March 20, 1902
THE NEBRASKA INDEPENDENT.
i
A.
- s
LINCOLN'S
gressive
STORE
Our Eleventh Semi-Annual Catalogue
i3 now on the press and will be ready
for distribution April 1st. Indepen
dent readers who desire to buy their
Dry goods and Crockery at Chicago
prices should send us their name at
once when a catalogue will be sent to
them. . ' ' .
We prepay express charges.
The New Summer Wash Fabrics
An unrivalled exhibition of every
fabric known to the Wash Goods
world every price from 5c to $2.50
per yard. 5,000 pieces on display and
no two alike. Fashion announces that
the delicate the sheer fabrics, will
predominate this season, and as our
line will never be as complete as now
we urge fastidious buyers to make
early selections. To give you some
idea of the immensity of our stock
we mention a few of the style cloths
we carry: ' '
Point Suisse, Mouseline Foulard,
Edinborough Zephyr, Parkhill Zephyr,
Graze de Soie, Anita Batiste, Aega
Lace, Lace Gingham, Roye Tambour,
Myosotis, Alva Batiste, Harris Home
spun, Toile du Nord, Fine Chambray,
Egyptian Tissue, Luxell Lace, Woven
Silk, Windsor Poppilion, Faulasee Tis
sue, Linen Mousellaine, Pois de Soie,
Silk Mull, Chambray Madras, Swiss
Dots, Organdie Gascow, St. Andrew's
Zephyr, Dentille Roye, Gipsy Batiste,
Erin Dimity, Swiss Silk, Imp Swiss,
Mutys, Chiffons, Plain . Organdies,
Fancy Organdies, India Dimity, Gren
adine Hipp, Tobasque dei -Linde, Silk
Gingham, Silk Madras, Silk Novelties,
Fantaise Suisse, Swiss Muslin, Pine
apple Lawn, Honiton Novelties, Ara
bian Lace Mull, Pineapple Tissue, St
Gall Novelties, Blenheim Zephyr, St.
Ives Madras, Auckland Tissue, Silk
and Linen Tissue,-Arras Lend, Printed
Mouseline de Soie, Printed Pdie de
Soie, Grass Linen, Royal Tissue,
Zephyr Gingham, Etc., Etc., Etc.
SEND FOR SAMPLES
FitzGerakT
Lincoln, Nebraska.
AUSTRALIAN BALLOT
A Dltcassinn of Principles Involved and
Comments on the Kansas Law
Because of certain misunderstand
ings regarding the Kansas election
law. I feel inclined to touch some
what upon the technical Bide of the
question, even at the risk of being
prosy and, perhaps, dull. Every reas
oning man knows that the republican
legislature enacted the law not for the
purpose of preventing any abuse of
the elective franchise but solely to
prevent two or more parties from co
operating in the nomination of a un
ion ticket and at the same time each
preserving its party identity. Perhaps
it may be said that any party in
power will naturally enact such laws
as will materially aid that party in
retaining control; but how far may a
party go without violating the un
derlying principles?
The Australian ballot (a general
term which includes some forms not
"Australian") is comparatively a new
thing in American elections. Up to
October, 1889, only eleven of the
United States had adopted some form
of it. These states were Kentucky,
Masachusetts, Indian, fthoae' Island,
Montana. Tennessee, Minnesota, Mis
souri, Wisconsin, Connecticut, and
Michigan. Since that year nearly every
other state has adopted some foTm of
the Australian ballot.
It is not my purpose to go into the
history of this form of ballot in other
countries, or even in the United States,
except where necessary to make
clearer some point in the law under
consideration. Seekers after informa
tion along this line would do well to
read John H. WIgmore's "Australian
Ballot System" and the works and
cases therein cited; also files of The
Nation for 1889, and American Law
Review, same year.
It seems hardly necessary to discuss
at length the arguments which led to
a change from the old systems of con
ducting elections to the Australian
ballot. Everybody understands why
the change was made. Yet to some ex
tent the new system has grown suffi
ciently old for some of its fundamental
principles to be forgotten, or at least
disregarded.
In matter of detail, both in form of
ballot and in manner of voting, the
Australian systems vary greatly, I
hardly two states having adopted like
methods. Yet the underlying princi
ples are the same everywhere, the
chief one being to make the ballot
what its name implies a secret vote
as distinguished from a viva voce vote.
A routrht classification, however, will
place all these laws in two groups. In
one all the candidates for a particular
office are grouped under one head with
names of candidates arranged (a) al
phabetically according to initial of
candidates surnames (as in Massa
chusetts and Nebraska laws first en
acted) or (b) according to voting
strength of the respective parties at
the preceding election (as In present
Nebraska law.) This is the Australian
SWEET PRUNE PLUM.
In September, 1901, Mr. E. D. Ham
mond, proprietor of the Norfolk Nur
sery, picked three -bushels of plums
from a single sweet prune plum tree
in his orchard. The tree was but five
years old. ; It began bearing when
two years old. This is the only kind
of prune plum that has been, a success
in Nebraska. , It has endured the
drouth of '93 and '94 and the hard
winter of 'S9. It is a grand- success
for northwestern Nebraska.
Those desiring FRUIT TREES or
SEED POTATOES should -write for
full particulars arid free catalogue to
E. D. Hammond, proprietor Norfolk
JVToH,
ballot proper. The other provides for
grouping all the candidates of one
party under one head in a separate
column with the columns placed side
by side, usually according the strong
est party first place, or the left hand
side (as in the Nebraska law of 1897
and in the Kansas laws of 1897. and
1901). This is known as the "blank
et" or Belgian ballot.
in either form there may or may
not be a provision for voting a straight
party ticket with one mark. The Ne
bi-aska law of 1891 had . the alphabet!
cal arrangement of candidates' names
and no provision for party voting; but
the gold emocrats' scheme of nomi
rating Adams, Allison, Bibb, Brown
and Bites, in order to profit by mis
takes by having first place, suggested
a change. The Nebraska legislature of
1897 adopted the Belgian ballot with
party emblems and circles for straight
party voting. The same year Kansas
also adopted the blanket ballot but
made no provision for emblems or
straight voting. Both these legisla
tures were populist" bodies.
In 1899 the Nebraska legislature
went back to the original form, with
party strength arangement of candi
dates' names and a provision for group
voting in the case of presidential elec
tors but leaving out the party circle
straight vote. In 1901 the law was
again amended by adding party cir
cles at top of ballot for straight vot
ing and a circle for group voting
wherever more than one officer was
to be elected in a group, as in case of
several representatives from one,, dis
trict. V '
la Kansas the legislature of 1901
amended he law of 1897 by providing
for emblems and straight party vot
ing, retaining the blanket form. The
frequent changes of form and arrange
ment in Nebraska have had the effect
of disfranchising a good many voters,
who had barely time to learn how to
vote one ballot until a different one
was forced upon them. . In Kansas the
changes in form and arrangement have
caused little difficulty, but the provis
ions in the law of 1901 regarding nomi
nations are so outrageous, in the light
of actual conditions there, as to de
serve the condemnation of every fair-
minded American citizen.
Mr. Wigmore, writing to the Ameri
can Law Review. October. 1889. on
Ballot Reform; Its Constitutionality,"
says: "Nominations for public office
may be considered in two aspects.
First, it involves the right of every
eligible person to be voted for by any
elector who desires to do so; secondly,
it involves the right of each elector to
exercise choice among all who are
eligible. The two rights may be pro
tected by the same legislation, but it is
Important to remember that there Is
Involved not merely the right of an
individual to be a candidate, but the
right of every other -person to select
him for the office; practically the feas
ibility of Independent -political move
ments depends upon the second right."
Without wearying the reader with
long quotations from the law (which
may be had in full in Laws of Kansas,
1901, chapter 177, beginning -at page
311) it may be stated that the repub
lican amendments of 1901 provide that
(a) Party nominations can only be
made by convention of ONE political
party, "having a national or 'state or
ganization, (b) That a party name
shall consist of not more than two
words, one of which shall be "party;"
and that no compound or hyphenated
word shall be used, (c) That "no per
son shall accept more than one nomi
nation for the same office." , Other
provision's of lesser Importance, In
tended to. make effective these three
provisions, need not be' noticed par
ticularly here, c
Now; the largest three political par
ties in Kansas are the republican, the
people's, and the democratic, with vot-
tthAfVFrfor'-TioTriPf1 I Vvmrhf tn win
T.j harmonious co-operation between
the people's and the democratic par
ties, the two have an undoubted ma
jority in the "state under normal con
ditions. And they have co-operated
each year since 1894 by agreeing upon
an equitable division of the offices,
each furnishing part of the candidates
and nominating the entire ticket,
which went upon the official ballot
under both party heads. This prac
tice has received the erroneous name
of "fusion" it is really co-operation
but, like the term "trusts," it has
doubtless come to stay. Whenever the
term fusion is used, co-operation is
really meant.
The Kansas law of 1901 was enacted
by an overwhelmingly republican leg
islature for no other purpose than to
prevent fusion and thus, by dividing
majority into factions, win all elec
tions with a minority vote. "But,"
says the person unacquainted with
Kansas people, "couldn't these factions
unite as one party,?" The student of
Kansas history v knows they cannot.
The history of the early settlement of
Kansas furnishes the key to the situ
ation. A majority of Kansas popu
lists came from the republican party
they will not adopt the name
"democrat." And the democrats are
equally tenacious in retaining their
party name. Next to religious preju
dice, there is probably no other that is
as strong as party prejudice. And
whether it ought to or not does not
matter it is an undoubted fact that
a name cuts considerable figure. It
may seem foolish to haggle over a
name when the party platforms and
principles are so nearly alike as they
are in Kansas, but one must take con
ditions and people as . they are not
as he imagines they ought to be. On
this head I. quote from Prof. C. Vin
cent in Central Farmer:
"The cold truth is that owing to in
herent prejudice and breeding for forty
or ; fifty years, any party movement,
with any platform, bearing the name
'democrat' is foreordained to sure and
overwhelming defeat. That party in
half a century has never- gained - but
one victory in Kansas and that was a
political accident. It has helped , the
populists in. some cases, and together
the forces have won some victories)
but, alone, the democrats never gained
but one election in Kansas."
I think it will not be contended
that the Kansas law i3 a fair expres
sion of the spirit of the Australian
ballot. Wm. M. Ivins in "Electoral
Reform," summing up the evils of the
old system and urging the Australian
ballot as a remedy, says: "It will
enable any body of citizens of the
number prescribed by law to have the
name of their candidates printed on
the same ballot with the names of all
other candidates for the same office,
so that before the law and before the
voters all candidate and all party or
ganizations will stand on a perfectly
even footing. But it remained for re
publicans to "evilize" the remedy. This
they have done in Iowa, South Da
kota and Kansas. They wanted to do
it in Nebraska but lacked the nerve.
Section 6 of the Kansas disfran
chisement act provides that "when.
no nomination has been made by a
political party, or if a nomination has
been made but. undr. the provisions of
this act the name of the nominee can
not be printed on the official ballot,
the title of such office shall be printed
in such party column, and underneath
such title shall be printed -. the
words, "No nomination." Does this
place all party orgnizations on an even
footing? Does the prohibition against
any person accepting more than one
nomination "enable any body of citi
zens to have the name of their candi
date printed on the ballot with the
names of all other candidates?" Does
this prohibition protect "not merely
the right of an individual to be a can
didate, but the right of every, other
person to select him for. the office?"
There can be but one answer. Where
a person has received more than one
nomination for the same office, he is
permitted to choose but ojie, and shall
be deemed to have declined all but
that one, or the first one made if he
fails to signify his choice.
The constitution of Nebraska pro
vides that "all elections shall be free,
and there shall be no hindrance or Im
pediment to the right of a qualified
elector to exerefse the elective fran
chise." (Sec. 22, bill of rights.) Hence,
in Nebraska .a law like that of Kan
sas would probably be held void. But
the Kansas constitution contains no
such provision, merely declaring that
elections shall be by ballot. Although
the law is undoubtedly repugnant to
all principles of natural justice, yet
it is doubtful if Kansas fusionists can
reasonably hope to have it declared
unconstitutional. The Kansas supreme
court is republican 5 to 2, and the
question being looked up, erroneously
perhaps, as a partisan one, it is not
difficult to guess what the decision will
be if any test case be brought before
that tribunal. And the court will have
good precedent for sustaining it. It
might cite 41 Mo., 171, where the Mis
souri supreme court quotes approv
ingly from Mr. Justice Iredell's lan
guage in Calder v. Bull:
If, on the other hand, the legisla
ture of the Union, or the legislature
of. any member of the Union, shall
pass a law within the general scope of
their constitutional power, the court
cannot pronounce It void merely be
cause It is, in their judgment, contrary
to the principles of natural justice.
The ideas of natural justice are regu
lated by no fixed standard; the ablest!
and purest men have differed on the I
subject, and all that the court could
properly say, in such an event, , would
be that the legislature (possessed of
an equal right of opinion) had passed
an'act which, in the opinion of the
judges, was inconsistent with the ab-
striet principles of natural justice."
Although there is little hope of hav
ing the law declared unconstitutional,
yet the populists and democrats of
Kansas should not submit : meekly
without testing it. Co-operation can
be effected as formerly, a suit can be
brought, and if decided in favor of
the law let the republicans bear the
burden cf deciding which one of the
tickets cannot appear on the official
ballot. Then a vigorous campaign can
be made upon the disfranchisement
Issue, for disfranchisement of a whole
political party will then be an assured
fact accomplished by a republican
legislature, a republican court, and re
publican state officers. The whole
thing is so revolting to the American
sense of fair play that thef fusionists
A
3
s a as a d . i . a
IC "Cood Luck.- "Piper
Heidsiecfc. "Boo Trk MnMw Snun Bv1l t T M
"Rxot." " H. Rice. Greenville" Tmnuut CmitirV
and W-XTin.teVctre ili . bfrd TMark TickeV. o Tinsle,.. , o. Natural Leaf
' ' H I '
jjj rA6$
" 8UTTCH HMIf. HOaSMSt ttTAC. I
i ,tuaa(9oc fokpius reACC CHAC, W
i i i i 1 1 a'wa. mt.mr-m j. -r v i.l ay ,a
- tr i i i
nil Hu4 ICM-H . SaiMCM. It
c i
3PUT&AMS0I 7SMMS QO. .h JO TAOS.
3 FOE 10 CENTS
so ass.
rQUrMM HM . iQO TAOS.
HATCH OOttt
TAGS AND FLORODORA'BANDS ARE OF EQUAL
VALUE AND MAY BE ASSORTED.
Our New Illustrated
CATALOGUE OF PRESENTS
FOR 1902
includes many articles not shown here. It contains the most attractive
List of Presents erer offered for Tags, and will be sent by mail on receipt of
postage two cents.
Our offer of Presents for Tags will expire Nov. 30th, 1902.
CONTINENTAL TOBACCO CO.
Write your name and address plainly on outside of package containing:
Tags, and forward Tags by . registered mail, or express prepaid. Be
sure to have your package securely wrapped, so that Tags will not be
lost in transit. Send Tags and requests for Presents (also requests for
catalogues) to
C. Hy. BROWN,
4241 Folsom Ave., '."
St. Louis, Mo.
fOO TAOS.
I. H. Hatfield Attorney at Law
KOTICE.
To Abbie Willsie, Isaac Stwppacher, Edward
Arnold and Fhilip Arnold as Steppacher
Arnold & Company; Meyer Heldman, Na
than Heldman and Jacob Heldman as Held
man & Company, non-rasident defendants.
You are each hereby notified that on March II
Emily P. Dill as plaintiff began an action
in theDistrict Court of Lancaster county, Ne
braska, against you and other- defendants to
quiet and confirm in the plaintiff the title to
lots 18.and23,bIock 12;lots30and Sl.block 7; lots
31. 32. 33, and 34 in block & all in Belmont; lots
9, 11, and 12, in block 7, West Lincoln; lot 10,
block Jl. South Lincoln ; Lot "G" in Seott's
sub-division of the west half of lot 4, and all of
lots 5 and 6 in block 14; Lot 3 in block 4; and
lot "B" in sub-division of lots 1 and 2, in block
11, all in the city of Lincoln ; lot 5 in block 5,
and the north half of lot 5 .block 1 in Daven
port's Addition; lot 6 in block 1 in EaBt Park
Addition; lot 1 in block W in Kinney's "O"
Street Addition; a certain strip .of ground
about 30 feet wide by 142 feet long, with a front
age of 27 feet, and bounded on the north by lot
4. block 15, North Lincoln: lot 18 in block 2,
and lot 6 in block 3, both in North Side Addi
tion riot 4 in block 1 in South Park Addition;
lot 7 in block 45 in Lincoln Heights ; the south
west quarter of the southwest quarter of the
southwest quarter of section 22. and also the
south half of the south half of the northeast
quarter of the southeast quarter of section 32 ;
all in town 10, range 6, east of th 6th P.M.;
lots 7, 8. and 9, block 17? and lots 9 and 10, in
block 29, in Iraboff's Addition to University
Place. All of the above described real estate is
in Lancaster county, Nebraska. Also all of
blocks 7, a 9, 10, and 11, in Binsel' &, Bailey's
Addition o the city of Holdrege, in Phelps
county, Nebraska. Plaintiff also prays for a
decree adjudging that you have no interest in
said real estate, that you be enjoined from in
terfering therewith, and for equitable relief.
You are required to answer plaintiff's petition
on or before April 21, 1902.
EMILY P. DILL,
By I. H. Hatfield, her attorney.
P. James Cosgrave Attorney at Law
NOTICE. '
To James Milton Granger, non-resident defen
; dant. . ; - .':.' .- - ... . ;
You are hereby notified that on the 11th day
of March, 1902, Martha Granger filed a petition
against you in the District Court of Lancaster
County, State of Nebraska, the object and
prayer of which are to obtain a divorce from
you on the ground that you have willfully aban
doned the plaintiff, without good cause, for the
term of two years last past, and also as a fur
ther ground alleging non-support. You are re
quired to answer said petition on or before
Monday, the 21st day of April. 1902.
MARTHA GRANGER,
' .. Plaintiff,' :
By P. James Cosgrave, her attorney.
Low Settlers Rates
During March and April, 1902, the
Northern Pacific will sell ONE WAY
SECOND CLASS SETTLERS' tickets
from eastern terminal points St.
Paul, Minneapolis, Ashland, Duluth,
and the Superiors at greatly reduced
rates to nearly all points on its main
line, branches and connecting lines,
west of North Dakota. These tickets
to Northern Pacific points will be good
for stopover. west of Hope,. Idaho.
For further detailed Information
about these rates call upon or write
to G. D. Rogers, D. P. A.. N. P. R., Des
Moines, la., or address Chas. S. Fee,
Gen. Pas. & Tkt. Agent, Nor. Pac. Ry.,
St. Paul, Minn. ' .
Some - of the important, valleys
reached by the Northern Pacific are
the Yellowstone, ; Gallatin, Madison,
Deer Lodge, Bitter Root and Clark
Fork in Montana, the . Palouse, Big
Bend, Colville. Clearwater, Walla Wal
la and Yakima in Idaho and Washing
ton, the Puget Sound and Britsh Co
lumbia regions and the Oregon coun
try. It is a vast empire where climate
soil and other advantages make of It
a favored lan . "
LOW RATES VIA,
THE NORTH-WESTERN LINE
MARCH AND APRIL ;
cmfweyptaoinshrdluu
To Portland, Tacoma,. Seattle, Vic-
torfa VailnnnVAr San Prsnefsm. T.os
Angeles, San Diego, and Intermediate
Points, $25.00
' To Spokane and Intermediate Points,
$22.50.
March 25, April 1 and 8, to certain
points in Minnesota and North Da
kota' at greatly reduced rates.. '
Homeseekers' Excursions March 4
and 18, April 1 and 15, May 6 and 20,
to certain points in Nebraska, Wyom
ing,". North and South Dakota, Min
nesota, Wisconsin and Michigan.
"The Best of Everything."
For other information call on C. H.
Dean, city ticket agent, 117 So. 10th
St.; E. T. Moore, depot ticket agent,
cor. 9th and Ssts.; R. W. McGinnis,
general agent.
Read this paper carefully and then
hand it to a neighbor. Ask him to
subscribe; or better send for a block of
five "Liberty Building' Postals and get
up a club of subscribers. There is no
other way in which you can do so
much to advance the cause of good
government. , . -. .
