Gazette Of The United States

Philadelphia, Nov. 27.

A paragraphist in the General Advertiser of Thursday last, reprobates in very forcible terms, the mode of voting viva voce, in popular elections, as practiced in some of the states. This abuse, says he, strikes at the very root of all good and free government—poisons the very source from which it flows.

It is impossible in this manner of voting, that elections should be free.—A candidate that has great wealth and influence, on whom the livelihood of many may depend, will inevitably awe all his dependants to support him. Men who owe to him their employment, or have received his bribes, dare not openly oppose him. Even a man's friends, those who are not dependant upon him, but are only in habits of intimacy, cannot well refuse to support him, lest this should interrupt that intercourse that subsists between the families. Whenever too the popular current runs violently in any particular direction, it is hardly safe to bear up against it. Many who think differently from the great body of the people, will be reluctantly hurried down the general stream. Many, rather than come forward openly to avow their sentiments, will consent to waive their privilege of voting.

We see sometimes, as in Baltimore very lately, that out of several thousand votes, all, except two or three, are in favor of the same persons; tho the very connections and intimate friends of the opposite candidates, must have amounted to a considerable number and all those who favored their interest, to many hundreds.

This method of voting will inevitably introduce corruption and intrigue into the elections. This is undoubtedly one cause of the corruption of elections in Great-Britain; and in some parts of the United States, where this method is adopted, the elections resemble those of England. They are little better than an auction, where the post is set up to public sale, and is struck off to the highest bidder.

The difference between the states that make use of these two methods, is very striking, and places their true influence in the strongest light—In those states where the mode of voting is by ballot, it would be exceedingly indelicate, and indeed would be considered as great presumption and effrontery for a man to come forward and hold himself up to the public as qualified for the higher posts of the government, and endeavor to procure interest. In some parts of the United States, where they vote viva voce, men, instead of being brought forward by the voice of their country, or their friends, publicly advertise themselves, openly solicit interest, and ride about the country to beg and buy all the votes they can collect. And to close this indecent scene, the candidates while the election is going on, are frequently seated upon the hustings, exposed to public view, to tamper with every elector that comes to vote.

Wealth, where elections are free, if not attended with some degree of ability, is no recommendation to a candidate; but where the viva voce method is adopted, it is the great, sometimes the only requisite.

To these observations a correspondent adds, that the practice of keeping an election open for a number of days, and sometimes weeks together, is attended with many objections; the mode is vexatious, and unnecessarily expensive to the people. Opens the door to intrigue and cabals, and is subversive of freedom.

In many of the states the election is held on the same day throughout the government.