italy (Part VIII.) . Where a reading and writing qualifi-
cation does not exist, there can be no doubt that this is eminently
just, and that if illiterates are to be disfranchised (as the}- should
be) it may be done in a more straightforward wa}'. Under the
New York and Massachusetts laws the illiterate may select one
of the election officers to assist him. It would seem that the
presence of two otHcers, if possible, should be required ; for as
was found in England, attempts ma}' be made to cany out bar-
gains b}' pleading illiteracy and proving to the officer of the
voter's part}' that the bargain is kept. Moreover, intimidation
or fraud may occur if only one officer is present. It is better
that in ever}' case one officer of each party represented should
be at hand. The publicity is no objection, for the voter's party
is even more easily ascertained from his choice (if he is given it)
of a single officer to assist him. In England, in 1876/ many
returning officers wished the privilege of receiving assistance to
be withdrawn, as subject to abuse, and the Conmiittee so recom-
mended ; but it would seem that the objection of the officials
arose largely from the cumbrous English provisions for reading
and signing a long declaration of illiterac}'. The verbal one
permitted b}- the acts of this country seems sufficient. But a
record should be kept, as it is in Great Britain, Belgium, and
Kentuck}', of all ballots marked with the assistance of the
officers, whether for illiteracy, blindness, or any oUiet-cauae*.^
Pari. Papers, 1876, vol. xii. //^^ o' rm \
IRSITY)
84 AUSTRALIAN" BALLOT SYSTEM.
Note 9.
Ilode of Expressing the Yote.
(Mass., § 23 ; S. Austr., § 58, VL ; Queens., § 73; Gt. Brit., A, § 2, B, § 25
C. " Form of Directions for Voters ; " Belg., A, § 12i, B, § 1 ; Ky., § 9 ;
N. y., § 22.)
Although this is one of the most interesting portions of the
S3'stem, very httle can be here said which will not snggest itself
to those who examine the provisions of the different statutes.
The two rival methods are that of striking out names not voted
for, and that of marking a cross for the preferred candidates.
The weak point (rclativeh-) of the former is its tediousness, and of
the latter is the opportunity offered for making the mark in other
than the exact place and mode. Various plans are used for reduc-
ing this opportunity to a minimum. The best theoretical method
is the Belgian, which leaves a small white spot for the voter to
])lacken ; or perhaps the black ballot (proposed by Mr, Pearson
of Stockport, Eng.) having white squares for the voter's mark.^
Probably the best practical plan is that of the Dominion statute,
all left-hand margin being discarded, and the upright line at the
right being omitted. But it may be asserted that there is no
real difficulty in the method, so far as ascertaining the elector's
desire (which is the fundamental object of election proceedings)
is concerned. The difficulties, if any, which have occurred with
respect to this method of marking, have arisen, in the great
majority of eases, solel}' from the provision in the British and
Canadian statutes making void a ballot which contains "any
mark by which the voter ma}' afterwards be identified," which,
in the hands of a few returning officers and many of the courts
(especially in Scotland and in Canada)^ has been applied in an
unpractical and over-suspicious manner. It would be better to
consider solely the voter's intention (which, as the testimony
cited in the Introduction shows, seldom causes much difficulty),
and to leave the question of collusion to be otherwise deter-
mined ; perhaps, as a compromise measure, putting the burden
1 Pari. Papers, 1876, vol. xii., app. to Report.
- See Appendix for references to tlie decisions of tlie last thirt}' years
construing tlie characteristic provisions of the ballot acts in Great Britain,
Ireland, Canada, and Australia.
NOTES. 85
on one who charges at the counting that a pecnhar mark has
been oorruptl}' used, or, better still, as in the New York Act,
imposing a penalty- on one who marks coUusively, but not plac-
ing upon the election officers the duty of entertaining the ques-
tion, and not allowing it to be raised at the counting of the
votes. Tlie construction of the ballots should continue to be
governed by the present plain principle of election law that the
voter's intention, whenever it clearly appears, should be given
effect.
Note 10.
What Ballots shall not he Counted.
(Mass., § 26; S. Austr, § 64; Queens., § 76; Gt. Brit, A, § 2; Belg.,
§§ 124, 127 ; Ky., § 11 ; N. Y., §§ 13, 28.)
To the ordinary causes of rejection applicable to all ballots
(e. g. that the vote is uncertain, because it is illegible or because
too many names are voted for), it would seem that the present
system should properly add but one cause peculiar to itself, —
failure of the ballot to bear proof that it was lawfully received
from and deposited with the officials of the election. In some
statutes the absence of prima facie proof of this sort, in other
words, the want of the official identifying mark, whatever it ma}*
be, justifies the rejection of the ballot (New York, uhi supra).
In other statutes regard is paid to the actual, not merely the
prima facie genuineness of the ballot ; as in Massachusetts,
where " none but the ballots provided in accordance with the
provisions of this act shall be counted," that is (probably,
tliough not clearly), all ballots actuall}' provided by the Secre-
tary, and actually received by the elector from the ballot clerk,
must be counted. Between the two principles a choice must be
made. The former, by fixing a definite test, gains in decisive-
ness and speed ; the latter has the advantage of occasional!}'
saving an honest vote from rejection.
The only other cause for rejection commonly sanctioned is the
use of a collusive mark. As to the advisability of this provision
an opinion has been already expressed (Note 9). It is not
adopted in either the Kentucky, New York, or Massachusetts
statutes.
86 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
Note 1 1 .
HesjJonsibilUy of Officials for Neglect of Duty.
(Mass., § 30 ; S. Austr., § 85 ; Queens., § 120 ; Gt. Brit., § 11 ; N. Y. § 31.)
That a general elause imposing a penalt}' upon an officer
neglecting any duty placed upon him by the statute should be
included therein seems unquestionable. Whether an}' provision
should be made for abrogating or modifying the officer's respon-
sibility in damages to one injured by liis failure to perform the
duty is a matter for some consideration. It seems that the
duties of stamping the ballot, delivering it, receiving it, etc., are
ministerial only (Pickering v. James, L. R. 8. C. P. 489 ; 55
L. T. 135; 11 Cent. L. J. 141), and that an officer is therefore
at common law liable for any loss incurred through his failure,
whether wilful or inadvertent, to perform such a duty. Pro-
vision, then, ought to be made for fixing a pecuniary limit to
the civil liability of an officer, so that the maximum extent of
his responsibility in case of loss might be known beforehand to
himself and to all others concerned. To leave in force the com-
mon-law rule of indefinite responsibilit^y, where the compensation
of the position is comparatively a mere bagatelle, would be
unjust, and would deter desirable men from accepting the duties.
But care should be taken, in such a case, to make it clear
(see Brett, J. in Pickering v. James, supra) that the statutory
provision entirely supersedes the common law liability.
Note 12.
Informalities.
(S. Austr., § 71 ; Queens., § 85; Gt. Brit., A, § 13; Ky., § 26.)
It is perhaps advisable to insert a clause curing all informal-
ities which do not affect the merits of the contest. This, how-
ever, would be extremely difficult to phrase properly, and had
better be omitted than poorly done. The English provision has
been more difficult to construe than it should have been, and is
hardly a good model for a provision of similar purpose.
NOTES. 87
Note 13.
Objections to JSTominations.
(Mass., § 7; Gt. Brit., B, § 13, D, § 3.)
In order to avoid the possibilit}- of causing a new election
upon trifling grounds, it is a great advantage to settle finall}' all
questions relating to nominations before the election takes place.
For this purpose a time and place are prescribed in the above
statutes for making and hearing objections to tlie legality of
nominations. The decisions of the tribunal are in Massachusetts
final, in Great Britain are final onh- where an objection is held
invalid. The former provision would perhaps in some places
confer a dangerous power on an extra-judicial body.
Neither of the above statutes contains the very desirable pro-
viso that, in case of the rejection of a nomination for non-fulfil-
ment of the statutory requirements, if the defect is within a cer-
tain limited time repaired, the nomination may be again filed
and shall then be treated as valid.''
Note 14.
Method of Reckoning Time.
(S. Austr., § 101 ; Gt. Brit., B, § 56 ; Ky., § 2.)
Framers of future statutes should not omit to declare whether
Sundays are to be included in the computation of the periods
for filing nominations, etc. ; nor to make it entirely clear to
what point the reckoner is carried by such provisions as " five
days before the day of," or " five days at least before the day
of" this or that event.
Note 15.
Deposit or Security from Candidates,
(Queens., §§ 49, 55; Gt. Brit., E ; Ky , § 2.)
In Australia the object of the deposit — to discourage reckless
candidacies — has already been commented on (Note 2). In
1 See the New York bill of 1889, page 155.
88 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
Great Britain, Canada, and Kentucky, it is a method of distribut-
ing the expense among the candidates. In this aspect it ought
not to commend itself to those who are trying to escape from the
evils of a machine corruption which rests largelj' on a similar
system of assessments upon candidates. The cases are not en-
tirely parallel, but the assessment of candidates, whether b}' the
State or by a political committee, has man^- identical evils which
will easily suggest themselves. We ought, moreover, to remem-
ber that in the Dominion elections the whole number of parlia-
mentary candidates is seldom half a dozen, and the amount
assessed being only $50 each, the sum collected is not intended
to reimburse the election expenses of the district ; while in Eng-
land, where the security required from the candidates is much
larger, the requirement is simply a part of the traditional sys-
tem ; the returning officer is personally- liable for the expenses,^
and is not unlike an officially-appointed agent of the candidates,
entitled to demand security in advance. In our own country-,
on the contrary, we have always recognized that, so far as the
State takes electoral machinery into its own hands, to that ex-
tent it should undertake the expenses. In other words, the plan
of imposing election expenses b}' law upon candidates proceeds
upon the entirely false theory that it is the individual candidates,
and not the people, for whose interests and needs the election
was instituted. That this principle already finds support among
a certain sordid few, to whom, as a recent writer has said, place-
hunting is a career, makes it none the less unfortunate that it
should be sanctioned in legislation. But upon whatever prin-
ciple or theory the assessment of candidates may rest, perhaps
the best reason for refusing to adopt it is, as has been said, that
it savors too much of the very system of party assessments that
we are now endeavoring to sweep away.
Note 16.
Space for Additional Names on Ballot.
(Mass., §10; N. Y., §13; Ky., § 9.)
A provision requiring space to be left, in the case of each
office, for any additional name (or for as many as there are
vacancies to be filled) that the elector may choose to insert,
- Unless recent legislation lias partially changed this.
NOTES. oy
is essential to the complete theoretical fairness and possibly to
the constitutionality of the system ; and the ballot can be ar-
ranged,^ without inconvenience, so as to permit this.
Note 17.
Withdrawals.
(Mass., § 8; S. Austr., § 54 ; Gt. Brit., A, § 1, D, § 1 (7) ; N. Y., § 11.)
In none of the above statutes has a clause been inserted to
provide against an important contingenc}', — the corrupt with-
drawal of a candidate, in collusion with the opposite party or
candidate. Without some such provision this becomes a vulner-
able point in the system. Opportunities will frequently exist,
with respect to candidates for many of the less prominent offices,
at the last moment to make a " deal," to apply pressure, or even
to purchase outright ; and thus, with their candidate withdrawn
and the time for nominations expired, the party or the section of
electors is defeated even without an election.
This possibility may be easily obviated by allowing a day or
two (after the expiration of the period for withdrawing) within
which to substitute another candidate.
1 See the model at the end of the book.
II. SOUTH AUSTRALIA.
ELECTORAL ACT, 1879 (42, 43 Vict., No. 141).
[PRELIMINARY (Sects. 1-4).]
[Part I. — Appointment of Officers, and
Registration (Sects. 5-45).]
Part II. — Conduct of Elections (Sects. 46-71).
46, 47. (Form of election-writ ; the polling clay to be
not less than two and not more than thirty clays from the
Mass., §6; day of nomination.) (a)
Queens., §§ 48, ^g^ j^ order that any person may become or be a can-
li'd'^uM^' c^itlate at any election, he shall be nominated by not less
Be'ig.,' § 105 ;" than two persons (^) entitled to vote at such election, in
N'^Y., §8. manner following, that is to say, after the issue of the
(h) wi;it and before the time fixed for the nomination, there
Seen's^, §'49; shall be delivered to the returning officer (c) a nomination
Bei^r§U06,^' paper, in the form, or to the effect of the form in the Tenth
Kv'5 2- Schedule hereto, naming such person as a candidate at
n:y.,§5; and such election, and signed by the persons nominating as
' ^' ' aforesaid, and having at the foot thereof a statement, un-
iiass. §6; der the hand of the person so nominated, that he consents
Queens., § 49; , , -e ^ 1. j y '\
Gt. Br., B, § 8, to act if elected, (c )
D, §1(3);
Bels., § 106;
49. (Publication by Returning Officer of dates of nom-
^y\:J l', ination and election and of polling-places.)
50. The Returning Officer shall at noon, on the day of
nomination, attend at the chief polling-place, and there
publicly produce the several nomination papers he shall
SOUTH AUSTRALIA. 91
have then received, and mve notice (d) of the names of () the same on the face thereof with.
Jl^J^'^.i^.'^'^ ' his initials in ink or pencil, and shall also write (j^) upon
n: y.. § 21; the back of the left-hand upper corner of the ballot paper
and Note 6, . . , ., , , . ^ ,
p. 81. in ink or pencil the number set against the name oi the
^'J r ,„ elector in the electoral roll.
Mass., § 10;
s. Austr., §57; The presiding officer shall then, and before delivery of
B..'§2i; "' ' the ballot paper to the elector, fold down {p} the corner
ibif' ^^ ^^ ' of the paper so as to entirel}'- conceal the number so writ-
2^-Y^i^Ii. ten, and shall securely fasten the fold with gum or other-
and XoTK 7, -^jse [^ g^^ich a manner that the number cannot be discovered
p. 81.
without unfastening the fold.
72. Upon delivery of the ballot paper to the elector, the
presiding officer or poll-clerk shall, upon the copy of the
electoral roll in use by him, or, in the case of a presiding
officer other than the returning officer, upon the certified
copy of the roll supplied to him by the returning officer,
make a mark against the name of the elector. The mark
so made on the roll shall be prima facie evidence of the
identity of the person to whom the ballot paper is de-
livered with the elector whose name is so marked on the
roll, and of the fact that such elector voted at that election.
The number marked upon the back of the ballot paper
shall, upon a scrutiny, be conclusive evidence that such
ballot-paper was delivered to and used by the person who
claimed to vote as the person against whose name such
number is set in the electoral roll.
73. The elector, having received a ballot paper, shall, in
one of the compartments or ballot rooms provided for the
QUEENSLAND. 103
purpose, strike out (5) from his ballot paper the names of (7)
such candidates as he does not intend to vote for, and shall s.' Tustr., § 58,
make no other mark or writing thereon, and shall forthwith Gt'Br.,A., §2,
fold, up the paper in such manner as will conceal the names ^^'p^onn of'
of the candidates, and deposit it in the ballot-box in tlie i^ii-fctions for
presence of the presiding officer. Provided that while an Bdg., a,'§ 124,
elector is in a compartment preparing his ballot paper no kV^, §'9;
other person shall be allowed in such compartment. Pro- and^xuxt"*!),
vided, nevertheless, that in case any elector is unable to p- ^^•
read, or is blind (r), he shall signify the fact to the pre- (r)
siding officer, who shall thereupon, in the booth or polling- s.^Aubtr.fs'ss,
place, and in tlie presence and sight of the poll-clerks, qJ^j^j.^^ 26;
candidates, and scrutineers, strike out the names of the 5^^^-, § 123;
Ky., § 10;
candidate or candidates other than the candidate or can- Ni: Y., § 25;
T T p 1 11 111. ^"'^ Note 8,
didates ior whom the elector says that he desn-es to p. 83.
vote.
No elector shall take out of the booth or polling-place
any ballot paper either before or after the same has been
so marked.
Any elector wilfully infringing an}' of the provisions of
this section, or obstructing the polling by any unnecessary
delay in performing any act within the ballot room, shall
be guilty of a misdemeanor.
74. (Provisions for disposing of second votes tendered
on the same name.)
75. An elector may vote for any number of candi-
dates not exceeding the number of members then to be
elected.
76. Every ballot paper which (s) — (s)
(1) Does not bear the initials of the presiding officer, s.Tu'str. §'g4-
or Gt.Br.,A, §2!
Bels., §§ 124,
147;
Kv., § 11;
written upon the back of it by the presidino- n. y., §§ 13,
ffi 1 • 1 r -J 1 28; and Note
oracer as hereinbefore provided, or 10, p. 85.
(3) Has such number torn off, or
(4) Contains a greater number of names of candidates
not struck out than the number of members to
be elected, or
104 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
(5) Has upon it any mark or writing not by this Act
authorized to be put thereon,
shall be rejected at the close of the poll.
77. (Provision for adjournment in case of a riot.)
78. (Power given to the presiding officer to maintain
order.)
Part V. — Declaration of the Result, and Return
OF Writs of Election (Sects. 79-87).
85. No election under this Act shall be liable to be
(t) questioned Q) by reason of any defect in the title, or any
Gt.B"\,A,§i3; want of title, of any person by or before whom such
S Note 12 election is held, if such person really acted at such elec-
P- 86. tion, nor by reason of any formal error or defect in any
declaration or other instrument, or in any publication
made under this Act or intended to be so made, nor by
reason of any such publication being out of timco
87. All expenses which a returning officer necessarily
incurs in and about an election under the provisions of
this Act shall be defrayed out of such moneys as shall be
appropriated by Parliament for that purpose.
Part VI. — Corrupt and Illegal Practices
(Sects. 88-110).
95 . . . (2). Any person who, before or during an elec-
tion, knowingly publishes a false statement of the with-
drawal of a candidate at such election for the purpose of
promoting or procuring the election of another candidate,
shall be guilty of an illegal practice.
99. Every person who corruptly induces or procures
any other person to withdraw from being a candidate at an
election, in consideration of any payment or promise of pay-
ment, and every person who withdraws in pursuance of
such inducement or procurement, shall be guilty of illegal
payment.
100. Every bill, placard, or poster having reference to
an election shall bear upon the face thereof the name and
QUEENSLAND. 105
address of the printer and publisher thereof ; and every
person who prints, publishes, or posts, or causes to be
printed, published, or posted, an}' such bill, placard, or
poster, as aforesaid, which fails to bear upon the face
thereof the name and address of the printer and publisher,
shall, if he is the candidate, or the agent of the candidate,
be guilty of an illegal practice ; and if he is not the can-
didate, or the agent of a candidate, shall be liable on
summary conviction to a fine not exceeding one hundred
pounds.
Pakt VII. — Supplemental Provisions (Sects. 111-
126).
116. Every person who intrudes into any booth or poll-
ing-place, other than the presiding officer, poll-clerk, can-
didates, scrutineers, and electors actually voting, shall be
guilty of a misdemeanor.
120 . . . (2). Every justice, presiding officer, or other
officer or person who wilfully neglects or refuses to per-
form (w) any of the duties which by the provisions of this («)
Act he is required to perform, shall for every such offence s. Austr., § 85;
forfeit and pay any sum not exceeding fifty pounds. n. Y.'j § 31:
121. Every presiding officer or other person who places p^ge^'^^'^ ^^'
or is privy to placing in a ballot-box a ballot paper which has
not been lawfully handed to and marked by an elector shall
be guilty of felony, and shall be liable on conviction to be
kept in penal servitude for any period not exceeding seven
years, and not less than two years, or to be imprisoned for
any term not exceeding two years, with or without hard
labor. Proof that a greater number of ballot papers is
found in a ballot-box, or is returned b}' a presiding officer
as having been received at a polling-place, than the num-
ber of electors who voted at such polling-place, shall be
prima facie evidence that the presiding officer at such
polling-place was guilty of an offence against this section.
124 (1). Ever}^ returning officer, presiding officer, poll-
clerk, scrutineer, or other person who knowingly and wil-
fully unfastens the fold upon a ballot paper within which
106 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
the number of an elector is written, unless he is by the
lawful command of some competent court or other tribunal
required to do so ; and, —
(2). Every returning officer, presiding officer, poll-clerk,
or scrutineer who attempts to ascertain or discover, or di-
rectly or indirectly aids in ascertaining or discovering, the
person for whom anj^ vote is given, except in the case of
a person voting openly, or who, having in the exercise of
his office obtained knowledge of the person for whom any
elector has voted, discloses such knowledge, unless in an-
swer to some question put in the course of proceedings
before some competent court or other tribunal; and, —
(3). Every returning officer, presiding officer, poll-clerk,
or scrutineer who places upon any ballot paper any mark
or writing not authorized by this act.
Shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction
thereof shall be liable to imprisonment for any term not
exceeding two years, with or without hard labor.
[Part VIII. — Temporary Provisions (Sects. 127-
131).]
IV.— GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND.
A. Ballot Act, 1572.
B. First Schedule.
C. Second Schedule (including forms for nomination
and ballot papers).
D. Municipal Elections Act, 1875 (sect. 1, subs. 3, 6, 7).
E. Pa7'liame7itary Elections (^Returning Officers') Acty
1875.
A.
Ballot Act, 1872 (35 and 36 Vict., c. 83).
Part I. — Parliamentaky Elections.
Procedure at Elections.
1. A candidate for election to serve in Parliament for a
county or borough, shall be nominated in writing. The
writing shall be subscribed by two registered electors of
such county or borough as proposer and seconder, and by
eight other registered electors of the same county or
borough as assenting to the nomination (a), and shall be («)
delivered during the time appointed for the election to the s.Austr., §48;
returning officer by the candidate himself or his proposer i;efg."^§§ iog,'
or seconder. ]l^/ , 2-
If at the expiration of one hour after the time appointed N- y.,§ 5; and
J, , . Note 2, p. 75.
for the election, no more candidates stand nominated than
there are vacancies to be filled up, the returning officer
shall forthwith declare the candidates who may stand
nominated to be elected, and return their names to the
clerk of the crown in chancery ; but if at the expiration of
such hour more candidates stand nominated than there are
108 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
vacancies to be filled up, the returning officer shall adjourn
the election and shall take a poll in manner in this Act
mentioned.
(h) A candidate may, during the time appointed for the
Queens , §'54; election, but not afterwards, withdraw (6) fiom his candi-
Gt Br ^dH 1 clature by giving a notice to tliat effect, signed by him, to
(7), infra. the returning officer ; provided, that the proposer of a
candidate nominated in his absence out of the United
Kingdom, may withdraw such candidate by a written no-
tice signed by him and delivered to the returning officer,
together with a written declaration of such absence of the
candidate.
(Provision for proclaiming the election anew in case
of the death of a candidate after nomination and before
election.)
2. In the case of a poll at an election the votes shall be
given by ballot. The ballot of each voter shall consist of
a paper (in this Act called a ballot paper) showing the
names and description of the candidates. Each ballot
(c) paper shall have ( ^"i^
tion or returns.
The Poll.
14. The poll shall take place on such da}" as the returning
officer may appoint, not being in the case of an election for a
county or a district borough less than two nor more than six
clear days, and not being in the case of an election for a borough
other than a district borough more than three clear da^'s, after
the day fixed for the election {I). (;)
(15) At ever}' polling-place the returning officer shall provide s^^f''5^K46.
a sufficient number of polling-stations for the accommodation of Queens., §§ 48,
the electors entitled to vote at such polling-place, and shall dis- ijeig., § 105 ;
tribute the polling-stations amongst those electors in such man- n" y^fg.
ner as he thinks most convenient ; provided that in a district Gt. Br., B, § 4,
, , , ,, 1 , ,,. . , <-fnfe;D,§l(3),
borough there shall be at least one polling-station at each con- mfra.
tributory place of such borough.
16. Each polling-station shall be furnished (m) with such (m)
number of compartments, in which the voters can mark their g^^^ustr.^S 54-
votes screened from observation, as the returning officer thinks S^f^^^j'AI.^'
necessary, so that at least one compartment be provided for Ky^ 8;
eveiy one hundred and fift}' electors {n) entitled to vote at such and Note 5,'
polling-station. P- ^^•
17. A separate room or separate booth may contain a sepa- ^"^
rate polling-station, or several polling-stations may be con- Queen's., § "
Hel, § ](3);
residence of each candidate, and shall also contain the N. Y., §'io.
instructions annexed as No. I.
The presiding officer of the chief polling-place, at the
request of the candidates or of the electors wlio presented
them, shall communicate (g) to them the official list of (g)
candidates not later than the fourth day before the day of ^^(^^^"^'■"•
election.
Section II. Ballots.
Art. 113. At the expiration of the time allowed for
presenting candidates, the election officers of the chief
polling-place shall prepare the ballots and cause them to
be printed on official paper.
Art. 114. Candidates to the legislature who present
themselves together and form an entire group shall be
placed in a single column, arranged in alphabetical order
for each Chamber, the candidates for the Senate coming-
first (h). The party appellation, as indicated according to 00
Art. 107, shall be printed at the head of the column. When s.Tustr., §55;
there are more members than one to be elected, candidates GrBr!B!§22;
presented independently shall be placed in alphabetical ^;JV^l5
order in a special column. Each column shall be printed ^-Y-' § i'^;
^ '■ and Note 4,
in ink of a different color ; the whole ballot being prepared p. 77.
according to the annexed model No. II.
Art. 115. Candidates for the provincial councils who
9
130 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
present themselves together and form an entire group
shall be placed in a single column in alphabetical or-
(;■) der (i). The first column shall contain the group in which
ee(h) supra, ^^^^^.g |.]^q name first in alphabetical order, and so on for
the other groups, whether entire or partial.
The election officers of the chief polling-place shall
cause the ballots to be printed or written in black ink.
Those who present themselves together and form an entire
group may request that a distinctive device be placed at
the head of their group ; the whole being prepared accord-
ing to the annexed model No. III.
Art. 116. The use of all other ballots is forbidden.
Section III. Of Polling Arrangements and the Process of
Voting.
Art. 117. The polling place and the separate compart-
ments in which the electors must record or determine upon
0) their votes shall be constructed (y) according to the
s. Austr., §'54; annexed model No. IV. But the dimensions and arrange-
GrB'i'-.tB,§i6; ment thereof may be modified according to the require-
Nfy.! §'20; ments of the premises or the needs of the occasion,
^"so^"^*^^' '^^^- ^^^' There shall be at least one compartment or
(^.j separate shelf for every 100 electors (^).
Mass., § 21 ; j^,.^ ][]^9_ Instructions, as contained in the annexed
Queens., § o9 ; '
Gt. Br., B,§i6; model No. I., shall be placarded on the outside of each
x: Y. § 20. polling-place, in the waiting-room, and within each sepa-
rate compartment.
Art. 120. The electors shall be called in alphabetical
order from a list containing the name, first name, age,
occupation, and residence of every elector in the district
or polling-place. Any charges of error in this list shall
be decided upon by the election officers, having regard
only to the ofiicial lists arranged by towns and posted
according to Art. 102.
Art. 121. (Provides that no one shall vote whose name
is not on the list or who cannot present a certificate of
qualification from the proper authorities.)
Art. 122. As one elector leaves the voting-place, the
BELGIUM. 131
clerk shall call another so that the electors shall succeed
each other in the compartments without cessation.
Art. 123. The elector when called shall approach and
receive from the hands of the presiding officer (I) a ballot (/)
folded at right angles into four parts, and stamped (m) on s^.Tustr.fl'58,
the back with a stamp indicating the number of the polling- [w'pug ^ -i.
place, and the date of the election. He shall proceed J^ti^^'J^'S^^!
directly to one of the compartments, shall there mark hisN.Y..§2i:
vote, shall return and show to the presiding officer the p. 8I.
ballot folded properly into four parts, the stamp on the ^^j^ss 5 lo-
outside, shall drop it into the ballot-urn, and shall leave s.Austr.,§ 57;
Queens., § 71;
the votmg-room. Gt. Br., a, § 2;
When it is" made to appear that a voter is blind or kV:, §§4, 7;
infirm (w), the presiding officer shall permit him to have bJi^.^'iM^J
a guide or assistant accompany him into the compartment. NoteV^"^81
The names of both shall be preserved in the official report («)
of the proceedings. s'lusti!'§'58,
Art. 124. If the elector Avishes to give his vote to all X'^"' c ^o
o _ Queens., §73;
the candidates of a single group, he shall mark (o) with a Gt. Br.,B,§26;
pencil a cross in the square reserved for the purpose at the n. y., § 25;
head of the group of candidates. If he wishes to give his p.^sa. ^ '
vote to certain candidates upon the same or different lists,
he shall mark (o) with a pencil a cross in the square reserved (")
for this purpose opposite the name of each of the candi- s.Tustr., §58,
dates for whom he votes. When there is but one member Queens., § 73;
to elect, the vote shall be expressed as in the former case b^'s^25-^c^ ^'
above, no square being printed opposite the candidate's " ^''o.'™ of Di-
■■■ =* ^ ^ J- rections for
name. voters;"
Every cross, although imperfectly made, shall be a valid 'r'A., §22;
expression of the vote (p), unless an intention is manifest inffa; ami '
to render the ballot recognizable. ^^^*^'^' i^- ^^■
Art. 125. If the elector inadvertently mars {q) the ggg (r), infra,
ballot which has been delivered to him, he may request P' ^^^•
another from the presiding officer, upon giving up to him mLs., §24;
the first, which shall be immediately cancelled. yvf/'f'^''"' ^ ^^'
Art. 126. The clerk shall check on the list the name of Gt.Br.,B,§28;
each elector who answers at the time of the first or the nI^y., § 24.
second call. When an elector receives a ballot froiu the
132 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
hands of the presiding officer, one of the inspectors shall
enter his name on a special list of voters.
Art. 127. There shall be a second call for those elec-
tors who Avere not present when first called. When the
second call is over, the presiding officer or his deputy shall
ask the assemblage if there are any electors present who
have not voted. Those who present themselves immedi-
ately shall be allowed to vote. When this has been done,
the poll shall be declared closed.
Art. 128. The elector may not remain in the compart-
ment longer than is necessary to prepare his ballot.
Art. 129. When the poll is closed, the election officers
shall place in separate sealed envelopes the ballots re-
turned according to Art. 125, and the unused ballots.
The number of returned ballots shall be recorded in the
official report, and tlie envelope containing them shall be
annexed thereto. The unused ballots shall be returned
by the election officers of the chief polling-place to the
superintendent of registration of the province.
Art. 130. No one shall be compelled to disclose the
manner in which he voted, whether at a preliminary
examination, a trial, or a parliamentary inquiry.
Section IV. Counting the Votes.
(v) Art. 147. The following ballots shall be void (r) :
s.Austr.,§'64; 1. All ballots Other than those whose use is permitted
StX'^r'bythisact:
N"V \§V3 28- ^' -^^^ ballots expressing no choice, or giving more than
Beig.,'§ m, one vote to the same person, or containing more votes than
Note 10, p. 85. there are members to be elected to either of the legislative
chambers or to the provincial councils :
3. All ballots which by a sign, erasure, or other mark of
any sort, not authorized by law, are rendered recognizable,
and all ballots altered in form or dimensions, or containing
within them a paper or other thing.
A7't. 151. The State shall furnish the election paper,
(s) which shall be stamped before being delivered (s) to the
See (m), ante, presiding officer of the chief polling-place.
BELGIUM. 133
The government shall fix the dimensions of ballots ac-
cording to the number of members to be elected. Ballots
for the same district at the same election shall be of the
same dimensions.^
Art. 152. It shall be the duty of the capital town of
each arrondissement to take charge of, renew, and repair
the partitions, shelves, and other material furnished to
them by the State. The partitions, railings, shelves,
stamping-instruments, and stamps shall be furnished by
the provinces to the other towns which are capitals of
cantons ; and it shall be the duty of these towns to take
charge of, renew, and repair these materials.
Art. 153. All other expenses incident to elections (ex-
cept the electoral registers in several towns, which are
charged upon the province) shall be borne by the town in
which the election takes place.
Chap. III. (Application of the foregoing principles to
Elections in Towns.)
Art. 155. (As amended by the law of 26 Aug. 1878) (t). u)
Nominations of candidates shall be signed (w) in towns of etc^fp'ay" '
More than 10,000 inhabitants, by at least 20 electors; ^^K , ,
' ' "' ' bee (c), ante.
From 5,000 to 10,000 inhabitants, by at least 10 electors;
From 3,000 to 5,000 inhabitants, by at least 5 electors;
and in towns of less than 3,000 inhabitants, by 3 electors,
among whom may be the candidates themselves.
Title V: Penalties (Arts. 167-191).
Art. 168. The counterfeiting of official ballots shall be
punished as a falsification of a public writing.
Art. 169. Any person who shall append the signature
of another or of a fictitious person to a nomination-paper,
1 By the laws of 18 Jan. and 17 Sept., 1878 {Supplement, etc., pp. 19,
25), the size of the ballots is fixed as follows, the first figure representing
the width: In districts having less than 6 members, 21 X 21 cm.; having
from 6 to 12 members, 24 X 24 cm. ; having more than 12 members, 21 X
34 cm. ; and in towns (general elections) 21 X 34 cm.
134 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
to an acceptance of a nomination, or to an appointment
of agents shall be deemed guilty of falsifying a private
writing.
Art. 183. Every presiding officer, inspector, or clerk of
a polling-place, and every agent of a candidate, who shall
disclose the contents of one or more ballots shall be fined
not less than 500 f., and not more than 3000 f., and in ad-
dition may be deprived, for a period not exceeding ten
years, of the right to act as election officer or agent, or to
vote or to be voted for.
[Title VI : Qualifications for holding office.]
[Title VII : Constitution of the legislative
CHAMBERS, PROVINCrAL AND TOWN
COUNCILS.]
[Title VIII : Repeals and miscellaneous provi-
sions.]
B.
Law of 21 3Iai/, 1884, repealing art. 124, ante.
Art. 1. If the elector wishes to give his vote to all the
(y) candidates of a single group, he shall (v) blacken with
the instrument (" esfamjnlle ") placed at his disposition
the white point in the centre of the square placed at the
head of the list of candidates.
If the elector wishes to give his vote to certain candi-
dates upon the same or different lists, he shall (w) blacken
as before the white point in the centre of the square placed
opposite the name of each candidate for whom he votes.
. . . Every impression made in the square with the instru-
ment and covering the white point, even though incom-
plete, confused, or otherwise defective, shall be a valid
expression of the vote, unless an intention is manifest to
render the ballot recognizable.
See (o), ante.
BELGIUM.
135
MODEL No. II.
Legislative Ballot (actual size about 10 in. square).
Anvers.
Election du.
[Blue.]
1
[
Slack
]
[Carmine.]
For Senator (Liberal).
For Senator [aU others].
For Senator (Catholic).
1
DESMET
1
AMMAN
1
MABILLE
2
EVERAERT
2
DELVAL
2
PEPIN
3
NELSON
3
3
VANSTUPPEN
For Representative
(Liberal).
For Representative
[all otlier.s].
For Representative
(Catholic).
1
2
DUBOIS
1
UYTERELST
1
ABELOOT
GEIRTS
2
VAN LOY
2
DEBOECK
3
MATERLING
3
HOMMEN
4
NICK
4
HOTTOIS
5
VANDENTOCK
5
LINSACK
6
VARMON
6
VAN DIEZT
136
AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
MODEL No. in.
Provincial Ballot.
Election du Province de , 18...
*
o
1
o
1
ABADIE
1
BERTRAND
1
COLIN
2
DELCAMPS
2
CORNET
2
DALTON
3
JACQUES
3
DUCANGE
3
HERMAND
4
NIEMAND
4
MAENHOUT
4
NICOLAS
5
PEETERS
5
ROBIN
5
STEVENS
XHOFFER
6
VERTBOIS
6
TILQUIN
137
MODEL No. IV.
Polling Arrangements.
Waiting Room.
Movable Partitions.
C c B C C
D D D n D
Da
Voting Roor
Dd I
A = Ballot-box.
B = Presiding ofScer.
C =r Inspectors.
D = Clerk.
E = Agents.
F ^= Compartments.
VI. — KENTUCKY.
AN ACT TO REGULATE MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS IN THE
CITY OF LOUISVILLE (Approved Feb. 24, 1888).
Section 1. (The provisions of the act are applicable to
elections of municipal officers, with certain exceptions, in
Louisville.)
Sec. 2. In order to have their names printed on the
(a) , ^
Mass., §4; ballots hereinafter described, candidates must be nomi-
(yueens.,'§ 4'j;' natcd as foUows : A candidate for one ward must be pro-
Beig.!^§§ 106?' posed by the written petition of ten or more registered
N^Y. § 5- voters (a) of the ward, accompanied by the city treasurer's
and NoTK 2, receipt for five dollars (6) ; a candidate for the city at large
(6) must be proposed by the written petition of fifty or more
Queens., §§ 49, registered voters of the city, accompanied by a like receipt
Gt. Br., E. fQj. twenty dollars (5) ; the petition in either case to be
Mass., §6: presented to the mayor (c) not less than ten days {d),
Quepns.'^'§ 49;' S'-^^^days iucludcd (g), before the election. •
i{fi-(3^:^^' Sec. 3. It shall be the duty of the mayor of the city to
N*^ y' w^^' ^^^^^^ ^o ^^ printed and bound and ready for distribution,
(ri) ' not less than three days before any municipal election, one
s! Austn^§46; book of stubs and ballots for each voting precinct in said
Queens., §§ 48, ^ity, and within such three days to distribute these books
Gt.Br.,B.,§§4, among the clerks of such precincts. The book for each
Beipr.,'§ 105; ' prcciuct shall contain as many leaves (/) as there are
%') ' ^ registered voters therein, with a reasonable number added
^- -Austr., to supply ballots that may be spoiled. The form herein-
Gt. Br.. B,§5G; after givcn for the election returns shall be printed on the
p. 87. ' inside of one of the covers of the book. The cost of print-
i^L^^ sio. i"o ^"^ binding these books, and the necessary expenses
s. Austr.. §.'j6; of all publications. Stationery, ballot-boxes and compart-
Queens., § 58; ^ ., i i , . i , , , ,
N. Y., § ie. ments prescribed by this act shall be borne by the city.
KENTUCKY. 139
Should the mayor be absent from the cit}', or prevented by
sickness from acting, the duties imposed by this section
upon him shall be performed by the city attorney.
Sec. 4. Each stub in such books shall liave printed on
it a consecutive number, commencing with number one,
and shall be worded as follows: —
Consecutive number — (After these words the consecu-
tive number shall be printed, beginning with one, and
increasing in regular numerical order).
Name of voter — (After these words the clerk shall set
down the voter's name).
Registered residence — (After these words the clerk is
to set down the voter's residence as found in the registra-
tion book of the precinct).
The ballot shall be printed on the same leaf with, and
shall be separated from the stub by a perforated line ; and
it shall be divided by heavy black lines into two columns,
and these again by horizontal black lines into divisions for
the different offices to be voted for, or questions to be
determined. Each division shall be substantially in the
following form (q^ : — (n)
° ^^^ Mass., § 10;
^ T I, -D S. Austr., §55;
r John Brown, Queens., §58;
For Mayor } William Smith, S);'§^i"(r5;^""^'
( James Williams, J'^f^ff-' §§ ^'i-^-
N. v.. § 1-i;
arranging the names in the alphabetical order of their p.^Yj.^'^^ '
surnames, and if several candidates have the same sur-
name, in the order of their given names ; and in like
manner for the other city offices to be filled, in this order:
Mayor, Receiver of City Taxes, Treasurer, Auditor. Then,
if any question be submitted, —
Yes.
For tax (or other measure) , ^^
( No.
Should there be hereafter other officers to be voted for by
the whole city, proper divisions are to be added for them.
In the second column siniihar divisions shall be printed :
For Alderman, for Councilman, for School Trustee, with
140 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
tlie names of the candidates put after them in the manner
above indicated : Provided, that the ballot shall have only
one column when only representatives of wards or when
only officers for the whole city are to be elected.
The mayor shall cause the contents and form of the bal-
lot, in the exact shape and size in which it is to be used
(/() for the city at large and for each ward, to be jDublished (Ji)
n't^"' ' in one or more of the daily newspapers that do the city
Quteus.?'§§ 5u' piiiiting on the da}' preceding the election, or in handbill
r^' D T> c n form, in his discretion ; in which latter case he shall cause
tjt. rsr., r5, § U ;
D. §1(3); said handbill to be properly circulated and distributed, to
N. Y.', §10.' t!)e end that the voters may become familiar therewith.
Sec. 6. (Division of the wards into precincts.)
Sec. 7. When a voter has given his name, and the same
^,-) is found on the registration list, and he is found otherwise
s^'Tu'str^"'^' 58 qii'ilified, the clerk of the election shall put the voter's
IV.; name on a stub in the book, together with the voter's reg-
(it. Br.,h.§56; istered residence, and the stub-book shall, for this purpose,
n! Y.', §21;' take the place of a poll-book. The clerk (i) shall tear the
and Note 6, i,.,]!^^^ off the stub and write his own name on the back
(i) thereof (?), and hand it thus indorsed to the voter. He
Ante 5 4; \ § i (3);
tificates of nomination shall be filed with the clerks (a') Ky.,§2.
of the respective counties wherein the offices are to be
filled by the electors. The certificate of nomination for
Assemblyman in the counties of Fulton and Hamilton
shall be filed in the office of the County Clerk of Hamilton
County, and a copy thereof certified by said County Clerk
of Hamilton County shall be filed in the office of the
County Clerk of Fulton County.
Sect. 5. A candidate for public office may be nomi-
nated otherwise than by a convention in the manner fol-
lowing : A certificate of nomination containing the name
of the candidate to be nominated, with the other informa-
tion required to be given in the certificates provided for in
Section 3 of this act, shall be signed by electors residing
within the district or political division for which candi-
dates are to be presented, equal in number (?>) to at least (b)
one per cent of the entire vote cast at the last preceding s.Aukr., §48;
election in the State, count}-, or other division or district ^"_^|r!," a Vi'
for which the nomination is to be made, provided, how- ^l'"-' §§ ^^^>
ever, that the number of signatures so required shall not Ky., §2; and
exceed one thousand when the nomination is for an office
to be filled by the electors of the entire State, and shall
not exceed one hundred when the election is for an office
to be filled by the electors of a county, district, or other
division less than the State in extent, and provided also
that the said signatures need not all be appended to one
paper. Such a certificate, when made as above prescribed,
may be filed as provided for in Section 4 of this act, with
10
146 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
the same effect as a certificate of nomination made by a
part}' convention.
Sect. 6. No certificate of nomination shall contain the
name of more than one candidate for each office to be
filled. No person shall join in nominating more than one
nominee for each office to be filled ; and no person shall
accept a nomination to more than one office.
Sect. 7. The Secretary of State shall cause to be pre-
served in his office all certificates of nomination filed
therein under the provisions of this act, and each county
clerk shall cause to be preserved in his office all certificates
of nomination filed therein under the provisions of this
act.
Sect. 8. Certificates of nomination, filed with the
Secretary of State, shall be filed not more than sixty
(c) days and not less than twenty days (c?) before the day
fixed by the law for the election of the persons in nomi-
Mass., § 6;
S. Austr., § 46
Queens., §§48, j-|j^^Jqj-,_ Certificates of nomination herein directed to be
^t-Br.,B,§§4, filed with the clerk of the county shall be filed not
Be'ig.'. §105;' morc than sixty and not less than fifteen days (c) before
election.
Sect. 9. Not less than eighteen days before an election
to fill any public office, the Secretary of State shall certify
to the County Clerk of each county within which any of
the electors may by law vote for candidates for such office,
the names and the description of each person nominated
for such office, as specified in the certificates of nomina-
tion filed with the Secretary of State.
Sect. 10. At least seven days before an election to fill
any public office, the County Clerk of each county shall
('0 cause to be published (c?) in at least two newspapers
ioT^"' ' within the county, the nominations to office certified to
Quee"S!^,"'§|5o,' I'ini by the Secretary of State, and also those filed with
Gt! Br., B, § 9, ^^^® County Clerk. He shall make not less than two such
ll\^ ^ I'l^i^ publications in each of such newspapers before election.
Belg., § 112; -^ ^ -"^
Ky., § 5. One of such publications in each newspaper shall be upon
the last day upon which such newspaper is issued before
election. Such publication shall be made in two news-
NEW YORK. 147
papers, representing the political parties that at the last
preceding election cast the largest and next largest num-
ber of votes ; the list of nominations published by the
county clerks of the respective counties shall be arranged,
as far as practicable, in the order and form in which they
will be printed upon the ballot.
Sect. 11. The Secretary of State shall not certify the
name of a candidate whose certificate of nomination shall
have been filed in his office, who shall have notified him in
a writing signed and executed with the formalities pre-
scribed for the execution of an instrument to entitle it to
record, that he will not accept (t?) the nomination con- (e)
tained in the certificate of nomination. The Count}^ Clerk Queensl", §'54:
shall not include in the publication to be made according ^'-.^l'^'--^' ^ ^'
to Section 10 hereof the name of any candidate whose
certificate of nomination shall have been filed in his office
who shall have notified him in like manner that he will
not accept the nomination. The names of such candi-
dates shall not be included in the names of the candidates
to be printed in the ballots as hereinafter provided.
Sect. 12. Whenever a proposed constitutional amend-
ment or other question is to be submitted to the people
of the State for popular vote, the Secretary of State shall
duly, and not less than thirty days before election, certify
the same to the clerk of each count}' of the State, and the
clerk of each county shall include the same in the publi-
cation provided for in Section ten of this act.
Sect. 13. Except as in this act otherwise provided, it
shall be the duty of the County Clerk of each county to
provide printed ballots for every election for public officers
in which electors or any of the electors within the county
participate, and to cause to be printed in the appropriate
ballot the name of every candidate whose name has been
certified to, or filed with the County Clerk in the manner
provided for in this act. Ballots, other than those printed
by the respective county clerks according to the provisions
of this act, shall not be cast or counted (f) in any election, (f) . ^
Nothing in this act contained shall prevent any voter from note.
148 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
(g) writing upon his ballot (^) the name of an}^ person for
Ky!!§ If and "^'hom he desires to vote for any office, and such vote shall
Note 16, p. 88. ]jq counted the same as if printed upon the ballot.
Sect. 14. Except as otherwise provided in this act,
every ballot printed as herein prescribed shall be printed
in accordance with the existing provisions of law. All
ballots shall contain the name of every candidate whose
nomination for any office specified in the ballot has been
certified to and filed according to the provisions of this
act, and no other name. The names of candidates nomi-
(h) nated by each party shall be grouped together (h) upon
S.Tustr., §55; the proper ballot, and each group shall be headed by the
Gt!^Bn,"B, § 22, name of the political party by which the candidates com-
Bei^'^''"§§ 'iu prising said group were placed in nomination as described
ij°; , , ^ in the certificates of nomination. There shall be a margin
Ky., § 4, and . , , °
Note4, p. 77. on each side, at least half an inch wide, and a reasonable
space between the names to be printed thereon, so that
the voter may clearly indicate, in the way to be hei-eafter
pointed out, the candidate or candidates for whom he
wishes to cast his ballot.
Sect. 15. Whenever the Secretary of State has duly
certified to any County Clerk any question to be sub-
mitted to a vote of the people, the County Clerk shall
prepare and distribute ballots of such form as will enable
the electors to vote upon the question in the manner
hereinafter provided.
Sect. 16. The County Clerk of each county shall pro-
vide for each election district in the county one hundred
ballots of each kind to be voted in the district, for every
(!) fifty or fi-action of fifty electors (i) registered at the last
s.^Austr. §56 ; preceding election in the district. If there is no registry
Ky!r§'3.^ ^^'^^ the district, the County Clerk shall provide ballots
to the number of one hundred for every fifty or fraction
of fifty electors who voted at the last election in the
district.
Sect. 17. Whenever it shall appear by affidavit that
an error or omission has occurred in the publication of
the names or description of the candidates nominated
NEW YORK. 149
for office, or in the printing of the ballots, the Supreme
Court of the State may upon application by any elector,
by order, require the County Clerk to correct such error,
or to show cause why such error should not be corrected.
Sect. 18. Before the opening of the polls at any elec-
tion of public officers within any count}^ the County
Clerk of the county shall cause to be delivered to the
board of inspectors of election of each election district
which is witliin the county, and in which the election is
to be held, at the polling-place of the district, the proper
number of ballots of each kind to be used in the district.
Sect. 19. At the same time, and in the same manner,
as inspectors of election are appointed or elected, two
ballot clerks for each election district in the State shall
be appointed or elected, whose duty it shall be to have
charge of the ballots, and to furnish them to the voters
in the manner hereinafter provided ; such ballot clerks
shall possess the same qualifications as inspectors of elec-
tion. No elector shall vote for more than one person for
said office of ballot clerk at the same time, and no political
party shall nominate more than one person for that office.
The two persons in each election district, when inspectors
of election are elected, who shall receive the highest and
next highest number of votes for the office, shall serve as
such at all elections except town-meetings to be held
therein during the ensuing year ; whenever inspectors of
election are not elected but appointed, such ballot clerks
shall be appointed, and their appointment certified at the
same time and in the same manner as is now provided
for in the case of inspectors ; but in making such appoint-
ments one of the ballot clerks in each election district
shall be taken from the political party that polled the
largest number of votes at the last preceding election,
and the other from the party that polled the next largest
number.
Sect. 20. Except in the City and County of New York,
all officers upon whom is imposed by law the duty of
designating polling-places shall provide in each polling-
150 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
0) place designated by them {j) a sufficient number of
S.Tiistr. § 54 ; places, bootlis, or compaitments, which shall be furnished
Gn"!,']! ^'"^ ' with such supplies and conveniences as shall enable the
lilw §117- '^oter conveniently to prepare his ballot for voting and
Ky. §8; in wliich electors may mark their ballots, screened from
and Note 5, p. . , , •, i i ,
80. observation, and a guard-rail so constructed that only per-
sons within such rail can approach within five feet of the
ballot-boxes or the places or compartments herein provided
for. The number of such places or compartments shall not
(k) be less than one for every seventy-five electors {k) who vot-
Queens!, §'59; cd at the last preceding election in the district. No person
Gt.^Br., B, other than electors engaged in receiving, preparing, or
K^'^'sV^*^' depositing their ballots shall be permitted to be within
(/) said rail Q) except by authority of the inspectors of elec-
s! Auif§'59; tions. In the City and County of New York the Chief
GrBr^'B^ ^'^5 of the Bureau of Elections shall provide such places or
§21; ' ^ compartments and guard-rails. The expense of providing
Ky,T§i7;' such places or compartments and guard-rails shall be a
anc oTt , p. p^^^j-g charge, and shall be provided for in each town and
city in the same manner as the other election expenses.
On or before the 1st day of Januaiy, 1889, and every year
thereafter, the officers of the several cities and towns now
charged by law with the division or alteration of election
districts, shall as far as necessary, alter or divide the ex-
. isting election districts in such a manner that each election
district shall contain not more than three hundred voters ;
and such division or alteration shall take effect immedi-
ately. Except as in this section otherwise provided,
such division or alteration shall be subject to the existing
provisions of law.
Mass., § 22; Sect. 21. On any day of election of public officers in any
S^Austr., § 58, gig^^^jQj^ district, each qualified elector shall be entitled to re-
GrBT''B "^' ^^^^^ from the ballot clerks one ballot for each of the offices
§ 50; ' for whicli the elector desires to vote. It shall be the duty
Kyf,'§ 7; ' of such ballot clerks (m) to deliver such ballots to the elector,
an 1 OTE , p. jig£Q^.g delivering any ballot to an elector the two ballot
1") , ,„ clerks shall write their names or initials (n) noon the back
Mass,, § 10; ' '
S. Austr., §57; of the ballot, immediately under the printed indorsement.
NEW YORK. 151
Sect. 22. On receipt of his ballots the elector shall Queens., § 71 ;
forthwith, and without leaving the polling-place, retire §"2, b,''§ -U;
alone to one of the places, booths, or compartments pro- ff^f ^^ ^'^^'
vided to prepare his ballots. He shall prepare his ballots J'i''{'J^4 7! p.
by marking a cross (0) before or after the name of the 8^-
person or persons for whom he intends to vote — thus, X ; (0)
. . J Mass., § 23;
or in case of a ballot containing a constitutional amend- s. AustV., § 58,
. VI •
ment or a question to be submitted to the vote of the Queens., § 73;
people, by crossing out therefrom parts of the ballot in ^2, Bi\%,
such a manner that the remaining part shall express his D-rectiT f^^
vote upon the question submitted. After preparing his Voters,'' ^^^
ballots, the elector shall fold each of them so that the face b, § i; '
of the ballot will be concealed, and so that the printed .^"*;;^d Note 9, p.
indorsement and the signatures and initials of the ballot- "
clerks thereon may be seen. He shall then vote forthwith
and before leaving the polling-place.
Provided, however, that any elector who desires to vote
for an entire group may mark a cross as above described
before or after the political organization of such group (0),
and shall then be deemed to have voted for all the persons
named in such group.
Sect. 23. Not more than one person shall be permitted
to occupy any one booth at one time ; and no person shall
remain in or occupy a booth longer than may be necessary
to prepare his ballot, and in no event longer than five
minutes (/:>). (p)
Sect. 24. Any voter who shall by accident or mistake Ky!,^§ 12. '
spoil his ballot (g) so that he cannot conveniently vote the (7)
same, may, on returning said spoiled ballot to the ballot s. An'str., § 58,
clerks and satisfying them that such spoiling was not ot. Br., B,
intentional, receive another in place thereof. Every elec- gg] ' §125;
tor who does not vote any ballot delivered to him, shall, ^y-^ § ^•
before leaving the polling-place, return such ballot to the
ballot clerks having charge of the ballots.
Sect. 25. Any elector who declares under oath to the
ballot clerks that he cannot read or write, or that by , ,
reason of physical disability he is unable to mark his Mass., §25; _
ballots (r), may declare his choice of candidates to either Vii.;'
152 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
Queeus.,§73; of tlie ballot clei'ks, who, in the presence of the elector,
Beigr§i'223; ' shall prepare tlie ballots for votmg in the manner herein-
Sd Note 8, before provided ; or such elector, after making such oath,
P- 83. may require one of such ballot clerks to read to him the
contents of the ballot, so that the elector can ascertain
the relative position of the names of the candidates on
each ballot, whereupon the elector shall retire to one of
the places, booths, or compartments provided, to prepare
his ballots in the manner hereinbefore provided.
Sect. 26. No inspector of election shall deposit any
ballot upon which the names or initials of the ballot clerks
as hereinbefore provided for does not appear.
Sect. 27. The County Clerk of each county shall cause
to be printed in large type on cards in English and in such
other languages as he deems necessary, instructions for
the guidance of electors in preparing their ballots. He
shall furnish twelve such cards, each printed in all the
languages determined upon by him, to the board of inspec-
tors of elections in each election district, at the same time
and in the same manner as the printed ballots. The board
of inspectors of elections shall post not less than one of
such cards in each place or compartment provided for the
preparation of ballots, and not less than three of such
cards elsewhere in and about the polling-place upon the
day of election. Said cards shall be printed in large, clear
type, and shall contain full instructions to the voters as
to what should be done, (1) to obtain ballots for voting ;
(2) to prepare the ballots for deposit in the ballot-boxes ;
(3) to obtain a new ballot in the place of one acciden-
tally spoiled ; also a copy of Sections 30 and 32 of this act.
Sect. 28. In the canvass of the votes, any ballot which
is not endorsed by the names or initials of the ballot
Ante, § 13; clerks, as provided in this act, shall be void and shall not
s. Au'str., §64; be couutcd (s), and any ballot or parts of a ballot from
0^6^!,'^. §2; ^^^^i*^li it is impossible to determine the elector's choice
Bdg., §§m, gjjj^ii |,g yQ[^ Q^^fi gi^.ji jjQj; \^Q counted(s). Such ballots
Ky.', §11; shall l)e treated and preserved in the same manner as
and Note 10, , . . , „
p. 85. detective ballots.
NEW YORK. 153
Sect. 29. No person shall (1) fulselj^ make, or fraudu-
lently deface, or fraudulently destroy any certificate of
nomination, or any part thereof; or (2) file any certificate
of nomination knowing the same or any part thereof to be
falsely made ; or (3) suppress any certificate of nomina-
tion which has been duly filed, or any part thereof; or (4)
forge or falsely make the official endorsement on any
ballot. Every person violating any of the provisions of
this section shall be deemed guilty of a felony.
Sect. 30. No person shall, during the election, remove
or destroy any of the supplies or other conveniences placed
in the booths as aforesaid for the purpose of enabling the
voter to prepare his ballot. No person shall, during an
election, remove, tear down, or deface, the cards printed
for the instruction of voters. Every person wilfully vio-
lating any of the provisions of this section shall be deemed
guilty of a misdemeanor.
Sect. 31. Every public officer upon whom any duty
is imposed by this act, who shall wilfully neglect or omit
to perform such duty (f), shall be deemed guilty of a mis- (t)
demeanor; and upon conviction thereof shall be punished s. Ailstr., § 85.
by imprisonment in the county jail or penitentiary for a Q"'^Bn,Af§ll■
term of not less than six months and not more than three ''•"'^ ^^o^e ii,
years, or by a fine of not less than two hundred and fifty
dollars, and not more than three thousand dollars, or by
both such fine and imprisonment.
Sect. 32. No officer of election shall disclose to any
person the name of any candidate for whom any elector
has voted. No officer of election shall do any election-
eering on election day. No person whatever shall do any
electioneering on election day within any polling-place,
or within one hundred feet of any polling-place. No per-
son shall remove any ballot from any polling-place before
the closing of polls. No person shall apply for or receive
any ballot in any polling-place other than that in which
he is entitled to vote. No person shall show his ballot
after it is marked to any person in such a way as to reveal
the contents thereof or the name of the candidate or can-
154 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
didates for whom he has marked his vote, nor shall any
person (except an inspector of election) receive, from any
voter, a ballot prepared by him for voting, or examine
such ballot, or solicit the voter to show the same. No
person shall ask another at a polling-place for whom he
intends to vote. No voter shall receive a ballot from any
other person than one of the ballot clerks, nor shall any
person other than a ballot clerk deliver a ballot to such
voter. No voter shall deliver any ballot to the inspectors
to be voted except such as he has received from a ballot
clerk. No voter shall place any mark upon his ballot by
which it may be afterward identified as the one voted by
him. Whoever shall violate any provision of this section
shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor.
Sect. 33. All the provisions of this act relating to
County Clerks shall apply in the City and County of New
York to the Chief of the Bureau of Elections, and not
to the County Clerk. Such provisions shall apply in the
City of Brooklyn to the Board of Elections, and not to
the County Clerk of Kings County.
Sect. 34. This act shall not apply to elections for town
and village officers in towns and villages where there is
no provision by law for the registration of electors, nor
to elections for public officers determined otherwise than
by ballot.
Sect. 35. All acts and parts of acts inconsistent with
the provisions of this act are hereby repealed.
Sect. 36. This act shall take effect January one, eigh-
teen hundred and eighty-nine.
NOTE.
The main points in which the New York bill of 1889,
as reported by the committee, differed from the act of
1888, are as follows : —
In section 2, the privilege of making nominations is extended
to " primary meetings ; " and the political party which may
nominate by convention or caucus need have obtained only
one per cent of the entire vote cast.
In section 5, the maximum number of signatures necessary
for a nomination to a state office is reduced to five hundred,
and for a nomination in a lesser district to fifty. Each signer
is also required to append his residence, occupation, and place
of business, and to make oath to his signature and statements.
In section 8, the earliest day for filing nominations is
changed from sixty to forty and thirty days, respectively,
before election.
In section 13, provision for filling vacancies is made, as
follows : —
" Section 13. Should any person so nominated die before
election day, or decline the nomination as in this act provided,
or should any certificate of nomination be insufficient or inope-
rative, the vacancy or vacancies thus occasioned may be filled in
the manner required for original nominations. If the original
nomination was made by a party convention which had dele-
gated to a committee the power to fill vacancies, such commit-
tee may upon the occurring of such vacancies proceed to fill
the same. The Chairman and Secretary of such committee
shall thereupon make and file with the proper officer a certifi-
cate setting forth the cause of the vacancy, the name of the
person nominated, the office for which he was nominated, the
156 NOTE.
name of the person for whom the new nominee is to Le substi
tuted, the fact that the committee Avas authorized to fill vacan-
cies, and such further information as is required to be given iu
an original certificate of nomination. The certificate so made
shall be executed, acknowledged, and sworn to in the manner
prescribed for the original certificate of nomination, and shall
upon being filed at least eight days before election have the
same force and effect as an original certificate of nomination.
When such certificate shall be filed with the Secretary of State
he shall in certifying the nominations to the various county
clerks insert the name of the person who has thus been nomi-
nated, to fill a vacancy in place of that of the original nomi-
nee. And in the event that he has already sent forward
his certificate he shall forthwith certify to the clerks of the
proper counties the name and description of the person so
nominated to fill a vacancy, the office he is nominated for, the
party or political principle he represents, and the name of the
person for whom such nominee is substituted."
In section 15, the following provision is inserted: "Nothing
in this act contained shall prevent any voter from writing or
pasting upon his ballot the name of any person for whom he
desires to vote for any office, and such vote shall be counted the
same as if printed upon the ballot and marked by the voter,
and any voter may take with him into the polling-place any
printed or written memorandum or paper to assist him in
marking or preparing his ballot, except as hereinafter other-
wise provided."
In section 18, the number of ballots to be printed is changed
to two hundred for every fifty electors.
In section 22, compartments are to be provided to the num-
ber of not less than one for every fifty electors. The clause
" except by authority of the inspectors of elections " is struck
out.
In section 2-i, "thus," in line 6, is changed to "for exam-
ple." The following provision is inserted for the benefit of
illiterates : " In marking such a ballot any elector shall be at
liberty to use or copy any unofficial sample ballot which he may
choose to mark or to have had marked in advance of entering
the polling-place or booth, to assist him in marking the official
ballot, but no elector shall be at liberty to use or bring into the
polling-place any unofficial sample ballot printed upon paper
NOTE. 157
of the color and quality now required to be used for the print-
ing of ballots under the general election laws of this State."
At the end of the section is added : " whose names shall not
have been erased."
In section 25, the maximum time is changed to ten minutes,
" provided the other booths or compartments are occupied."
Section 26 reads as follows (apparently for the purpose of
avoiding Governor Hill's objection that the power to determine
whether a ballot had been intentionally spoiled should not be
left to the ballot clerk) : —
*' Section 26. Any voter, who shall by accident or mistake
spoil his ballot may, on returning said spoiled ballot, receive
another in place thereof."
Section 27 obviates another of Governor Hill's objections by
omitting the clause compelling illiterates to declare their votes
to one of the officers, and by allowing persons physically dis-
abled to take a friend into the compartment to mark for them.
Illiterates are supposed to take advantage of section 24,
mite, p. 156.
In section 30, the words " names or initials " are altered to
"signature or autograph initials."
In section 34, the word " voter " is throughout very properly
changed to "elector."
VIII.
THE AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM AS EMBODIED
IN THE STATUTES OF TASMANIA, NEW ZEA-
LAND, NEW SOUTH WALES, VICTORIA, WEST
AUSTRALIA, THE DOMINION OF CANADA, THE
PROVINCES OF ONTARIO AND OF QUEBEC,
THE GRAND DUCHY OF LUXEMBOURG, ITALY,
AND NORWAY, AND OF THE UNITED STATES
SINCE 1888.
A. Tasmania.
Parliamentary Elections Act, 1858 (21 Vict. No. 32).
The following are the special features of the Tasmanian
legislation : —
By § 62, any two electors may nominate a candidate.
By § 61, the ballots are required to be signed or stamped
on the back by the Clerk of the Peace, who distributes
them to the various Returning OflBcers ; and upon their
receipt by the latter they are again stamped or countersigned
before being distributed to voters.
By § 69, the voter is required to express his vote by
striking out the names of all candidates other than those
for whom he intends to vote.
By § 71, provision is made for rendering assistance, in
marking the ballot, to those only who are blind.
In other respects no notable variation is found in the
system in use in Tasmania. In the Rural Municipalities
Act, 1865 (29 Vict. No. 8), the parliamentary provisions
are adopted without material difference.
NEW ZEALAND. 159
B. New Zealand.
Regulation of Elections Act, 1881 (45 Vict. No. 12).
This Act, applying only to elections for Representatives
to the General Assembly, supersedes, for such elections,
the Regulation of Elections Act, 1870 (33-31 Vict. No.
18), which, for the election of members of the Provincial
Councils and of Provincial Superintendents, apparently is
still in force. The later Act makes several changes, evi-
dently intended as improvements called for by experience.
The provisions to be noticed are as follows : —
By § 12, a candidate must be proposed by one elector,
and seconded by another.
By § 30, the method of identifying the official ballot is
to be as follows : the Returning Officer writes upon the
back of the ballot his initials, and upon the lower left-hand
corner of the ballot, on the back, the registered number
of the voter, and " after securing the said corner by gum
or otherwise," stamps upon it the official mark.
The original method employed in the earlier Act con-
sisted in stamping the official mark on the back of the
ballot, and placing near the lower edge, on the back, the
registered number of the voter or some other identifying
mark. Secrecy was provided for by forbidding the exam-
ination of the backs of ballots while counting ; but appar-
ently this regulation had failed to attain its object.
By § 33, " if any voter desires it, the Returning Officer,
and, if necessary, an interpreter," are to retire to one of
the compartments with the voter, and mark the ballot ac-
cording to his instructions.
Under the earlier Act, the corresponding provision lim-
ited the right to give such assistance to the specific cases
of blindness and inability to read.
By § 32, the vote is to be expressed by striking out the
names of candidates not voted for.
160 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
C. Victoria.
Electoral Act, 1865 (No. 279).
The important variations of the Victorian system are
as follows : —
Nomination-papers are to be signed by ten electors. As
in Queensland, a deposit — X50 or .£100, according to the
office — is required at the time of nomination, to be re-
turned if the candidate withdraws or receives one-fifth of
the number of votes received by the successful candidate.
The period between the days of nomination and election is
to be from 3 to 14 days.
The vote is expressed by striking out from the list of
names all except those for whom the vote is cast. The
method of identifying the official ballot is to place upon
the ballot, before the voting begins, the signature or the
initials of the Returning Officer ; the registered number of
the voter is also placed on the back of the ballot, and the
officers are forbidden, in counting, to examine the back of
the ballot.
D. New South Wales.
Elections Act, 1880 (44 Vict. No. 13) ; Municipalities Act,
1867 (31 Vict. No. 12).
The editor has not been able to obtain a copy of these
statutes for examination, and cannot state their provisions
in detail. They follow, however, the general plan of the
kindred Australian statutes. Nominations (in municipal
elections) must be handed in 7 days at least before the
day of election; the ballots must be signed by the poll-
clerk ; and the vote is expressed by striking out the names
of candidates not voted for.
WEST AUSTRALIA. 161
E. West Australia.
Ballot Act, 1877 (41 Vict. No. 15).
This Act applies only to elections for the Legislature.
The provisions to be noted are as follows : —
By § 4, a nomination-paper is required to contain the
names of 6 electors, and to be accompanied by a deposit
of X25, returnable as provided in the Queensland Act,
ante.
By § 5, II., the ballot is to have a counterfoil attached,
and a number is written or printed on the back of the
ballot, the same number being written or printed on the
face of the counterfoil.
By § 9, the vote is required to be expressed " by making
a cross or other mark " within the square opposite the
name. In the " Directions to Voters," however, the di-
rection declares absolutely that the voter "will place a
cross," etc.
By § 9, the Returning Officer's initials are to be placed
on the back of the ballot before delivery to the voter, and
the voter's name is to be written on the counterfoil.
By § 14, the Returning Officer is to reject, at the count-
ing, any ballot " on which is written any matter or thing
which is not justified by this Act to be written thereon,"
or in which votes are cast for more candidates than are to
be voted for. In the " Directions for Voters," it is also
stated (though no section of the Act appears to authorize
it) that " any mark by which the voter may be afterwards
identified " will invalidate the ballot.
There is no provision authorizing assistance to be ren-
dered to any class of voters.
162 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
F. Dominion of Canada.
Dominion Elections Act, 1874 (37 Yict. c. 9), as amended
by 41 Vict. c. 6 (1878).
The important provisions to be noticed in this Act, which
is one of the best conceived among the various statutes
dealing with the subject, are as follows : —
By § 18, any 25 electors may nominate a candidate.
By § 19, the nomination-paper must contain the con-
sent in writing of the person nominated, unless he is
absent from the Province in which the election is to be
held.
By § 19, the sum of 50 dollars must be paid to the
Returning Officer at the time of handing in the nomination-
paper.
By § 43, and by § 3 of the amending Act, the ballot-
paper is to have a detachable counterfoil, as shown by
Form (1), m/m, with the counterfoil attached. At the
time of delivering the ballot to the intending voter, the
Returning Officer places his initials upon the back of
the ballot, and the registered number of the voter upon
the counterfoil. When the ballot has been marked by the
voter, and is presented for deposit in the ballot-box, the
Returning Officer, by noting his initials upon the back of
the ballot, and the number upon the counterfoil, is enabled
to identify the ballot as an official one, and also to know
that the ballot is presented by the same voter to whom it
was originally given out. Before the ballot is deposited,
the officer detaches and destroys the counterfoil.
It is to be noted that, by § 2 of the amending Act, the
use of an envelope, in which, by § 43 of the original Act,
the ballot was required to be placed, is abandoned.
By § 6 of the amending Act, the voter is to "mark his
ballot, marking a cross with a pencil on any part of the
ballot-paper within the division containing the name of
the candidate for whom he intends to vote." In the
original Act (§ 45), the method was to mark " a cross on
DOMINION OP CANADA. 163
the right-hand side opposite the name of" the desired
candidate. But to obviate the possibility of the irregular
methods of marking which voters were found now and
then to employ, the margin on the left of the names and
the upright dividing line on the right were discarded, and
the ballot was printed in the shape shown in Form (1),
infra^ probably the best form now in use. This led to the
change in the wording of § 45 of the original Act.
By § 48, official assistance may be rendered to voters
" unable to read, or incapacitated by blindness or other
physical cause " from voting in the prescribed manner.
By § 55, the void ballots are to include, besides those
containing votes for more candidates than are to be elected,
all ballots " not similar to those supplied by the Deputy
Returning Officer," and all those upon which there is
any writing or mark " by which the voter could be
identified."
By § 80, it is provided, as in the English statute, that
no informality shall vitiate the election, if the principles of
the Act have been foUowec
tion has not been affected.
164 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM,
Form 1. Ballot-Pajjer.
Electiox for the Electoral District of , 18
DOE.
I. John Doe, Township of Nepean,
County of Carleton, Yeoman.
ROE.
11. Richard Roe, of the town of Prescott,
County of Grenville, Merchant.
STILES.
IIL Geoffrey Stiles, of 10 Sparks St.,
Ottawa, Pliysician.
STILES.
IV. John Stiles, of 3 Elgin St.,
Ottawa, Barrister-at-Law.
^^^^^i^l^i^.^^f5^E^i^
(Counterfoil.)
QUEBEC. 165
G. Quebec.
Quebec Elections Act, 18.75 (38 Vict. c. 7), as amended by
39 Vict. c. 13 (1875) and 46 Vict. c. 2 (1883).
The points essential to be noticed are : —
By § 105, a candidate may be nominated by 25 electors.
By § 106, the candidate's consent in writing is necessary
unless he is absent.
By § 166, the identification of the ballot is secured by
requirements as to initials, counterfoils, etc., similar to the
requirements of the Dominion Act (1878) already described.
The Quebec Act (1875) was, in fact, the earlier of the two,
and apparently inspired the Dominion amendment of 1878.
Its details, however, are different and better in this respect:
the counterfoil, or " annex," as it is called, is printed upon
the back of the ballot (see Form (2), infra), so that in the
operation of verifj-ing and detaching the annex, the back
of the ballot is presented to the officer, and its face is not
liable to be exposed to view.
By § 170, the voter is to " mark his ballot-paper, mark-
ing a cross or other mark on the right-hand side, opposite
the name of" the desired candidate. But by § 17 of the
amending Act of 1875, the words " or other mark " were
omitted, and a pencil was required to be used.
By § 190, the validity of ballots is to be determined by
rules similar to those of the Dominion Act.
By § 222, a provision similar to that of the English Act
declares that mere informalities shall not invalidate the
election.
166
AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
FoEM 2. Ballot-Paper.
CO
a
1
2
2
o
c
o
•J
1
BUREAU.
(Jean Dureau, town of Sorel, County of
Richelieu, Merchant.)
2
MEUNIER.
(Joseph Meunier, city of Montreal, 10
Fontaine St., Montreal.)
3
RICHARD,
(Antoine Richard, of the parish of St
Henri, County of Le'vis, Farmer.)
4
RICHARD.
(Joseph Richard, of the town and
county of Levis, Advocate.)
i^^I^^:l^:i^.^:^^:^^iO<0^<^
^ ~ "" ^
[Over.]
QUEBEC.
167
Reverse of Form 2.
168 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
H. Ontario.
Elections Act (Ontario Revised Statutes, 1887, c. 9).
The Ballot Act of Great Britain is followed in substance,
but the following provisions may be noted : —
By § 48, a nomination may be made by a single elector,
and if at the time and place of nomination a poll is de-
manded by any elector, it is to be granted.
By § 68 (3), " the numbers and names of every candi-
date shall, if practicable, be distinctly printed in ink of
different colors," the candidates selecting the colors on the
day of nomination, or the Returning Officer assigning them
in case of disagreement.
By § 90 (7), the English method of identifying the bal-
lot is in substance adopted ; a number is previously stamped
on the back of the ballot and on the face of the counterfoil ;
the voter's registered number is placed on the counterfoil
at the time of delivering the ballot, and the officer's name
or initials are stamped or signed (signed only, by the
original Act of 1874, c. 5) on the back of the ballot and
on the counterfoil.
By § 91, the vote is to be expressed "by placing a cross
thus X on the right-hand side, opposite the name of the
candidate for whom he desires to vote, or at any other place
within the division which contains the name of such candi-
date.^' The words in italics were for the first time inserted
in the revision of 1887. They are intended, however, not
to change the method of marking (for the "Directions to
Voters" still require the mark to be "at the right-hand
side " only), but to save the votes of those whose mark
is not formally made.
The provisions of the Municipal Act (Rev. Stat. 1887, c.
184), applying the same system to municipal elections, are
substantially the same as those of the Elections Act, except
that ill the ballot the use of counterfoils and of colors is
discarded. A form of the ballot used in municipal elec-
tions is given below as Form (3).
By § 205, no mere informality is to vitiate the election
(as in the English Act).
ONTARIO.
169
Form 3. Ballot-Paper.
^3 •
aj 3
— o
BROWN.
(John Brown, of the village of
Weston, Merchant.)
ROBINSON.
(George Robinson, of the village of
Weston, Physician.)
ARMOUR.
(Jacob Armour, of the village of
Weston, Pumpmaker.)
BOYD.
(Zachary Boyd, of the village of
Weston, Tinsmith.)
BULL.
(John Bull, of the village of Weston,
Butcher.)
JONES.
(Morgan Jones, of the
Weston, Grocer.)
tillage of
McAllister.
(Allister McAllister, of the vil-
lage of Weston, Tailor.)
O'CONNELL.
(Patrick O'Connell, of the village
of Weston, Milkman.)
170 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
I. Nova Scotia.
Revised Statutes^ 1884, c. 4.
By § 30, only two signatures are necessary for a nomina-
tion. By § 32 each candidate for the Assembly makes a
deposit of $100. The face of the ballot is arranged as in
the Dominion elections ; but apparentl}^ no provision is
made for authenticating the official ballot.
By § 57 assistance is to be given to those who cannot
read or are physically unable to mark the ballot. By § 71
a ballot bearing an identifying mark is void.
J. Manitoba.
Elections Act, 1886 (c. 29), as amended in 1888 ; Munici-
pal Act, 1886 (c. 52).
By § 72 of the Elections Act, provision is made for
nominating in place of a deceased nominee. By §§ 74,
75, nominations require 25 signatures and the consent
of the nominee. The form of the ballot is substantially
like that of Quebec, and colors may be used if practi-
cable. Tlie original act provided for a counterfoil system
similar to the English one ; but in 1888 this was abol-
ished, and the officer's initials alone serve to authenticate
the ballot.
By § 34 of the Municipal Act, nominations may be made
by a proposer and a seconder. By § 146, different ballots
are to be used for different sets of offices. The ballot is
arranged as in Ontario, and no counterfoil is used. The
Ontario provision as to the place of the voter's mark is
also adopted. The officer's initials authenticate the ballot.
Ballots bearing an identifying mark are void. Assistance
is to be given to those unable to read.
LUXEMBOURG. 171
K. British Columbia.
Ballot Act, 1877 (No. 19) ; 3Iunicipalities Act, 1881 (No. 16).
By § 4 of the Ballot Act, the ballot is treated as follows:
A number is placed on the back of the ballot, and also of
a foil attached to it ; at the time of voting, the official
mark is placed on the back of the ballot at the end farthest
from the foil, and on the face of the latter is placed the
voter's number on the register ; the whole is folded, when
deposited, so as to conceal all but the official mark on the
back.
By § 8, all ballots dissimilar to those officially supplied,
and all bearing an identifying mark, are invalid.
The form of the ballot is similar to that of Quebec, but
without the vertical right-hand line.
By § 13, assistance is allowed for those who cannot
read.
By § 30 of the Municipalities Act, only two signatures
are necessary for a nomination.
L. Northwest Territories.
Ordinances, 1885 (No. 2).
By § 25, nominations may be made by a proposer and a
seconder. By § 57, the initials of the election officer are
to authenticate the ballot. By § 63, assistance is to be
given to those who are " unable for any cause " to mark
the ballot. By § 65, an identifying mark makes the ballot
invalid.
M. Luxembourg. («) Annuaire
de leg. etranf^.
Consolidated Election Act of March 5, 1884.* p%92ri884'^'
xiv.), p.
This act unites into one the previous statutes relating ^ "
to elections, embodying and superseding the act of May
28, 1879, relating to legislative elections, and for the first
172 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
time applying the same system to municipal elections. In
most respects the Belgian law is followed and adopted,
with certain simplifications suitable for the smaller con-
stituencies of Luxembourg.
In legislative elections, nomination-papers are to be
signed by five times as many electors as there are mem-
bers to be elected, but in no case by less than ten. In
municipal elections, the signatures of fifteen electors are
necessary in the city of Luxembourg ; of five electors in
towns of more than three thousand inhabitants ; and in
other towns of three electors, among whom may be the
candidates themselves. The voter is directed to mark a
cross, and the ballot is to be folded square. Every ballot
folded differently, or containing any mark that could iden-
tify it, or containing a name other than those upon the
ofiicial list, or more names than there are members to be
elected, is void.
N. Italy.
Acts of Jan. 22 and 3Iay 7, 1882, published in one by royal
(*)Ann.dei^g. decree of Sept. 24, 1882.*
etrang., 1882
503^ '"'•)' P' The material provisions are as follows : —
Title III.
Art. 54. The election room shall be divided into two
parts by a railing a metre or more in height, with an
opening for passage from one part to the other. The
voters shall remain during the voting in the outer portion;
in the other shall sit the election officers. The table of
the officers shall be so placed that at the close of the
voting the electors may surround it. The tables at which
the ballots are to be filled out shall be isolated, and so
placed as to insure secrecy in voting.
Art. 59. The capital town of the district shall supply
time the official to the presiding election officers of the polling-places a
had^been^Wue. municipal scal and a number of ballots of white (a) paper
ITALY. 173
not less in number than the nuraher of voters on the list
of the polling-place. The use of any other ballots is
forbidden. . . .
Art. 63. As soon as tlie organization of the election
officers has been recorded in the minutes of the proceed-
ings, the name of one of the inspectors shall be drawn by
lot, who shall sign on the back as many ballots as there are
electors in the polling-district. As each ballot is signed,
the presiding officer shall impress thereon the municipal
seal referred to in art. 57, and shall place it in an urn of
transparent glass. If the said inspector absents himself
from the room, he shall sign no more ballots, and shall be
replaced by another inspector similarly drawn by lot. The
minutes shall record the names of the inspectors who sign
the ballots and the number signed by each one.
Art. 64. The presiding officer shall cause each elector
to be called in the order of his name on the list, and,
after identifying him, shall draw a ballot from the urn and
deliver it to him unfolded.
Art. 65. The elector who is called shall seat himself at
one of the tables used for the purpose, and on the ballot
which has been delivered to him shall write the names of
the deputies for whom he wishes to vote. If the elector
was a qualified voter before the passage of the present law
but is unable to read and write (6), or if, through physical (*) By this act,
^ ^' _ o 1 ./ which em-
incapacity, known by or proved to the election officers, he braces all mat-
. i . 1 n 1 1 1 • ters relating to
cannot write his ballot, he shall be allowed to have it the elective
written by another elector selected by himself. o'AhVsuffrage
Art. 66. When the ballot is written, the voter shall ;';;^'jg;.^7^'«
deliver it folded to the presiding officer, who shall drop it read and Viite.
into a second urn of transparent glass, placed on the table
and visible to all. . . .
Art. 69. Ballots shall not be counted which are with-
out the signature and seal required by art. 63, or which
contain anything that identifies or is intended to identify
the voter.
174 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
O. NOKWAY.
(*) Ann. de Act of July 1, 1884,* amending the Electoral Act of 1828.
leg. Strang.,
i884(voi.xiv.), Art. 2. . . . The electors shall be called in the order
in which their names occur on the register. When the
entire list has been called those who have not answered
shall be called again ; whoever is not then present will
lose his vote.
Art. 3, . . . The presiding officer, or some other elec-
tion officer, shall deliver to each elector, when called, an
envelope marked with the official seal, and shall direct hira
to a secluded place in the polling-station, where, without
being seen by any one, he shall place his ballot in the
envelope, a sufficient time being allowed for the purpose,
and shall then drop it into an urn placed on the election
table.
Art. 4. The envelopes used shall be of the same size,
form, and color, and not transparent. The election officers
shall see, at the time the envelopes are dropped into the
urn, that they bear no mark on the outside. The ballots
placed in the envelopes shall be of white paper, without
signature or mark appended. If an envelope or ballot
does not fulfil the requirements of this act, the ballot shall
be thrown out as void. If several ballots are found in
one envelope, they shall all be void.
P. Austria.
By the law of April 2, 1873, at Austrian elections an
official ballot paper is furnished the elector by the officers
of election at the time of voting, and the voter retires to a
secluded place and writes upon his ballot the name of the
preferred candidate.^ The editor is not aware that this
provision is modelled upon the Australian method, and
has no further information in detail as to the polling
arrangements or other regulations.
1 Charbonuier, " Organisation electorale de tous les pays civilises,"
p. 153.
OTHER EUROPEAN COUNTRIES. 175
Q. Other European Countries.
In several states certain features of electoral procedure
are parallel to provisions of the Australian system, and
merit a brief notice.
In Hungary,! nominations are open, and must be handed
in to the officer of election at least half an houi' before the
opening of the polls. The vote, however, is not secret.
In France, intending candidates are required to register
themselves as such by taking the candidate's oath (^preter
serment) before the proper officer a certain number of
days previous to the election.^ The purpose of this, how-
ever, in no respect resembles the principle of the Austra-
lian system. The ballot in France is not an official one,
containing the names of all candidates, but, as in this
country, separate ballots are prepared by each party or
candidate, and the oath-taking is a mere necessary form.
Sir Charles Dilke relates ^ that it was a common joke in
Paris to say, when departing in some direction, " I am
on my way to my cafe, and am going to take the oath as
a candidate."
In Greece, t];ie objects of the Australian system are
attained by provisions materially different in form, but so
similar in effect that they deserve description.*
Nominations must be in writing signed by twelve elec-
tors (a much larger number, generally one twentieth of
the electorate, but varying with the number of members
to be elected, were formerly required), and delivered to
the officer of elections at least twenty-five days previous
to the election. A deposit of two hundred drachmas
1 Charbbnnier, p. 180.
2 The correctness of this statement has been questioned ; but the
abolition of this requirement, if it is abolished, must have occurred in
recent times. No mention of such an oath occurs in the Petit Code
Annote'e des Elections, Faivre, Paris, 1885.
3 Pari. Papers, 1868-69, viii. 402.
* See Charbonnier, p. 366; Pari. Papers, ubi supra, Test, of Arthur
Arnold, p. 416.
176 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
(about $40) is also required from each candidate. The
voting is by means of balls. In the polling-place are
arranged in a row ballot-boxes equal in number to the
number of candidates, and on each is the name of a
candidate, in plain letters. The right-hand half of the
box is white, with the word " Yes " upon the front ; the
left-hand half is black, with the word " No " upon it.
Within are two bags, one placed to the right and the
other to the left, with a partition between the two. A
funnel, about ten inches long and five inches in diameter,
projects at a slight upward angle from the front of the
box. After the voter has given his name and proved
his right to vote, he approaches the line of boxes. An
election officer attends him from box to box, at each one
giving him a small metal ball. The voter holds this up
between the thumb and forefinger, to show that he has
only a single ball, and thrusting his arm in the funnel,
drops his ball to the right or left, according as he votes
for or against the candidate, the movement of his hand
of course being completely invisible. This he does at
each box. At the close of the election the votes cast
against each candidate are subtracted from the votes cast
for him, and his total number is thus ascertained.
A little reflection will show that this system is by no
means an inefficient one, and is capable of attaining very
good results. But it is of course not adapted to a numer-
ous electorate, nor to communities whose traditions have
not accustomed them to similar methods.^
R. Connecticut.
By § 1, the Secretary of State is required to prepare
blank official ballots, to be furnished to any person before
1 The Grecian system would seem to be a development of the old
method of reckoning by tallies. In Hungary, until not many years
ago, the electors voted with long, slender sticks, colored to represent
the different candidates.
INDIANA.
177
election, upon payment of cost. By §§ 4-7, polling arrange-
ments are to consist of two adjacent rooms. At the en-
trance to one the voter receives from election officers
'* ballots of any political party that he may desire," and
an official envelope, and then places his ballot in the
envelope, and in the next room deposits it in the ballot-
box, passing out by another door. No identifying mark
is to be used. No provision is made for assistance to
illiterates.
S. Indiana.
By § 18, nominations may be made (a) by conventions
and primary elections of parties casting 1 per cent of the
total state vote ; (b) by nomination-papers containing 500
names for a state oflfice, 200 names for a congressional
office, 25 names for county and intermediate offices, 20
names for lesser offices. A " simple figure or device " may
be selected, together with a political designation, for the
candidate. In case of conflicting claims to the same name
or device, preference is given to the convention held
according to the call of the regular party officers ; and if
the latter position is disputed, the two factions are to be
suitably distinguished.
By § 21, nominations for state offices may be made from
60 to 20 days before election, and for lesser offices from 60
to 15 days before election.
By § 26, the ballot is to be arranged in the following
form : —
Device.
Democratic
Ticket.
Device.
Republican. 1 Republican
; Ticket.
For Governor.
Democratic. : ConRTLAND C. j Republican.
Matson. :'
: For Governor.
: Alvik P. HOVET.
For Lieut. -Gov.
Wm. B. Mters.
Republican.
For Lieut. -Got.
lR.i J. Chase.
Device.
Prohibition, i Prohibition
Ticket.
For Governor.
D. Hughes.
For Lieut. Gov.
Robert Gale.
12
178 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
If a nominee dies, removes, or resigns, pasters may be
furnished by the proper party committee to the election
officers, who will affix them in place as the ballots are
handed out.
There is no provision for inserting the name of one not
previously nominated. No distinguishing mark is to be
put on the ballot.
By § 45, the voter receives from the ballot clerks a
ballot containing their initials on the back, and an ink-
stamp with an X device, and marks his choice by stamp-
ing the square opposite the preferred condidates. A stamp
in the uppermost square indicates a vote for the whole
ticket in the column ; but stamps for individual candidates
in other columns are counted for those offices. No voter
is to remain in a booth longer than 5 minutes. Not
more than 3 voters at a time are to be in the election
room, and no electioneering is to be done within 50 feet
of it.
T. Minnesota.
By § 24, nominations may be made (a) by any assembly
or convention of delegates representing a party casting
one per cent of the vote of the district, or (6) by a num-
ber of individual electors equal to one per cent of the
voters in the district. This apparently leaves no room
for a nomination by a caucus as such. A nomination fee
is charged, of $50 for state offices, $10 for county and
congressional offices, and $5 for municipal offices. The
limits of time for making nominations for state, county,
and municipal offices are respectively 28, 10, and 4 days
before election.
The ballot is arranged substantially as in Massachusetts,
except that there are separate ballots, differently colored,
for state, county, and municipal offices, and that the name
of the office is printed horizontally at the left side of the
column, and is repeated before each candidate's name.
The ballot is initialled at the time of delivery by the
MISSOURI — MONTANA. 179
ballot clerk. The voter is allowed from 3 to 10 minutes
in the compartment ; but the election ofl&cers may regu-
late the time within those limits. Within the railing are
allowed policemen, one representative of each party, and
three more electors than there are compartments. For
rendering assistance to an illiterate, a qualified voter may
be called in ; but the same person cannot do this for more
than 6 illiterates.
A vote for all the nominees of a party may be made by
placing a cross " near the head of the ballot in the proper
place opposite the name of some one candidate nominated
by such party." This is a roundabout way, and interferes
theoretically with the right of the elector who wishes to
vote for, say, governor alone.
U. Missouri.
By § 2, nominations may be made (a) by convention,
(5) by primary election of parties casting 3 per cent of*
the entire state vote, or (c) by electors equal in number
to 1 per cent of the last vote for the office ; but in no case
by more than 1,000 or less than 50. Nominations must be
made, for county and lesser offices, between 60 and 15
days before election ; for other offices, between 60 and 20
days before election. Vacancies by death, withdrawal, or
otherwise may be filled by the appropriate committee.
Names on the ballot are to be grouped by parties. By
§ 22, errors may be ordered to be corrected on application
to the proper court. The voter receives a ballot signed
or initialled on the back by two election officers, and
crosses out all names except those for which he votes.
The voter is allowed 5 minutes in the compartment. No
electioneering is to be done in the polling-room, or within
100 feet of it.
V. Montana.
By § 2, nominations may be made (a) by any conven-
tion or primary meeting, or (b) by nomination-papers.
180 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
For the latter the number of names necessary is, for
territorial offices, 100 ; for county or intermediate offices,
10 ; for municipal offices, 5. The limits of time for filing
nominations are as follows : for state offices, 60 to 30 days
before election ; for county and intermediate offices, HO to
20 days ; for municipal offices, 30 to 3 days. A vacancy
by death, by withdrawal, or by invalidity of certificate
may be filled as in the case of an original nomination. If
the ballots have been printed, official pasters are to be
printed and affixed to each ballot by an election officer
before delivery.
Names are arranged on the ballot under each office in
alphabetical order. Sections 15 and 24 of the New York
bill of 1889, giving express permission to take within the
compartment and to paste on the ticket an^^ printed or
written memorandum for assistance in preparation, aie
adopted. The ballot is stamped " Official Ballot " on the
back by the ballot clerks before delivery.
No electioneering is to be done in the polling place, or
within 25 feet therefrom. No identifying mark is to be
placed on the ballot by the voter.
W. Rhode Island.
B}^ §§ 2 and 3, nominations may be made (a) by con-
ventions or caucuses (for state offices, conventions only)
of parties casting two per cent of the vote of the district ;
and (6) by nomination-papers signed by the following
number of voters : for a state office, 500 voters ; for Con-
gress, 250 voters ; for the legislature, in cities, 50 voters,
in towns, 25 voters. Certificates are to be filed 15 days
before election. Vacancies occurring through death or
withdrawal may be filled by the persons making the origi-
nal nomination.
The names are arranged on the ballot by offices in
alphabetical order. No voter is to place any identifying
mark upon the ballot.
TENNESSEE WISCONSIN. 181
X. Tennessee.
B}' § 3, nominations may be made (a) by " any caucus,
convention, mass meeting, or other assembly of any politi-
cal party in this state," or (6) by " written petition signed
by at least 15 citizens qualified to vote." The certificate
must be filed 10 days before the election. The candidate
"• who desires to run of his own volition " may print a
paster, which is to be given with the ballot by the election
officers to tlie voter for consultation only. The names are
to be arranged on the ballot by offices in alphabetical
order. On the back is printed " Official Ballot," with the
signature of the officer printing the ballots.
Assistance is authorized only for those who are blind
or otherwise physically disabled. None but intending
voters can enter the polling-room or come nearer than 50
feet to the entrance.
The placing upon the ballot of any mark by which the
voter may be identified is forbidden.
Y. Wisconsin.
(a) Laivs o/1887, c. 350 {applying to Mihvauhee only).
By § 1, each voting precinct is to be provided with two
adjoining rooms, — a " ticket room " and an " inspectors'
and voting room." In the ticket room are to be tables or
compartments, on or in wliich the tickets " prepared for
the use of voters by any political party " are to be kept,
" each class or kind being placed and kept in a separate
compartment or upon a separate table," and a notice being
placed over each class stating " the name or title by which
the tickets are respectively classified or generally known."
" Any chairman of a ward committee, or other person
authorized by the ward committee of each political party,"
may deliver the proper tickets to the inspectors of election,
who are to arrange them on the tables. " Every voter
182 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
when in the ticket room shall be at liberty to select from
the ballots kept there such as he may wish, taking one of
each kind if he pleases."
For each table a custodian of tickets is to be appointed
by the ward committee issuing the ticket. The custodians
are to take an oath of office, and while inside the ticket
room are not to '' directly or indirectly solicit, request, or
attempt to influence any voter " in respect to his vote.
The custodians are to be paid the same fees as the clerks
of election. A challenger is also appointed by each ward
committee, and remains '' in such convenient jjlace to be
designated by the inspectors," but outside the voting room,
to challenge suspected votes. No undue advantage is to
be given to any one of the challengers or custodians over
his fellows.
The voter is admitted into the ticket room, where he
selects his ticket or tickets. Only one voter at a time is
to be admitted, and none others than the custodians and a
single voter shall be permitted to remain in the room. At
the door between the two rooms is to be one police officer,
and at the outer door of the ticket room is to be another.
The voter passes into the voting room, casts his ballot,
and passes out through another door.
No crowd is to be allowed within one hundred feet of
either room during the election. No one shall solicit
votes or offer tickets within the same limits. The mutila-
tion, destruction, and theft of tickets is forbidden, as well
as all attempts to solicit or influence voters while within
either room. A penalty is also imposed upon those who
request or receive anything of value from a candidate
for services rendered or to be rendered in or about any
election.
By § 2, the act is applied to all judicial and city elec-
tions (except special elections). ^
^ The above act, while pointing in the direction of reform, has not
established the two essential principles of improvement: (1) complete
and compulsory secrecy in voting; (2) a single ballot containing all
BILLS INTRODUCED ELSEWHERE. 183
■ (J) Latvs of 1889, c. 248, as amended hy c. 494 (iwt
applying to Milwaukee').
By § 3, nominations may be made (a) by convention
or primary meeting of a party casting 2 per cent of
the last vote for the office, or (6) by nomination-papers
signed by 1 per cent of the voters in the district, but by
not more than 1000 and not less than 50. The limits of
time for fihng nominations are, for county and lesser
offices, 30 to 15 days ; for other offic^es, 40 to 20 days. A
vacancy by death, by withdrawal, or by invalidity of
nomination may be filled as in the case of an original
nomination. [See New York bill of 1889, § 13.] Sec-
tions 15 and 24 of the New York bill of 1889, relating to
taking memoranda into the compartments, are adopted.
The names are arranged on the ballot by offices in alpha-
betical order. On the back is printed " Official Ballot ; "
and the ballot clerks sign or initial the ballots at the time
of delivery. No ballot not so signed or initialled is to be
counted. No identifying mark is to be placed on the
ballot by the voter. Assistance is to be given onlj' to
those who are physically unable to mark a ballot.
Z. Bills Introduced Elsewhere.
In some of the proposed legislation of 1889 there appear
certain provisions worth notice.
the names printed and distributed by the state. Its provisions will
doubtless abolish disorder and tumult at the polls, and intimidation
by brute force; but it is as easy as before to ascertain which way a
vote is cast, and thus very little is gained toward relieving the electors
from other and equally effective means of control; moreover, a bribe-
taker can still prove his vote. Finally, the evils of the present nomi-
nation system do not seem to be reached ; and several custodians of
tickets at each precinct are added to the ranks of those who draw
official pay for election services, and whose places add to the patronage
under the control of local politicians.
184 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
In the California bill, which failed to pass, it was pro-
vided that the paper used for the official ballot should be
watermarked with a design to be visible on the outside of
the ballot. The design was to be kept secret until the day
of election, and was not to be used again at a general elec-
tion for fourteen years. Furthermore, the ballots, with the
stubs from which they were torn, were to be numbered
consecutively on the back at the side ; and the number
of the ballot given to a voter was to be placed opposite
his name on the list. When he returned, after marking
the ballot, the number on his ballot must be seen to be
the same as the number opposite his name. The portion
of the ballot containing the number was then to be de-
tached by means of a perforated line, and destroyed. This
is not unlike the method in use in Quebec.
In the Ohio bill, a nomination substituted for a vacancy
occurring after a certain time is printed on a card and
posted in each compartment and polling-place. This seems
a preferable method.
APPENDIX.
I. DECISIONS SINCE 1856 IN GREAT BRITAIN, IRE-
LAND, CANADA, AND AUSTRALIA.
The cases here collected are intended to embrace all the
decisions since 1856 found in the accessible reports of Great
Britain, Ireland, Canada, and Australia, and construing such
provisions of the respective ballot acts as are peculiar to the
system and are likely to be found in one or another of the stat-
utes of our own country. These decisions have never before
been collected, so far as the editor is aware. The cases cited
number less than sevent}', and in view of the period of time cov-
ered and the frequent occasions on which election statutes are to
be construed, are reraarkabl}- few. Of Australian decisions, only
those of Victoria, New Zealand, and New South Wales have been
examined, the last in a digest onl^-. In Canada, the decisions
of the Dominion, Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, and Manitoba
were accessible to the editor. It is believed that no other deci-
sions are accessible in this country. Notes of decisions in the
other jurisdictions will be gratefully received. The decisions of
the various jurisdictions have been examined down to the follow-
ing dates : England to April, 1889 ; Scotland to January, 1889 ;
Ireland to March, 1889 ; Dominion of Canada to 1888 (vol.
14, Supreme Ct.) ; Ontario Practice Rep. to 1889 (vol. 12);
Ontario Appeals to 1888 (vol. 14) ; Ontario Rep. to 1888
(vol. 14) ; Nova Scotia to 1887 (vol. 19) ; Manitoba to 1886
(vol. 3) ; Quebec to 1888 (vol. 14) ; Victoria to 1887 (vol. 13) ;
New Zealand to 1887; New South Wales to 1885 (vol. 5).
A few recent decisions in the United States bearing on ques-
tions likel}' to arise have been added.
In the "American Law Review" for October, 1889, will be
found an article by the editor on the constitutional aspect of
186 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
the ballot reform statutes, and an attempt is there made to note
the decisions relating to that subject.
A. NOMIXATIOXS.
1. Nominators and Candidates.
The term " qualified voters " signifies registered voters. Southei-Jand v.
Aldermen, 9Q N. C. 49; Duke v. Brown, \(i. 127; Markltam v. Manning, id.
132; McDowell V. Construction Co., id. 514, 530; State v. Brassjield, 67 Mo.
331, 3.36. But cf. Smith v. Stephen, 6 Cent. Kep. (Md.) 4-32.
Under the Municipal Elections Act, § 1, every candidate must be upon the
registry list of the borough. Held, that this required his name to be on the
new list according to which the election was to be held, but not necessarily
on the old one also. Held, also, that the same rule applied to nominators.
Budge V. Andrews, 32 L. T. K., N. S. 166 (1878). Other statutes entered
somewhat into the decision.
A nomination made by persons " not entitled to vote " because of taxes
unpaid is not valid, even though at a previous election they were qualified
and voted. Ex parte Drew, 9 8upr. Ct. R. (N. S. Wales) 169.
The nomination-papers of the four petitioners, on all of which P.'s name
appeared as nominator (there being lour vacancies to be filled) were filed
with the town clerk at 4.15 p m. on the last day for nominations, 5 p.m. being
the last possible moment. After the filing of tiiese papers. P., without the
knowledge or assent of the petitioners, signed a fifth paper, which was filed
at 4.59 P.M. on the same day. The five nominations were rejected, on the
ground that P. had signed more than was lawful. Held, that the papers of
the petitioners could not be invalidated by the subsequent illegal sigiiing of
the fifth paper. Burgoyne v. Collins, 30 W. R. 923 (1882).
2. Defective Nomina'ion Papers.
By statute (Municipal Elections Act, §1) the registry number of each
nominator was required to be inserted in the nomination-paper. The regis-
try number of a nominator was erroneously given. Held, that the defect
was fatal, the error not being a clerical one, nor open to a different inter-
pretation, and that the mayor properly disallowed the nomination. Gothard
V. Clarke, 42 L. T. R., N. S. 776 (1880). Disapproved in 24 Journ. Jurisp.
293.
In a nomination-paper for alderman in a ward of a city, it was not stated
that the ward was within that city. Held, that the nomination should have
been received. Ex parte Lenehan, Sidney " Morning Herald," 14 June, 1876 ;
Browning, p. 170 (Victoria).
A statute required that candidates should sign their nomination-papers
by way of acceptance. On a nomination-paper was subscribed : " And I,
the above-named James Greig, hereby consent to such nomination," but
there was no signature. Held, that the nomination was valid. "The ques-
tion is whether the candidate intended to sign the paper." Beg. v. Oddie,
6 W. W. & A'B. (L.) 221 (Victoria, 1869).
A statute directed that nomination-papers should be in a form prescribed,
"or to the like effect." The form read : " We, etc., do nominate, etc., at the
election to be held for the said district [or subdivision] on the, etc." A nomi-
APPENDIX. 187
nation-paper inserted "district" where "subdivision" should have been
used. Held, that the paper was " to a like effect " with the statute. Reg. v.
Munday, ex parte Daft, 5 W. W. & A'B. (L.) 143 (Victoria, 18G8).
A nomination-paper was not filed until after 4 p. m., the prescribed time,
on the day or nomination. Hdd, that the election was void, though no other
person was nominated. Reg. v. Miller, 1 Austr. Jur. II. 56 (Victoria, 1870).
A statute required nomination-papers to be filed at tlie office of the elec-
tion officer, and provided that "no person who shall not have been nomi-
nated as aforesaid shall be deemed to be a candidate." The respondent's
nomination-paper was delivered to the officer at his residence. Tlie relator
was properly nominated, and protested against the respondent's nomination ;
but when the election was held, e.xerted himself on his own behalf. Held,
(1) that the respondent was not legally a candidate; (2) that "an irregu-
larity, acquiescence in which disqualifies a relator from complaining, must
be an irregularity common to both sides, and of which he took advantage.
As, for instance, where an unqualified person presided at the polling, if the
relator acquiesced in it, he would be just as much to blame as his opponent."
Reg. V. O'Dwyer, ex parte Wdson, 4 Austr. Jur. R. 151 (Victoria, 1873).
3. Time of making Nominations.
Under a statute requiring nominations to be made "seven days at least "
before election day, Sundays being excluded, held, that, the election occur-
ring on Monday, November 1, the last day for receiving nominations was
Friday. Oct. 22. Hawes v. Turner, 1 C. P. D. 670 (1875). Zouch v. Emprey,
4 B. & Aid. 522, shows that this reckoning is based on the use of the phrase
"at least."
By statute the town clerk was required to give notice " seven days at
least " before an election, and nominations were to be filed at least two whole
days before election. The election was to occur Nov. 1, and the clerk gave
notice on Oct. 22, and required nominations to be sent in by Oct. 28. Held,
(1) that the clerk could not fix the date of sending in nominations, and
(2) that a nomination filed Oct. 29 was valid. Reg. v. Glover, 15 L. T. R.,
N. S. 289 (1866).
A statute required that nominations be filed "seven days at least" before
election day. Held, that this required " seven clear days to intervene, exclu-
sive of the days of election and nomination." Ex parte Hurst, in re De
Clouet, 9 Supr. Ct. R. (N. S. Wales) 177.
A statute provided that " whenever any day provided or appointed by or
under this act for any purpose shall in any year happen on a Sunday, New
Year's Bay, etc., or any day proclaimed as a holiday, then such provision
and appointment shall take effect as of the following day." The last day for
filing nominations fell on a Sunday; on Saturday nominations had been
made for all vacancies, but on Monday further nominations were accepted.
Held, that these were invalid, that statute applying only where a single day
was specified for an event, and not where Sunday was one of several days on
which an act might be done. Reg. v. Hennessy, ex parte Knight, 5 Austr.
Jur. R. 85 (Victoria, 1874).
Where administrative and judicial acts are concerned, Sunday is excepted
in computing periods of time. Computation of Time, 9 Colo. 632.
4. Duties of Officials as to Nomination Papers.
A town clerk was required (Municipal Elections Act, § 1) to give notice
of the last day for filing nominations; he named a day which was too late.
188 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
and in consequence the nomination of a candidate was filed too late and was
rejected. Held, that this affected the result of the election, as the rejected
candidate might have been elected, and the election was therefore void.
Hawes v. Turner, 1 C. P. D. 670 (1875).
Where the officer with whom nominations are filed refuses to receive the
nomination of one of two candidates except on a condition which is unlaw-
ful, and he refuses to perform the condition, the election is void. Davies v.
Kensington, L. R. 9 C. P. 720 (1874).
A returning officer's duties being ministerial only, hehl, that wliere a nomi-
nation-paper did not contain, as required, tlie candidate's acceptance, the offi-
cer should not have rejected it, but should have handed it back to have the
omission supplied. Rerj. v. Junes, ex parte Darcy, 5 Vict. L. R. 334 (1879).
A returning officer erroneously decided that the nomination-paper of one
of two candidates nominated was insufficient, and therefore declared tlie other
candidate elected. Ht^kl, that the officer's duties were ministerial, not judi-
cial ; that the nomination-paper was for his information merely ; and that if
it was not sufficiently full, he should have returned it for further informa-
tion, and not have rejected the nomination. Queen v. Miinday, 5 W. W. &
A'B. (L.) 145; Melbourne "Argus," Sept. 15, 1868 (Victoria).
A nomination-paper was signed by 25 persons and was duly attested. The
election clerk found that one signature was not on the registry, and upon a
comparison made by the returning officer and the clerk this was verified,
and the nomination rejected. Held, that the returning officer had both
ministerial and judicial functions, and might of his own motion take notice
of a defect not apparent on the face of the paper ; but that, since under § 80
of the Ontario Elections Act the election could not have been declared void
if the nomination had been allowed, and since the name of the nominator
ought to have been on the list, and the defect was one of form rather than
of substance, the nomination was improperly rejected, and the election
void. McKay v. McDouyall, Hodg. El. Cas. 705 (1875).
5. Publication of Nominations.
By statute the town clerk was obliged to post nominations in his office on
the day after nomination. Held, that this was directory only, and a failure
to post until the second day did not avoid the election. Reg. v. Mitchell, 4
Ont. Pract. Rep. 218 (1868).
The notice of election required by § 24, 44 Vict. no. 13, was advertised in
a daily paper circulating but not published in the electoral district, tiiough
a weekly of small circulation was published in the district. Held, that the
section was directory only, and had been sufficiently complied with. Reg. v.
Hartmann, 2 N. S. Wales L. R. 87.
The notice of an election was published in the proper newspaper, but in a
part distinct from the ordinary news, namely, in a supplement described as an
advertising sheet, and sent only to special subscribers, though obtainable by
all before the time for nominations. Held, that " tlie fact that the advertise-
ment appeared in a part of the paper distinct from the ordinary news does not
affect the question." Rrg. v. Miller, 1 Austr. Jur. R. 56 (Victoria, 1870).
6. Miscellaneous.
A nomination-paper, defective when first filed, but afterwards corrected,
is to be taken as of the date of the second filing. Hawes v. Turner, 1 C. P.
D. 670 (1875).
APPENDIX. 189
A valid nomination-paper was taken away to correct a supposed defect,
and was returned when tiie time for nominations li;ul elapsed. Held, that
the nomination was vahd ; otlierwise, if the paper had been taken away for
the purpose of witlidrawing tlie nomination. lb.
B. POLLING ARRANGEMENTS, SUPPLIES, ETC.
Through tlie failure of a contractor to deliver ballots, materials, etc., no
election was held at certain polling-places in a district. Ihld, that the elec-
tion was void if there was a substantial failure of opportunity for the elec-
torate to vote. Gill V. Read, 2 O'Malley & Hardwicke, 78 ; 31 L. T. K., N. S.
69 (Hackney Case, 1874).
The objection that the supply of ballots at an election ceased, or that suffi-
cient accommodations were not supplied, cannot be raised as between two
candidates upon petition for a recount of the votes. The defect in supply
must be sufficient to avoid the whole election, and therefore must be the
subject of a special claim, and all the candidates must be made respondents.
Per G Wynne, J., and Ritchie, C. J., Jenkins v. Brecken, 7 Can. Supr. Ct.
248 (1883).
At a polling-place two rooms were used, the election officers being in
one, and the voting compartments in the other. There was opportunity
for other persons to stand at the landing between the two, but no actual
violation of secrecy was proved. The Court of Common Pleas, on appeal,
being divided, Barry, J., on the return of the cause to the lower court, held,
that, no evidence of the violation of seirecy being offered, and no injury
having been suffered, the elected candidate should not be unseated on
account of the act of the election officers. Morion v. O'Leary, 2 O'Malley
& Hardwicke, 201 ; 9 Jr. L. T. R. 161 (Drogheda Case, 1874).
At a polling-place the supply of ballots gave out, and the polls were
closed half an hour while waiting for more. Evidence was offered that a
number of voters were prevented from voting. Held, that as the number
was not sufficient to affect the result, the election, under § 197 of the Ontario
Elections Act, was valid. Had v. Drurij, 1 El. Cas. (Ont.) 291; Ont. Dig.
III. 499.
C. BALLOTS.
1. Irregdlarities in Names on the Ballot.
The omission of the name of one candidate from the ballot does not per se
vitiate the election ; there must be reasonable evidence that the result of the
election has been thereby affected, — e. g., that votes would have been cast
for him sufficient to change the result. Re(/. v. Mitchell, 4 Ont. Pract. Rep-
218 (1868).
Where a nomination was declined orally and informally, through friends,
and the nominee's name was not placed on the ballots, held, that since the
omission did not affect the result of the election, it was not per se a ground
for setting the latter aside. Semhle, also, that a defeated candidate who had
not protested against the informality when it was brought to his knowledge
before election could not make objection, no claim being made that he
received a majority, that the successful candidate was disqualified, or that
190 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
any other fact existed which would if true give him the contested seat
Reg. V. Bradhurn, 6 Ont. Pract. Rep. 314 (1876).
The petitioner was twice nominated fur tiie same oflBce, and his name
appeared twice on the ballot, in one case with the residence erroneously
stated. Tiie latter nomination was invalid ; he received 70 votes under one
name, and 301 votes under the other, and 8 voters marked both names.
Held, that it was the duty of the proper officer to enter only once on the
ballot the name of one twice nominated. Held, also, that the votes being
all intended for the same person, and that person having received at least
one valid nomination, all votes cast for him should be added together.
Northcote v. Pulsford, L. R. 10 C. P. 476; 32 L. T. R., N. S. 602 (1875).
2. Irregularities in Marking the Vote.
The references are to the following cases : —
1. McLaren v. Milne Home, 44 L. T. R., N. S. 289; 8 O'Malley & Hard-
wicke, 178 (1881).
2. Woodward v. Sarsons, L. R. 10 C. P. 733; 30 L. T. R., N. S. 867; 44
L. J. C. P. 293(1875).
3. Ackers v. Howard, 16 Q. B. D. 739 ; 54 L. T. R., N. S. 289 (1886).
4. Pickering v. James, L. R. 8 C. P. 489 (1873).
5. Gill V. Reed, 31 L. T. R., N. S. 69; 2 O'Malley & Hardwicke, 78
(1874).
6. Haswell v. Stewart, 1 Ct. of Sess. 925; 2 O'Malley & Hardwicke, 215
(1874).
7. Robertson v. Adamson, 3 Ct. of Sess. 978 (1876).
8. Anstruther v. Williamson, 13 Ct. of Sess. 877 (1886).
9. Shell V. Ennis, 8 Ir. C. L. 240; 2 O'Malley & Hardwicke, 186 (1874).
10. Smith V. Stewart, 2 O'Malley & Hardwicke, 232 (1874).
11. Jenkins v. Brecken, 7 Can. Supr. Ct. 248 (1883).
12. Hawkins y. Smith, 8 Can. Supr. Ct. 676 (1884).
13. Cameron v. McLennan, 11 Can. L. Journ. 163 (1875) ; Hodg. EI. Cas.
817.
14. Dionne r. Gagnon, 9 Queb. L. R. 20 (1883).
15. Bernatchez v. Fortin, 9 Queb. L. R. 61 (1883).
16. White V. Mackenzie, 20 Low. Can. Jur. 22 (1875).
17. Grant v. McCallum, 12 Can. L. Journ. 113 (1876).
18. Olmstead v. Carpenter, Hodg. El. Cas. 531 (1879).
19. Reg. V. Wilson, 1 Austr. Jur. R. 150 (Victoria, 1870).
See a discussion of the Scotch and English cases and their different ten-
dencies in 71 L. T. (1881), 141 ; 18 Journ. Jur. 199; 20 id. 402; 24 id. 225;
25 id. 234 ; 14 Ir. L. T. 153.
(a) In Position of Mail:
1. Cross in upper left hand corner, outside the space for names; invalid,
case 1.
2. Cross on the left, in the column reserved for numbers ; valid, cases 2, 13.
3. Cross on the left, in the same compartment as the candidate's name ;
valid, cases 13, 6.
4. Cross on the left (indefinite) ; inv(did, cases 7, 6, 17; valid, case 14.
5. Cross at the left and below ; invalid, case 16.
6. Cross on the right, but in the compartment with the candidate's name;
valid, cases 13, 9, 7.
APPENDIX. 191
7. Cross anywhere at the right ; valid, case 7. See case 6.
8. Crosses at tlie right and left both ; invalid, case 6.
9. Cross above tlie name, in the same compartment ; valid, cases 13, 6.
10. Cross below tlie name, in tlie same compartment; valid, case 6.
11. Cross in two squares, but having the intersection in A's square;
valid for A, cases 1, 11.
12. Two crosses, each with the intersection exactly on successive lines, the
upper line being the higliest on the ballot ; the upper cross counted for the
uppermost candidate, the second cross invalid; case 11.
13. Cross on the back of tiie ballot, opposite the name of a candidate ;
invalid, 1, 11, 18; valid, case 17.
(h) In Style of Mark.
1. Two crosses ; valid, cases 2, 17, 12 ; invalid, case 12.
2. Three crosses ; valid, case 2 ; invalid, case 6.
8. Three crosses, one in the right-hand column, one on the name of the
candidate, and one in the left-hand column ; valid, case 17.
4. Cross, with a pencil line through the other candidate's name ; valid,
case 2.
5. Cross in A's square, and a slight single line in another square ; valid
for A, case 11.
6. Cross in A's square, with an obliterated mark opposite another name ;
valid, case 17.
7. Cross, with a spot or dot in addition ; valid, case 10.
8. Cross, with a rough P in addition ; valid, case 2.
9. Cross, with "Cu" above it; invalid, cases 2, 7.
10. Cross, with rough inverted " y " above it ; valid, case 2.
11. Cross, with extra one rubbed out with the damp finger; valid, case 2.
12. Cross, with an additional mark ; valid, case 2.
13. Cross, with additional marks of various sorts ; invalid, case 13.
14. Cross, with the candidate's name in addition ; invalid, case 13.
15. Cross, with a name, not the voter's, in addition ; invalid, case 6.
16. Cross, and voter's signature in the lower corner of the ballot ; invalid,
case 2.
17. Cross with lines at end of the arms (iX!); valid, cases 13, 6.
18. Cross having two vertical lines ; valid, case 14.
19. Cross having two transverse lines ; valid, case 14.
20. Cross having several heavy transverse strokes ; valid, case 14.
21. Cross made of repeated heavy strokes ; valid, case 14.
22. Cross with a double leg : valid, case 6.
23. Cross formed like an anchor ; valid, case 13.
24. Cross in form of ornate script C'^S) ; invalid, case 11.
25. Cross with small lines running in several directions ; invalid, case 14.
26. Cross in ink, with a duplicate blotted cross in the next candidate's
square, made by folding the ballot before dry ; valid, cases 17, 19.
27. Line or lines, with several lines crossing irregularly ; valid, case 17.
28. Cross of irregular shape; valid, case 17.
29. Circle, instead of a cross; invalid, cases 17, 12, 6.
30. Circle, with two lines beneath ; invalid, case 17.
31. Oval, instead of a cross; invalid, CB,se Q.
32. Spiral uniting two vertical bars ; invalid, case 14.
192 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
33. Horizontal line, with a spiral down and across ; invalid, case 14.
34. Star or asterisk ; valid, case 2 ; invalid, case 16.
35. Small light curved lines toucliing a principal line, like branches; in-
valid, case 14.
36. Several small lines : not forming a cross ; invalid, cases 14, 13.
37. Oblique line, with a short one meeting it at right angles but not
crossing; valid, case 11.
38. Inverted V; valid, case 12.
39. Two lines crossing at a very acute angle ; valid, case 17.
40. Line like the figure 1, with a loop at the top ; valid, case 7.
41. Single line, instead of a cross; invalid, cases 13, 17, 14, 12, 18, 6, 7;
valid, case 2.
42. Faint marks, not made with a pencil ; valid, case 1.
43. Instead of a cross the name or initials of a candidate written oppo-
site his name; invalid, cases 2, 13.
44. Cross made with a finger-nail ; valid, per Hawkins, J., case 1.
(c) In both Position and Style of Mark.
1. Blot or scratch in ink below the name of the candidate ; invalid, case 1.
2. Straight line on the back ; invalid, case 6.
3. Straight mark on the left; invalid, case 6.
4. Two lines on the back, opposite the candidate's name ; invalid, case 6.
5. Two strokes on the right, but not in the square ; valid, case 8.
[d) Other Irregularities in Marking.
1. Tearing the ballot ; valid, cases 2, 17, 18.
2. Where the statute directs the voting mark to be made with a pencil, a
mark with ink does not avoid tlie ballot ; case 17.
A ballot is valid, although the voter in marking his ballot does not use,
as required by the statutory' directions, the pencil provided in the compart-
ment ; case 6.
3. Ballots marked with identifying marks by some person unknown, dur-
ing the counting of the votes, are not invalid ; case 15.
(e) Remarks.
The grounds upon which it is possible, under any of the statutes or
because of any rule of construction, to reject a ballot for improper marking
of the vote, are: (1) Failure of the voter to express his intention; (2) fail-
ure to fulfil the requirements of the statute ; (3) use of an identifying mark.
It will be seen, then, that only in the second of these cases can a given
decision always be of importance as establishing a precedent, in the sense of
a decided question of pure law; while in the first and usually in the third
case each decision is but an estimate of the intention of the voter,
or of the significance of his mark, in a particular instance, and cannot
safely be treated as positing an inflexible rule. Denman, J., says in
Phillips v. Goff, 17 Q. B. D. 805, 35 W. R 196: " It is no doubt better not to
turn into a point of law a question like this, wiiich can be better dealt with
APPENDIX. 193
at the place by the commissioner, with his experience and knowledge of the
liabits and ways of the chiss of persons who vote at these elections." See
81 Law Times, 414; Pari. Papers, 1884-85, XI., p. 25. More important
tlian any particular informality passed upon in a decision is the principle, if
any, wliich is adopted, especially since the second and the tiiird of the above
rules for rejection have not been uniformly interpreted, and would perhaps
in some of our jurisdictions not be applicable at all. Tlie particular grounds
upon which each informality has been passed upon have not been indicated
above, first, because it is frequently impossible to detect them ; secondly, be-
cause the labor of doing so would be disproportionate to the necessity, since
reference can be made to the original. But in what courts and to what
extent these principles have been applied must be briefly noticed.
1. The intention of the voter must be clear. This is an ordinary canon of
interpretation which is recognized more or less explicitly in all the above
cases, and needs little comment. Apparently, even a cross on the back of
the ballot, opposite a name ((a), no. lo), would be sufficient, so far as mere
intention goes; case 1. The informalities in (a), no. 1, and (b) no. 1, in-
volved, in some of the decisions, only a question of intention. The words
of Denman, J., supra, should always be considered in applying this principle.
The correct principle is tliat laid down by Benholrae, J., in case 6, that if the
choice of the voter is clearly indicated, it is immaterial whether the mark is
on one side or another, of this shape or of that.
2. But the result which would be reached by tlie application of this
principle alone must often be altered if the second principle be recognized,
that a statutory requirement must be fulfilled because it is a statutory
requirement and is mandatory. Two views have been put forward. In
England it is pointed out (case 2) that the body of the statute merely re-
quires that the vote shall be marked " secretly," while the directions as to
the manner of marking are in the schedule; and these are held to be direc-
tory only, and not mandatory. In the Canadian courts it has been generally
held that the statutory requirements are mandatory (cases 17, 18 ; see case
12). " Everything which is not a cross is not the indication of intention
called for by tlie law." Ritciiie, C. J., in case 14. Thus, in Ontario a straight
line is not a valid mark, but a cross anywhere on the right is valid, because
the statute requires only that it shall be on the right. In Quebec (case 14)
a cross on the left of the name is valid, because no special position is required
by the statute. In case 18 the rule is justified on the ground that the direc-
tions for marking are not, as in England, in a schedule, but in the body of
the statute. In case 13, however, it was intimated obiter that the require-
ments as to the manner of marking were directory only. In the Scotch
cases (case 6, Neaves and Ormidale, JJ. ; case 7, Mure and Gifford, JJ.)
it is also held that any mark materially different from a cross is invalid, be-
cause the statutory requirements are mandatory.
Wherever our statutes do not expressly declare that particular informali-
ties avoid the ballot, it would seem best to consider their requirements as
directory only. The whole purpose of the ballot as an institution is to ob-
tain a correct expression of intention ; and if in a given case the intention is
clear, it is an entire misconception of the purpose of the reqirements to treat
them as essentials, that is, as objects in themselves, and not merely as
means.
3. In the British, Belgian, Canadian, and some of the Australian statutes,
an identifying mark is specially declared to avoid the ballot. This rule has
13
igj: AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
been interpreted in two ways. By some courts it is held to be sufficient if
the mark is one by which the voter miglit be identified (cases 6, 7, 13, 16).
Tliis of course results in throwing out a very large proportion of ballots in
which informal marks occur ; though it is expressly said, as a part of the rule,
that ordinary deviations due to awkwardness or carelessness are not to be
regarded (cases 6, 7). The rule has been stated as follows (more liber-
ally than in the cases supra): " Whenever the court is convinced that the
irregularity was the result of awkwardness or a stiff, heavy, or trembling
hand, of carelessness, or an attempt to correct a supposed defect or to
make a line more clear or more straight, — whenever, in short, it appears
that the addition to the required cross, or the form of the cross, or its
embellishments, are owing to an unskilled hand rather than to a desire to
identify one's self, — whenever tlie identification of the voter is rendered im-
possible by the impossibility of reproducing the same pencil-marks, the
vote is good." Alleyn, J., in case 14. According to a second and sounder
view, the ballot must itself furnish clear evidence of an improper agreement,
— such as the voter's initials, or a mark known to be his (case 17 ; Benholme,
J., in case C). This rule has been expressed less liberally as follows:
" Whenever the mark evidences an attempt or intention to make a cross, it
should be counted, unless from the peculiarity of the mark made it can be
reasonably inferred that there was not an honest design simply to make a
cross, but also an intention so to mark tlie paper that it could be identified."
Ritchie, C. J., in case 12. Under this rule it has been held that the follow-
ing informalities should not vitiate the ballot (case 17>: additions or em-
bellishments, inadvertent extra marks, placing the mark in an improper
place.
Of course extrinsic evidence of a corrupt arrangement to identify by a
given mark would suffice (case 2). It is possible Uiat this case requires that
such evidence should be offered in order to avoid the ballot. Such at any
rate should be the rule adopted in this country, on several grounds : 1. The
words of our statutes do not expressly declare votes having identifying
marks to be void ; it should therefore clearly appear upon sufficient evi-
dence — the mark alone being only a part of that evidence — that the vote
was cast under a corrupt arrangement, before the ballot is thrown out.
2. The precaution disfranchises too many in proportion to the illegal votes
which it eliminates ; too much good wheat is lost to keep out a little chaff.
This is shown by the figures (given in the investigation in 1876, Pari.
Papers, Vol. XII.) as to the number of ballots rejected as containing identi-
fying marks. The voter has been well said to lie between " the Scylla
of uncertainty and the Charybdis of identification." 18 Journ. Jur. 199.
3. The marking of a vote in a special way requires so much pre-arrange-
ment, and can be practised only on so small a scale, that it is an evil not
worth trying to combat in this way. 4. Too much power is put into the
hands of the officials who are to count the ballots. 5. Too much delay
would probably be caused by the necessity of deciding, at the time of count-
ing, upon the validity of informal marks.
The best plan would seem to be, as suggested in Note 9, ante, p. 84, to
impose a penalty on one who marks coUusively, but not to place upon the
election officers the duty of passing upon the question whether the ballot
was so marked.
APPENDIX. 195
3. Irregularities in Official Stamp, etc.
The absence of the election officer's initials does not vitiate the ballot.
Grant v. McCallum, 12 Can. L. Journ. 113 (Ont. Vice-Ch. Ct., 1876).
The absence of the election officer's initials does not vitiate the ballot,
the statute not expressly creating such a cause of invalidity. While v.
Mackenzie, 20 Low. Can. Jur. 22 (Quebec, 1875).
A ballot not bearing the initials of the election officer is invalid, unless
clear proof of its genuineness is given. Dionne v. Gaynon, 9 Queb. L. R.
20 (1883).
A ballot without the official mark on the back is void. Haswell v.
Stewart, 2 O'Malley & Hardwicke, 215; 1 Ct. of Sess. 925 (Wigtown Case,
1874).
A ballot having the election officer's initials on the counterfoil and not
on the back is not void. Jenkins v. Brecken, 7 Can. Supr. Ct. 248 (1883).
(The wording of the Dominion statute on this point permits a more liberal
rule than the English act.)
After the first three ballots were deposited at a polling-place, it was dis-
covered that the election officer's signature had been omitted. The three
ballots were numbered as required by law. Held, that the signature was
not essential, and the absence of it did not invalidate the election. In
re Lloyd, 5 W. W. & A'B. (L.) 226; Melbourne "Argus," IG Sept. 1867
(Victoria).
At a certain polling-place none of the ballots deposited had the initials of
the election officers on the back, as required by law. Held, that as the
irregularity occurred on all ballots, without reference to a particular candi-
dacy, and was evidently the result merely of the election officers' ignorance,
the ballots were valid. Ex parte Tremhlay, 13 Queb. L. R. 64 (1887).
In delivering a ballot to a voter, two were inadvertently torn from the
block together, the official mark placed on the back of the upper one only,
and the voter's mark made on the face of the lower one. Held, that the
absence of the official mark on the ballot marked by the voter did not
vitiate it. Dionne v. Gafjnon, supra. In Anstruther v. Williamson, 13 Ct. of
Sess. 877 (1886), the question was raised, but not decided.
Under a statute requiring that the officer of election shall indorse a num-
ber on the back of every ticket before it is put in the box (Rev. Stat. III.
1874, c. 46, § 55), it is error to reject at the counting a ballot properly num-
bered because an unnumbered ballot is found folded within it. Dole v.
Irwin, 78 111. 170 (1875) ; Clark v. Robinson, 88 111. 498, 509 (1878).
A provision that no ballot not numbered shall be counted is mandatory.
West V. Ross, 53 Mo. 350 ; Ledbetter v. Hall, 62 Id. 422.
tinder a statute requiring the ballot clerk to sign ballots as delivered, he
only initialled them. Semble, that the election was valid, the statute being
directory only {per Martin, C. J. ). Ex parte Reay, Sidney " Morning Herald,"
11 March, 1876; Browning, p. 173 (Victoria).
The absence of the number on the counterfoil, required by § 2 of the
Ballot Act, does not make the ballot void. Ackers v. Howard, 16 Q. B. D.
739; 54 L. T. R., N. S. 289 (1886).
The election officer at a polling-place stamped all the ballots with the
official mark before the opening of the polls, to save time, and kept them in
his possession until the delivery of each one to the voters. Held, under
196 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
§ 13 of tlie Ballot Act, that though the irregularity was serious, the princi-
ples of the act were not infringed, and tlie election was valid. Hamilton v.
Police Com'rs, 2 Ct. of Sess. 299 (1875).
A voter's registry number was erroneously placed by the election officer
on the face of tlie ballot, and was erased by him after tlie close of the polls.
Held, that the ballot was valid. Hawkins v. Smith, 8 Can. Supr. Ct. 676
(1884).
Where the election officer place 1 tlie voter's registry number on the
front of the ballot, held, that under § 2 of the Ballot Act the ballot was
void, as the number enabled the voter to be identified. Woodward v.
Sarsons, L. R. 10 C. P. 733 ; 30 L. T. R., N. S. 867 ; 44 L J. C. P. 293 (1875).
D. ASSISTANCE TO ILLITERATES.
The election officer, instead of taking a declaration from voters that they
were unable to read, asked tliem if they were able to read or write, and if
they said not, had them sign a declaration that they were unable " to read
or write sufficiently to mark the ballot paper," and marked the bahots.
Held, that this was not a fatal irregularity. Cunningham v. Hagar, 1 El. Cas.
(Ont.) 88; Ont. Dig. III. 483.
A number of voters had their ballots marked by the election officers
without taking the oath of disability, all parties acting in good faith. Held,
that the officer should have assured himself in the manner required by law
of their disability ; but, the number of votes so received not affecting the
result, the election was valid. Hickson v. Abbott, 25 Low. Can. Jur. 290
(Quebec, 1881).
Several ballots were marked openly in the presence of others by persons
under a disability. Held, that this was illegal, but the number of invalid
votes not affecting the result, the election was valid, lb.
An illiterate voter asked for instruction from some one not present. An
agent belonging to the latter's party, after the election officer had put a pen-
cil in the voter's hand, and the latter, who could not read but had not
declared his inability, had said that he wished to vote for B., took the pen-
cil and marked the ballot accordingly. Held, an improper proceeding; but
the election was set aside on other grounds. Bussell v. Barber, Hodg. El.
Cas. 283 (1875).
A voter struck out, as by law required, all names on the ballot except
that of H., for whom he intended to vote. He then inadvertently struck
out the first name of H. Upon asking a bystander, not an election officer,
how to rectify the mistake, the latter, not otherwise interfering, told him
that the only way would be to write "I vote for H. only," and wrote these
words on the ballot for him. Held, (1) that the erasure of the first name
of H. did not vitiate the vote for him ; (2) that as the act placed the ser-
vices of the election officers at the disposal of illiterates, but did not ex-
pressly forbid other persons to render assistance, the bystander's act was
not unlawful, notwithstanding sucli a practice might materially interfere
with the secrecy of the ballot. Re Hutton, ex parte Haynes, 5 Austr. Jur. R.
135 (Victoria, 1874).
APPENDIX. 197
E. LIABILITY OF ELECTION OFFICERS.
See, generally, 21 Ir. L. T. 310 (1887) ; 17 Sol. Journ. 644; 11 Cent. L. J.
141. The case of Pickering v. James, infra, is commented on in 55 L. T.
1.35.
By R. S. U. S. § 5515 every election ofBcer who " neglects or refuses to
perform any duty " imposed by the election statutes, " or who violates any
duty so imposed," shall be guilty of an offence. Held, that such neglect,
refusal, or violation was an offence, even though there was no accompanj'-
ing evil intent. In re Coij, 31 Fed. Rep. (C. Ct. Ind.) 794.
The duties of election officers as to placing official marks on ballots, etc.,
are ministerial, and the common-law liability for failure to perform them is
therefore independent of the existence of malice or negligence. Pickering
V. James, L. R. 8 C. P. 489 (187G).
Semble that under a statute imposing a penalty on any officer to be sued
for by any person " refusing or neglecting to perform any of the obligations
or formalities " of the act, it is no defence that the failure occurred unin-
tentionally and through ignorance. Cameron v. Clucas, 9 Out. Pract. Rep.
405 (1882). See also Qnem v. UnUes, 8 Ir. C. L. 50, infra, under "Miscel-
laneous."
A candidate, in order to recover against an election officer as a " person
aggrieved " under 46 Vict. c. 18, § 167, must have lost his election. Atkins
V. Ptolemy, 5 Ont. Rep. 366 (citing cases touching the common law right in
such instances).
There is a duty on the person delivering the ballot to the voter to see
that it has the official mark upon it. Pickering v. James, L. R., 8 C. P. 489
(1873); Ackers v. Howard, 16 Q. B. D. 739; 54 L. T. R., N. S. 289 (1886).
The presiding officer is prima facie responsible for a misfeasance in the
premises, but may show that he has delegated his duty to another. Picker-
ing V. James, supra.
There is a duty on the "person who in the particular instance " under-
takes to be present to receive ballots, to be present so that the voter may
show the official mark. //*.
Whether there is a duty on such person to see that the official mark is
upon the back of the ballot when received by him, — qiuere, the court being
divided. //). Such a duty exists. Ackers v. Howard, supra.
Wliether such person has a right to refuse to receive a ballot not having
the official mark, — gucere, tlie court being divided. Pickering v. James, supra.
Qucere, also, in Ackers v. Howard, supra.
By § 11 of the Ballot Act an additional liability (" to any other penalty
or liability to whicii lie maybe subject") to any person aggrieved is im-
posed for wilful misfeasance or omission. Held, that the officer is also liable
at common law and apart from tlie statute. Per Brett, J. : In the absence of
tlie clause above quoted, the result would probably not be different. Pick-
ering V. James, supra.
By statute the council of a city were to hold meetings for revision of the
voting register at such times as the mayor should appoint between Jan. 21
and Jan. 28. A day was duly appointed, the plaintiff attended, claiming to
be placed on the register, but tiie defendant, an alderman, wrongfully and
maliciously failed to attend, and the council adjourned, for want of a quo-
rum, to Jan. 28. The defendant again failed to attend, a quorum was lack-
ing, and the defendant was prevented from being registered, from voting, and
198 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
from becoming a candidate. Held (Innes, J., dissenting) (1) that the duty
of the defendant to attend was of public consequence only, and no right of
the plaintiff was infringed ; (2) that the statute could give him no right
to the attendance of an individual member, but imposed the duty to act
upon tlie council only as a whole. Howe v. Harriskeij, 5 N. S. Wales L. R.
227 (1885).
Mandamus will not lie to compel a returning officer to hold that a person
has been duly nominated ; as long as the officer is willing to proceed, he may
do so at his peril. Quo irarranto is the only proper remedy, nor is it mate-
rial that this cannot be brought until the election is over. In re Attleborowjh,
ex parte Dent, 5 W. W. & A'B. (L.) 103 (Victoria, 18G8).
F. MISCELLANEOUS.
The objects of the Ballot Act were two, — secrecy and purity of elections.
Queen v. DeardsuU, 1 Q. B. D. 452 (1875).
Secrecy of voting is establislied for the benefit of the voter, and he may,
when he deposits his ballot, announce aloud, without losing his vote, the
candidate for whom he intends to vote. Bernard v. Brillon, 7 Leg. News
(Queb.), 414 ; 1 Montreal L. R. 121 (1881).
It need hardly be said that the secrecy of the ballot, as provided for in
the Australian system, requires tliat no evidence of the vote shall be fur-
nished by an exhibition of the contents of the ballot itself, that is, that there
shall be compulsory secrecy. So far, then, as the above opinion may intimate
that the privilege, not merely of asserting orally the candidate voted for, but
of showing the ballot, is a personal privilege, which may be waived by the
voter, it of course entirely mistakes the object of the ballot. Most of the
recent statutes expresslj^ forbid the voter to show his ballot after it is
marked and before it is deposited. The law does not care how often the
voter soj/s that he voted for so-and-so. But one principal olject of the re-
form is to prevent the giving of sucli evidence as the ballot itself furnishes.
A deputy returning officer improperly refused to give ballots to a num-
ber of voters, on the ground that tlieir names were not upon the registry.
Semhle, that upon proof of the candidate for whom they intended to vote,
their votes should be counted, such a proceeding not being a violation of the
policy of the ballot, and any other decision putting it into the power of the
election officers to control tlie election. Cameron v. McLennan, Hodg. El.
Cas. 671; 11 Can. Law J. 102 (1875); apparently affirmed in 37 U. C.
Q. B. 134.
A voter tendered his ballot, but, on being improperly required to take a
certain oath if he wished to vote, refused to do so, and his ballot was re-
jected. At the trial he testified that lie intended to vote for a certain candi-
date. Held, that the policy of the ballot forbade that the intention should be
disclosed, and that the vote could not be counted. Pawling v. Rijkert, Hodg.
EL Cas. 500 (1877).
A failure by the election officers to take the declaration of secrecy is not
sufficient to avoid the election. Reid \. Drunj, 1 El. Cas. (Ont.) 291; Out.
Dig. in. 499.
The defendant was an election agent of a candidate, and under oath not
to communicate any information obtained in the polling-place. A voter
having been brought in by X., the defendant afterwards said to X., " What
APPENDIX. 199
made you bring that man back 1 " " Why should I not ? " " Because he
voted against us." Held, that tlie fact that his disclosure was a mere in-
advertence, and not deliberate, was no defence to a charge of violating his
statutory duty. Hdd, also, the defendant not having asked the voter
■whether he had so voted, and not having introduced any evidence to the
contrary, the above statement by the defendant was sufficient evidence that
thevoter did so vote. Queen v. Unkles, 8 Ir. C. L. 50 (1874).
The defendant, an election agent, left in the room of the candidate whom
he represented a document containing information obtained in the polling-
room. Held, that the offence of giving information is not proved unless
evidence is offered that the prohibited facts were actually made known to
some person, or that he has availed himself of means of information fur-
nished by the defendant. Stannamught v. Hazeldine, 4 C. P. D. 191 (1879).
A deposit, required by law to be made by all candidates, was made by a
check, which was dishonored. Held, without argument, that a rule to oust
from office should be made absolute. Reg. v. Weickliardt , 1 Austr. Jur. R.
78 (Victoria, 1870).
A statute provided that " if anj' officer shall, etc., he shall upon conviction
by and before any Court of General Sessions forfeit and pay, etc. ; and every
such court shall hear and determine such charge in a summary way," — i.e.,
without a jury. Held, that an offence under this statute was an indictable
offence, and that therefore it was governed by a statute providing that
prosecutions for such offences could be brought only by the public prose-
cutors, and that the penalty could not be recovered by an informer in qid
tarn proceedings. Held, also, as to the argument that half the penalty was
given to the informer, that the power to sue for it could not exist unless
given expressly or by necessary implication. Reg. v. Cope, ex parte Willder,
4 Vict. L. R. (L.) 397 (1878).
Evidence was offered that at a polling-place ballots were handed to two
voters before 9 a. m., the hour of opening. A rule to oust from office was
dismissed, as the election officer's affidavit stated that the poll was held
between the hours of 9 and 4, and it was not shown that any persons voted
before 9 a.m. Reg. v. Ross, ex parte Rettigan, 4 Austr. Jur. R. 166 (1873).
For a case raising the question whether, if polls close before a ballot given
out has been deposited, the ballot may be received, see 56 L. T. 265.
For cases involving the question whether the ballot is a lawful mode of
election at common law, see Shaw v. Thompson, L. R. 3 Ch. D. 283, 252
(1876), 45 L. J. Ch. 827, distinguishing Edenborough v. Archbishop, 2 Russell
93, and Faulkner v. Elger, 4 B. & C. 449 ; Re Dowman,ex parte, Clark, 3 Vict.
L. R. 287 (1877).
G. CONTESTED ELECTIONS.
For cases involving the right of a candidate to raise certain objections
to the validity of an election, see, ante, Reg. v. Bradburn, under " Ballots ; "
Reg. V. O'Dwyer, under " Nominations (2) ; " Jenkins v. Brecken, under
" Polling Arrangements."
200 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
II. SPEED OF VOTING, EXPENSE, ETC.
L Speed of Vot'mg. At p. 16 is given some account of the practicable
speed of voting, as shown by English experience. Mr. Richard H. Dana, of
Boston, has experimented at various public lectures upon the subject, and,
trying the system with persons of all degrees of intelligence, finds that the
time necessary to take the ballot, retire, mark it, and deposit it, varies from
a minimum of 40 seconds to a maximum of 1 minute 35 seconds. Where
tliere are ten compartments, therefore, 10 votes per minute — taking the
average time as 1 minute — could be deposited in the ballot-box, if the officers
could receive them so quickly. In other words, the Australian system sup-
plies voters as fast as they can be accommodated at the ballot-box. Even
should a number be found to combine to obstruct proceedings by remaining
a full 5 minutes each in the compartment, they would retire at the rate of 10
in 5 minutes, or 120 an hour, and their number would soon be exhausted.
2. A plan of the arrangements of the polling-room, with specifications for
the construction of the apparatus, may be procured, on application, from the
Ballot Act League, Fiske Building, room 01, Boston. The erections, as will
be seen, are simple and inexpensive. A series of 10 compartments has been
substantially constructed, for use at lectures on the system, at a cost of §10.
The apparatus represented by the above plans is intended to be slightly
more elaborate and better finished, and will be a little more expensive.
The cost of the whole apparatus (that is, additionally required by the Aus-
tralian system) for a polling-room, including 5 compartments, railings, etc.,
will not be less than S12, and need not be more than $18. For each additional
series of 5 compartments, not more than SIO need be added. These rates
may all be reduced where large quantities of material are required and can
be made at one time. Reckoning that the apparatus will last at least 10
years, and adding a small sum for repairs, we see that the additional neces-
sary cost of the Australian system is not more than $2.50 per polling-place
per year.
APPENDIX. 201
III. THE RHINES VOTING MACHINE.
To ]\Ir. John W. Rliines, of St. Paul, Minn., is due the credit of tliis
excellent invention. Disgusted with corrupt counting methods and witli
the vicious government of machine politicians, he determined to invent a
mechanical device which should do something towards effecting an im-
provement. A company has been organized to manufacture the machine,
and bills requiring its adoption were introduced in the legislatures of
Michigan and Minnesota in the session of 1889. The following description
is in part taken from an account appearing in the Xew York "Nation" of
ApriUB, 1889: —
" Tlie ordinary pagingmachine of the printer suggested the main idea to
Mr. Rhines. The principle involved is that of the counting-machine, as in
the odometer. The machine itself is an oblong brass box about 10 X 14
inches, 6 inches deep, with a hinged cover. This box is placed on a small
stand in the rear of the polling-room, and in plain sight of the judges and
clerks of election. The voter is identified by the judges, and passes into the
stall where the machine is. On raising the lid of the box, a screen is drawn
up before the stall, shutting both voter and machine from view. The lid
when raised discloses a number of keys not unlike organ stops. There are
as many vertical rows of keys as tl)e greatest number of candidates for any
one oflBce, and as many keys in a horizontal row as there are offices to be
tilled. The printed name of each candidate and tlie office for which he is
nominated are placed in the top of or above these keys.
" The elector in voting presses down the key bearing the name of the
candidate he wishes to support. The key remains down. In being de-
pressed it has locked all the keys of other candidates to the same office,
thus making it impossible for an elector to vote for more than one candidate
to the same office; at the same time this key has imprinted indelibly, on a
slip of paper beneath in the box, a number which shows the total vote cast
for that candidate up to that time. The elector votes for each of the other
offices in turn in the same way, shuts down the lid of the box, dropping the
screen in front, exposing machine and voter to the view of the judges. The
box-lid, on being closed, liberates all the keys, and the machine is ready for
the next voter.
" When the last elector has voted, the count is thus already made and
recorded for each candidate, while the turnstile at the judges' desk has
recorded the total number of voters admitted. There is no opportunity for
repeating by closing and raising the lid, and thus setting free the keys ; for
each raising of the lid not only is visible to tiie officers but also rings an
alarm bell."
A portion of the keyed surface would look like the first illustration on
the next page (a schedule of tiie parties represented by various colors being
posted near the box).
202
AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
SEC. OF STATE.
(Red.) \
Burt.
[Blue.) i
i OsMUN. :
i [Blue.)
: Maltz.
{Blue.)
Luce.
(Red.)
(Red.)
Norton.
(White.)
Mills.
(White.)
Waring.
( White.)
WiNNErr.
; (Green.)
: Wise.
At the close of an election the recording-strip for a given office would
appear as follows; —
TREASURER.
Burt.
LUCB.
Mills.
OSSIUN.
190
162
105
41
191
192
163
106
There is no reason why the machine as arranged above should not come
into general use.
APPENDIX. 203
IV. BALLOT LEAGUES.
Associations may be formed as well to enforce and facilitate the working
of the reform law when enacted as to organize a movement for its enact-
ment. In taking measures for tlie latter purpose, petitions should be circu-
lated for signatures. A form used in New York is as follows : —
" The undersigned believe that the public interests demand the prompt
enactment of a law embodying the following principles : —
1st. The ballots should be printed and distributed at the public expense.
(This takes away the excuse for assessing candidates.)
2d. The names of all candidates for the same office should be printed
upon the same ballot. (This destroys dealing and trading between candi-
dates, makes independent nominations possible, and makes it impossible for
the name of any candidate to be withheld from the voter.)
3d. The ballot should be delivered to the voter within the polling-place
on election day, by sworn public officials. (This abolishes the paid political
worker.)
4th. Only ballots so delivered should be voted, the voter guaranteed abso-
lute privacy in preparing his ballot, and the secrecy of the ballot made com-
pulsory. (This prevents intimidation and destroys bribery at the polls.)
We hereby authorize the enrolment of our names as members of Thk
Ballot Reform League, and the use of our names in petition to the
legislature or otherwise in furtherance of these objects.
Name. Address. "
After a bill has been introduced, public opinion may be further expressed
and brought to bear upon legislators by preparing postals indorsing a par-
ticular bill and urging that the representative's vote be given for it ; these
should be distributed among the members of the League and others, who
should sign them and address them to their respective representatives at the
capital.
In organizing to secure the full and fair enforcement of a reform law,
the constitution adopted by the Massachusetts Ballot Act League may be
found useful. For specimens of the Hterature issued by this League in the
course of its work (directions to election officers, forms of nomination, etc.,
under the Massachusetts Act), address Albert C. Burrage, 8 Congress St.,
Boston.
204 AUSTRALIAN BALLOT SYSTEM.
V. ELECTION IN MILES CITY, MONTANA.
Tlie following letter from Samuel Gordon, Esq., editor of the Miles City
(Mont.) " Yellowstone Journal," will be of interest : —
" The occasion was the special election of an alderman to fill a vacancy ;
tiie Australian law went into effect in this Territory June 1, 1889, and this
election was held July 25, 1889.
" Two candidates were in the field, and the tickets were prepared as re-
quired by law, with tlie name of each candidate and liis political distinction.
Owing to the fact that there was little interest taken in the election, a small
vote (only 88) was polled; and there being only two candidates, the intri-
cacies of the system, if any there be, were not fairly tested. On this occa-
sion the vote proceeded as rapidly as any one could wish, and the system
received the commendation of all, particularly so in regard to the working
of the provision prohibiting heelers and workers from soliciting within or
near the polling-place. The absolute freedom and privacy with which the
voter was invested was a most pleasing and satisfactory change from
former methods. While the law is cumbersome in some respects, I see no
absolute fault in it save one ; that is, in requiring the voter, when expressing
his preference between candidates, to make a check-mark or cross against
the name of the person for whom he wishes to vote. The most natural ac-
tion is for the voter to cross out or erase the name of the ptrson for whom he
does not wish to vote, leaving unerased the name of his choice. This I think
should be changed ; and in our coming election, which will require a ticket
with some seventy names on it if only two parties are represented, I look
for much confusion from this source. However, the system in its main pro-
vision of securing privacy and freedom of ballot to every voter is so great
an improvement that its minor defects can be borne without grumbling, in
view of the advantages obtained."
APPENDIX.
205
VI. SUMMARY OF PARTY VOTES.
Tlie attitude taken liy the two leading parties towards the reform in
the various States may be seen from the following summary of legisla-
tive votes, the first figure in each case representing the affirmative vote,
the second the negative vote : —
House.
Sknate.
Statk.
r
Repub.
Dem.
Total.
Repub.
Dem.
Total.
Indiana . . .
12 21
52
64 21
8 12
27 1
35
13
llhode Island .
Passed
without
division.
23 5
6
29
5
Tennessee . .
8
59
59 8
9
17 5
17
14
Montana . .
17 1
1
18 1
7
3
10
Connecticut .
? 5
? 4
183 9
? 1
? 4
15
5
Missouri . .
?
?
84 38
p
P
22
8
Massachusetts
?
p
121 41
Passed
without
divi
sion.
Minnesota . .
>
p
63 17
Passed
without
division.!
Dakota. . .
?
p
43 5
Passed.
New York . .
73
44
73 44
18
11
18
11
Nebraska . .
51 11
12 7
63 18
11 14
1 5
12
10
Maine . . .
16 104
19
35 104
10 11
10
11
Pennsylvania
23 87
46 1
69 88
No vote.
Delaware . .
1 13
6 1
7 14
No vote.
New Jersey .
28
30 2
4G 2
No vote.
Arkansas . .
25
34 21
34 46
Passed.
Illinois . . .
51? 13
08?
119 13
No vote.
California . .
11 21
15 26
26 47
No vote.
Ohio. . . .
No vote.
14 5
2 4
16
9
Adding the States not represented in tlie above list, the debit and
credit account of the two parties may be roughly stated thus : (a) in
six States opposite sides were taken by the parties ; in five of these the
Democrats were the supporters, in one the Republicans ; (b) in seven-
teen States no party lines were clearly apparent, but the party having
the majority should receive the responsibility and the credit as follows : The
credit for legislation belongs in six States to the Pepublicans, in two
States to the Democrats ; the responsibility for non-legislation belongs in
seven States to the Kepublicans, in three States to the Democrats. Total
score, crediting each with opponent's failures: Democrats, fourteen points;
Republicans, ten points. The whole record shows how irrational it is
to carry national party lines into local reforms.
For an article by the writer entitled " A Summary of Ballot Reform,"
see the New York " Nation," Aug. 29, 1889.
rsivEUSlTl
OFFICIAL BALLOT
FOR
Precinct , Ward
OP (CITY OR TOWN),
NOVEMiBER , 18 .
[Fac-Simile of Signature of Secretary.]
'^cf. I.
,/^v^' Of THE r,
C4L1F0B^
Sec7-eiary of the Commonwealth.
SAMPLE BALLOT,
"With exiDlanations and an illustration.
Prepared by the Ballot Act League with the ap-
proval of the Secretary of the Commonwealth.
Some representative districts elect one, some two,
and a few three representatives to the General Court.
To Vote for a Person, mark a Cross X
GOVERNOR
Vote for ONE.
OLIVER AMES, of Easton
. Republican,
WILLIAM H. EARLE, of Worcester, . .
. Prohibition,
WILLIAM E. RUSSELL, of Cambridge, . .
. Democratic,
LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR.
Vote for ONE.
JOHN BASCOM, of Williamstown, ....
. Prohibition,
JOHN Q. A. BRACKETT, of Arlington, .
. Eepublican,
JOHN W. CORCORAN, of ciinton
. Democratic,
SECRETARY
Vote for ONE.
WILLIAM N. OSGOOD, of Boston, . . .
. Democratic,
HENRY B. PEIRCE, of Abington
. Republican,
HENRY C. SMITH, of Williamsburg, ....
. Prohibition,
TREASURER
Vote for ONE.
JOHN M. FISHER, of Attleborough
. Prohibition,
GEORGE A. MARDEN, of Loweii
. Republican,
HENRY C. THACHER, of Yarmouth, . . .
. Democratic,
AUDITOR
Vote for ONE.
CHARLES R. LADD, of Springfield, . . .
. Eepublican,
EDMUND A. STO WE, of Hudson
. Prohibition,
WILLIAM A. WILLIAMS, of Worcester, . .
. Democratic,
ATTORNEY-GENERAL.
Vote for ONE.
ALLEN COFFIN, of Nantucket
. Prohibition,
SAMUEL O.LAMB, of Greenfield
. Democratic,
ANDREW J. WATERMAN, of Pittsfieid, . .
. Eepublican,
,Vote for a Person, m arfe a Cross [x\ b j^*^ Sdiuvrc at th<> rij-ht of the name.
EBPRESENTATIVES IN GENERAL CO0BT. V^te^TrWoT
GOVEENOH
Vote for ONE.
OLIVER AMES, of E»«oa
. . Republican
—
WILLIAM H.EARLE, of WorcMter, . .
. . Prohibition
WILLIAM E. RUSSELL, of Cambridge, .
. . Democratic
Vote for OWE.
JOHN BASCOM, of wiui.ms.o™, . . .
. . Prohibition
JOHN Q. A. BRACKETT, ofAriinstoD, .
. . Republican
JOHN W. CORCORAN, of cihiton, . . .
. . Democratic
SECHETAET
Vote for ONE.
WILLIAM N.OSGOOD, of Boston, . .
. Democratic,
HENRY B. PEIRCE, of Abingion. . . .
. Republican,
HENKY C. SMITH, of WUUamsbarg, . . .
. Prohibition,
TEEASUKER
Vote for ONE.
JOHN M. FISHER, of AUleboroagh, . . .
. . Prohibition,
GEORGE A. HARDEN, of Lowell, . . .
. Republican,
—
HENRYC. THACHER, ofY.mo«b, . .
. Democratic,
I
AUDITOR
Vote for ONE. 1
CHARLES R. LADD, or springBoid, . .
. Republican,
EDMUND A. .STOWE,ofH„d.oo, . . .
. Prohibition,
WILLIAM A. WILLIAMS, of Worcester, .
. Democratic,
ATTOBNEY-QENERAL. . . .
Vote for ONE.
ALLEN COFFIN, of N.«acke.
. Prohibition,
SAMUEL O.LAMB, of Greenfield, . . .
. Democratic,
—
ANDREW J. WATERMAN, of Pittefieid, .
. . Republican,
! I WILLIAM H. MARBLE,
COirNCII.I.OR, Third Dl.irtci. . . .
. Vote for ONE.
ROBERT 0. FULLER, of Cbbridge, . . .
. Republican,
—
WILLIAM E. PLUMMER, ofN.wton, . . .
. Democratic,
SYLVANUS C. SMALL, of Wit,cbe.ter, . . .
. Prohibition,
SENATOR, Th„d Mlddl..„ Di.tHcu . .
. Vote for ONE.
FREEMAN HUNT, of Cambridge
. Democratic,
CHESTER W. KINGSLEY, ot Cambridge, .
; Kepvibllcan,
• 1 Prohibition,
DISTRICT ATTORNEY, Northern Dflrtet.
Vote for ONE.
CHARLES S.LINCOLN, of SomorYii
. Democratic
JOHN M. READ, of Lowell
. Prohibition
WILLIAM B.STEVENS, of Stoneham, . .
. Republican,
ISAAC McLEAN, of
GEORGE A. PERKINS,
JOHN READ, of Cambridge Eepublit
f CHESTER F. SANGER, of
Republic
WILLIAM A. START, of Cambridge Prohibition
HENRY G. GUSHING, of Loweii,
Vote for ONE.
Republi
HENRY G. HARKINS, of Lowell Prohibition,
WILLIAM H.SHERMAN, of Ayer Democratic,
COJIMISSIOITEES OP INSOLVENCY. Vote for THREE.
JOHN W. ALLARD, of Framlnghai
GEORGE J. BURNS, of Ayer Republ
WILLIAM P. CUTTER, of Cambridge Prohibition
FREDERIC T. GREENHALGE, of Lowell, . . Republican
JAMES HICKS, of Cambridge Prohibition
JOHN C. KENNEDY, of i
Republican
RICHARD J. McKELLEGET, of
EDWARD D. McVEY, of Lowell Democratic
ELMER A. STEVENS, of Someryllle,
COUNTY COMMISSIONER.
WILLIAM S. FROST, <
^
Republican,
If^iE??. ?: . aiK^ER, ".'. ?*«.*«^, .
,_-^_„^i.,Bb;^.:i^,
- 1
JAMES SKINNER, of woburn, . . .
. . . Democratic,
SPECIAL COMMISSIONERS.
. . Vote for TWO.
HENRY BRADLEE.ofMedford, . .
. . . Democratic,
LYMAN DUvE, of Ston.ham
. . . Republican,
JOHN J. DONOVAN, of Lowell, . .
. . . Democratic,
WILLIAM E. KNIGHT, of sbiri.y, .
. . . Prohibition,
ORSON E. MALLORY, o. Lowell, . .
. . . Prohibition,
=
EDWIN E. THOMPSON, of wobun., .
. . . Republican,
SKETCH OF POLLING PLACE.
SUGGESTIONS TO VOTERS.
Give your name and residence to the ballot clerk, who, on finding
your name on the check list, will admit you within the rail and hand
you a ballot.
Go alone to one of the voting shelves and there unfold your ballot.
Mark a cross
in the square at the right of the name of each
person for whom you wish to vote. No other method of marking,
such as erasing names, will answer.
Thus, if you wished to vote for John Bowles for Governor, you
would mark your ballot in this way : —
GOVERNOR. . . . Vote for ONE.
JOHJN iiOWLES, of Taunton, . .Prohibition.
X
THOMAS E. MEA:N'S, of Boston, . Democratic.
ELIJAH SMITH, of Pittsfieid. . . EepubHcan.
If you wish to vote for a person whose name is not on the ballot,
write, or insert by a sticker, the name in the blank line at the end of
the list of candidates for the office, and mark a cross )^ in the
square at the right of it. Thus, if you wished to vote for George T.
Morton, of Chelsea, for Governor, you would prepare your ballot
in this way : —
GOVERNOR.
Vote for ONE.
JOHIN' BOWLES, of Taunton, . . Prohibition.
THOMAS E. ME ANS, of Boston.^ ^ Democratic.
ELIJAH SMITH, of pittsiieid,
Eepublican.
GENERAL LIBRARY
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA— BERKELEY
RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED
This book is due on the last date stamped below, or on the
Keneweu ooisitAJto ^^ich renewed.
•» ■— ♦"^'fliate recall.
\3Nlar54VV
4^95^^^
REC'D L,D
JAN 22 1963
IN STACKS \^ ^^^h)^^ )^^(^^
DEQ6 1954 i cAyKuJ - ^tf^ui iq:
i^j STACKS
FEB 25 1955
'1^
^^3 1 B
Inter-library
LQAN
JAN 6 1971
^^%iov^^^-S^
M^&B, JAN 13 '8
MAfi272003
LD 21-IOOto-I, '54(1887516)476
BEC, cm MAR 2 1
78
U.C. BERKELEY LIBRARIES
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiil
THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY