The serious modern instance of interference with free election is that of the Federal government with State elections in the South during the thirty years following the war.  While such interference was never quite held unconstitutional, it was strongly felt to be so; and has therefore disappeared from practical politics.  The principle of free election, therefore, remains again unquestioned, and is, indeed, strengthened by considerable legislation aimed at the influencing of votes by employers, etc.  Many States, for instance, require that Election Day shall be a holiday, or, at least, that all employers of labor shall give part of the day, one or two hours at least, for the employees to vote; and a number of States have statutes aimed at the coercion of their vote by any promise of giving or withholding employment, or otherwise, and the giving their pay to them in envelopes upon which any political matter is printed.  Bribery is nearly always made criminal and cause of permanent disfranchisement and disability to hold office, both to the person giving or receiving the bribe, but there is more interesting legislation still aimed at any form of political corruption.  Massachusetts led the way with a statute which endeavors to make criminal any promise of employment or advantage, or even for a corporation, at least, to employ any person at the recommendation of any member of the legislature.  It is very difficult to draw such laws to make them apply fairly, but they have been copied with even greater elaboration in many Southern States.  The statute of Alabama, for instance, covers nearly a page in describing the various acts or promises which are thus forbidden to officers or candidates for office.

Then there is the long range of lobby acts aimed at the very serious abuse of lobbying.  Massachusetts divides the offence, or rather the business, into two general classes:  First, the legislative counsel who appears before legislative committees in support or in opposition of measures.  This practice, of course, is perfectly legitimate in many cases, but the law provides that his advocacy must be open, he must disclose the client for whom he appears, if there be one, and at the end of his services file a statement of the counsel fees actually received.  Such legislation, however, is easily evaded by the payment of an annual salary.  Then there is the legislative agent or lobbyist, properly so called, who does not openly appear before legislative committees, but waylays members of the legislature at their dwelling or meeting places, or elsewhere.  He must also register as legislative agent by the Massachusetts law, and file an actual account of his receipts and expenses.  Such legislation properly observed would, of course, have made impossible the celebrated “House of Mirth” at Albany.  Then there are many statutes against intimidation in elections, particularly in the South; and there were many acts of Congress passed under the Fourteenth Amendment, but these have practically all been held unconstitutional.