Section 78. The electors of the second degree receive an indemnity of 48 skillings per mile, from their domicile to the place of voting for the Landsthing.

Section 80.

at the place and Section 92.

The electors of the second degree and the direct electors must be present at the hour of election.

Any person neglecting the duties imposed by the present law is subject to a fine of from 10 to 200 rix-dollars: unless a severer penalty has been imposed.

COMPULSORY VOTING.

By Sydney Fisher. in the Montreal Herald, May 24th, 1892.

I cannot agree with the view that this compulsory voting, will be an effectual or even partial cure. Such an expedient may force some few to an unwilling and unintelligent compliance with the law, but it will not in any way remove the cause of the evil, therefore cannot be effective. At the same time compulsory voting may easily cause hardship and may lower the morale of numbers of the electorate. It must be remembered in discussing the plan of forcing every man to vote that under our present laws a voter can only vote for one of certain duly nominated individuals and in consequence of the consent of the candidate being required and a large money deposit being exacted to nominate a man, it is not easy to secure the nomination of more than two or three candidates. Thus the average elector would be obliged to vote for a candidate in whose nomination he has had no part, unless indeed as one of the rank and file of a great political party, and of whom very probably he does not approve. Suppose for instance an honest voter who believes in protection finds two candidates nominated in his constituency, one a free trader and the other a boodler or a drunkard, consequently men neither of whom he can honestly support, nor does he consider either worthy to represent his views on public questions. Why, under such circumstances, should the voter be forced to cast his vote or lose his franchise or pay a fine? Suppose again a voter is a prohibitionist and finds no candidate who will agree to vote for Prohibition, why should he be forced to vote for a man who is opposed to what he considers the most important public question? It would be a hardship to make him lose his right to vote when other candidates are in the field. I see it is proposed by some that religious scruples shall relieve a voter from being forced to vote. I fear that in election times there would be great, if insincere, accession of religious fervour and I doubt the moral improvement of many of those who thus would shirk the vote. Another point which would largely nullify any benefit that might be obtained by compulsory voting is the secrecy of the ballot. It is something like the old adage, “One may bring the horse to water, but a hundred cannot make him drink." You may make the man go into the polling booth and go through all the motions of voting, but you cannot tell whether he votes or not.

I believe a better remedy would be to adopt an expedient by which the elector would have to appreciate his privilege in the franchise, and the only way I can think of to accomplish this, is to throw the responsibility of securing his right to vote on the citizen himself. Let only those vote who value the privilege sufficiently to make an effort, only a slight one but still an active step, to secure the privilege. This may at first sight appear reactionary as it is radical, but the mode I suggest of carrying the plan out is not reactionary at all. I would place the right to vote within the reach of every male British subject of twenty-one years of age who lives in Canada, but I would exact of him the active step of appearing personally before the proper official and entering his name on the list. If any resident of Canada be not willing to take so much trouble as this once a year to secure the right to have his say in the

management of our public affairs, either he is so ignorant of the duties and privileges of citizenship that he is not competent to vote intelligently or he does not take sufficient interest in the affairs of the community to study them enough to vote properly. If a man has thus taken the trouble to obtain the right to vote, he is pretty sure to make use of it if he conscientiously can.

There are but few difficulties in the way of this reform, while nearly all the objectionable features of our present arrangememts would disappear. The scheme I would suggest, after considerable thought given to it during several years of active participation in election work is this: That in a certain month of the year, say May or September, the secretary-treasurer of the municipality, or in large cities an officer appointed for the purpose, should during certain hours of the day keep open a register for voters. Any man who would appear before him and make oath (the official being empowered ex-officio to adminster oaths) that he was a British subject, twenty-one years of age, a resident in the municipality at that time, and that he had not registered anywhere else that year, should have his name entered as a voter. In case of confinement to the house by sickness during the whole of the month, a doctor's certificate under oath would entitle the applicant to registration without personal appearance, and absence from Canada during the whole month, properly established by oath would do the same. This list should come in force at the end of the given month and be valid for one year. The same process for a new list being gone through each year.

This list would cost hardly anything, there being no labor on the part of the officer to hunt up names, no enquiry into qualification, no revision. The man making oath would be liable to prosecution for perjury, if swearing falsely, which would be sufficient check on improper registration.

This plan involves the principle of one man one vote, which is the only true principle of a democratic franchise. No doubt at first the number of voters would be lessened, but it would be the indifferent or ignorant who would be left off, just the men who now either do not vote or put up their vote for sale.

A further enactment ought to go with this scheme; namely, that paying a man for his time and trouble in registering or inducing him to register, would, in the first place deprive him of the right to vote, and also be punishable by a fine or imprisonment for either party to the bargain. I do not suppose that this or any other expedient will do away with bribery in elections until the voters themselves become honest, but I do believe that it would greatly lessen the evil of corrupt elections. The time of registration would not usually be in the heat of a contest and men would not be so easily induced to pledge themselves to an unknown candidate or to a future contest as they now are willing to sell themselves for cash down within a few days or a few hours of voting. A politician or a party even would not be so willing to pay out money to men for an uncertain return, and consequently bribery would be made more risky. This scheme is put forward as a reform, which I am confident would do more than any other so far suggested to improve our election work, while at the same time it would remove nearly all the expense and labor, and waste of time involved in the making up of our voters lists and so render corruption more difficult.

Certainly some reform in these matters is absolutely necessary if Canada is to be governed by her people in their own interests, and the most just and most effective mode is to shut out the ignorant, indifferent and corrupt from the power to control the election of the representatives.

POSTSCRIPT.

The foregoing excerpts present in a condensed form the views of many public men who have given much attention to the subject submitted for consideration. It is believed they will not be unacceptable to some of those readers who do not live within reach of public libraries, where they could have access to the original works.

While they were passing through the press, two articles have appeared which the writer deems it expedient to add to the list. The first in the "Week" of May 13th, by Dr. Wicksteed. of Ottawa, under the heading "Voting by Command;" the second in the "Montreal Herald" of May 24th, by Mr. Sydney Fisher, for many years member of the Dominion House of Commons, under the heading "Compulsory Voting." The first expresses the convictions of that section of the community which in order to obtain the voice of the people advocates the introduction of a law by which electors would be compelled to vote or be punished. The second takes a different view and with the design of shutting out the ignorant, indifferent and corrupt, from the power of controlling elections, submits a plan which he thinks would have that effect; he is of opinion too that it would tend to raise the franchise so as to embrace chiefly, those who are sufficiently inttelligent to value their political privileges and are patriotic enough to exercise them properly. These articles together with the introduction of a Bill in the Canadian Parliament to enact the principle of compulsory voting and the appointment of a special committee to consider the expediency of adopting the principle, are at least hopeful indications that among members of the House of Commons of Canada the feeling is arising that some amendment of our electoral system is imperatively called for. The Proportional Representation Society has already been alluded to (page 30): a list of members of the British House of Commons who had joined this organization will be found at page 88, and in this list will be noticed the names of no less than twelve members who are, or were, ministers of the Crown, and of these, four ranked as "cabinet" ministers in Lord Salisbury's administration. Such facts attest that the public conscience in both countries is being awakened to the necessity of some radical change in electoral methods.

The writer is unable himself to recognize that any extraordinary results of a beneficial character would be achieved by the enforcement of

a system of compulsory voting. Taken by itself as explained in Dr. Wicksteed's paper, it would give no freedom of choice to the elector. Compulsory voting would not touch the real difficulty, which leads to party organization, and its outcome, the caucus system by which the choice is determined. The candidates would be selected as at present, and as a rule by coteries of party politicians. The ordinary independent voter would not have the remotest voice in the selection, and many will consider it a monstrous proposal that an elector should be forced by legislative enactment, under threat of fine, to vote for one of the two party candidates, in neither of whom he could place confidence. For this is practically what he would be reduced to, if he were dragged in his despite to the polls, and compelled to choose between two evils. His alternative would be to pay the penalty, or go through an empty form which would render his vote of no effect whatever. Would not high minded men, rich and poor alike, feel themselves humiliated and degraded in being thus coerced? If compulsory voting could be effectively enforced, its tendency would be to drive all composing the voting community, whether they will or not, to take sides with one party or the other. It would by no means remove the evils of party government. Its direct consequence would be to separate the community more completely than even at present, into two great political divisions. In what way then would it effect good? Would it not tend to intensify party bitterness? Would it not consolidate and perpetuate the dualisin which we deplore? Would it not always leave unrepresented in parliament that great mass of the electors who had supported the defeated. candidates?

High authorities have expressed the opinion that representative government is on its trial. We may ask the question; has true representative government ever yet been tried? The writer is profoundly convinced that our present duty is to make every effort to obtain this ideal government, and seek for nobler ideas of public life than now prevail, that is to say if we are to be freed from the political ills from which we suffer. The issue, with greater accuracy, may be set forth that it is government by party which is on its trial. Can we doubt what the verdict will be, when we have something better to take its place?

The foregoing pages indicate the views which begin to dominate on both sides of the Atlantic on this subject; the lesson is inculcated that we have reached the stage when we should aim to lay aside the spirit of antagonism and wrong which we have acquired by transmission from the distant past, and substitute the spirit of we do in almost all other human affairs.

amity and right, in national, as We recognize that we are in an

age of evolution: the arts and sciences are expanding civilization in every sphere of activity, and it appears inconsistent with the law of progress that the domain of government should remain non-progressive or become retrogressive.

The evidence before us leads to the conviction that to enter on the path of progress, popular government must stand on a broader and sounder basis than that of party. We must hope for a political evolution which will enable every man in the land to feel that the acts of the government are his acts, that the laws made by parliament are made by those who represent him. We must look for a political development based on the fundamental principles of our constitution; one which will bind every individual life, in the common life of the state; a development which removing the causes of chronic internal dissensions, will benefit society, will give strength and stability to the commonwealth, and enable it the better to stand the test of time.

To determine the best means of effectively promoting this high public purpose is the end and object of the appeal which the Canadian Institute submits to the world of thought and constructive statesmanship. It cannot be doubted that this object will find earnest sympathy with every well wisher of his country.

OTTAWA, May 26th, 1892.

S. F.