278 
Gregory—Political Corruption. 
association, calling attention in plain but temperate language to 
the evils of patronage and of the free use of money in elections, 
was mailed to some 5,000 citizen through the state. The cir¬ 
cular reviewed the advantages of the Australian ballot system 
lately adopted in Missouri, and pointed out that it required as 
its supplement “legislation restricting the expenditures of can¬ 
didates at elections. ” It announced that a bill for this purpose 
would be introduced in the coming legislature, briefly outlined 
its provisions and asked aid in affecting public opinion and in 
selecting representatives with a view to proper action on this 
subject. 
When nominations were made letters were addressed to each 
nominee, enclosing a summary of the bill and asking an expres¬ 
sion of his views on the subject, and many replies were received, 
mostly favorable. After election correspondence was opened 
with the members elected, criticism was evoked and the most 
effective advocates were discovered. The bill was finally placed 
in the hands of Senator Cochran of St. Joseph, and by his good 
management, carried in the senate. 
A committee of the association including its president spent 
some days at the capital while the bill was under consideration, 
and made a personal canvass of the members. The result was 
there was practically no adverse vote, and a measure so com¬ 
plete and drastic that few would dare propose it was added to 
the statutes of Missouri and raised the standard of enactment 
in this respect for every state in the union. 
I owe these interesting details to the courtesty of E. C. Elliot, 
Esq., of St. Louis, one of the committee which carried through 
this admirable work. 
The law covers thirteen printed pages subdivided into 24 sec¬ 
tions. The first section defines bribery at elections in a way to 
include all who effect or attempt the corrupting of an elector 
by money’s worth or patronage or who accept such corruption, 
and makes it felony punishable by two to five years in the pen¬ 
itentiary and by a forfeiture of $500 to any one suing for it. 
Any candidate who within ten days prior to a primary or 
sixty days prior to an election provides meat, drink or entertain¬ 
ment for any person to corruptly influence his vote is liable to 
