EE RKMA'R'SiES ;iTY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY NOT TO BE ^ READING E ', RETURN A'J LIBRARY i OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. Class SELECTED ARTICLES ON DIRECT PRIMARIES [REPRINTS] MINNEAPOLIS THE H. W. WILSON COMPANY 1905 EXPLANATORY NOTE These reprints, dealing with material upon both sides of the question of Direct Primaries, were prepared es- pecially for the use of the Minnesota High School Debating League. Articles have been reprinted in whole or in part as the circumstances seemed to de- mand. Where a number of articles have dealt with the same material certain parts have been eliminated so as to avoid repetition. This has made it possible to put in compact and convenient form a large amount of valuable material. These reprints will be found especially valuable to students taking part in debates on the subject, or to clubs or individuals making a study of the subject. Librarians will find it most useful since it will furnish as much information on the subject as will ordinarily be called for, and will make available a large amount of valuable material that comparatively few libraries will have. 210086 CONTENTS Title Page Progress of Primary Reform. Clinton Rogers Woodruff. Chau- tauquan. 38: 9-10. September, 1903. 1 Direct Primaries. Harper's Weekly. 46: 1070. August 9, 1902. 3 Minnesota's New Primary Election Law. Samuel M. Davis. Independent. 52: 2495-7. October 18, 1900. - - 6 Results of the Minnesota Direct Primary System. T. M. Knap- pen. Independent. 54: 2694-5. November 13, 1902. - 11 The Regeneration of the Primary. Nation. 33: 486-7. December 22, 1881. - 15 The Primary in California. A. B. Nye. Nation. 34: 74-5. Jan- uary 26, 1882. - - 18 irect Nominations. Nation. 75: 85-7, July 31, 1902. - - 23 Primary Reform. Nation. 77: 5-6. July 2, 1903. - 26 Progress of Primary Reform. Nation. 72: 290. October 13, 1904. 29 Primary Elections. Outlook. 57: 790. December 5, 1897. - - 32 A Necessary Reform. Outlook. 57: 943-5. December 18, 1897. 33 The Nominating Ballot. F. M. Brooks. Outlook. 57:950-2. December 18, 1897. 37 The Nominating Ballott. L. G. McConachie. Outlook. 58: 176-7. January 15, 1898. - - 41 Primary Election Reform. Outlook. 58: 266-8. January 29, 1898. 43 Primary Elections. Outlook. 58: 455-6. February 19, 1898. 48 Primary Law in Illinois. Outlook. 58: 753-4. March 26, 1898. 49 Primaries in New York. Outlook. 59: 411. June 18, 1898. - 50 Primaries in Georgia. Outlook. 59: 411-2. June 18, 1898. - - 51 The Dark Side of the Direct Primaries. Outlok. 59: 797. July 30, 1898. - 52 vi CONTENTS Concurrent Primaries. Outlook. 68: 8-9. September 2, 1899. 64 Direct Primaries in South Carolina. Outlook. 60: 146. Septem- ber, 10, 1898. - 56 /Direct Primaries. F. M. Brooks. Outlook. 60: 251-2. September 24, 1S98. - 57 Hill Bill for Primary Reform. Outlook. 58: 210. January 22, 1898. 59 An Essential Reform. Outlok. 58: 261-2. January 29, 1898. 60 Direct Primaries and Ward Option in Ohio. Outlook. 64: 378. February 17, 1900. - - 62 Direct Primaries in Kansas and Missouri. Outlook. 63: 475. October 28, 1899. 63 -Direct Primaries Make Headway. Outlook. 65: 761. August 4, 1900. - - 64 Direct Primaries in Wisconsin. Outlook. 65: 897-8. August 18, 1900. 66 Primaries, Direct and Indirect. Outlook. 66: 91-2. September 8, 1900. -67 Direct Primaries in Pennsylvania. Outlook. 66: 861-2. Decem- ber, 8, 1900. 69 votes were cast between four and eight o'clock Saturday evening at the Republican primary elec- tion. It was the first test of the Crawford County rules, and the results showed that a vast number of voters took an interest in the election. Captain James Moir was nom- inated by over 1,400 majority. He received almost as many votes as all the other candidates together." "The vote as mentioned above," says Mr. Dunn, "repre- sents the entire Republican vote of the city. On credible authority, the nomination cost Mr. Moir $98.50. He is our present Mayor, and the greatest compliment that can be paid him is that he is the kind of a man who could never have been nominated under the old system. Last spring E. B. Sturges, a man of wealth and highest character, leader of the reform movement against unlicensed saloons, bawdy- houses, gambling-dens, corrupt officials, and all forms of vice, registered as a candidate for Jury Commissioner, an office insignificant and which pays about as much per year as that gentleman gives to charity every week. In this county, with its large foreign element, it 3,000 unlicensed saloons, its bribers and its bribed, this man received 9,000 of the 16,000 Republican votes cast." Mr. Dunn concludes his report as follows: "The ring made an attempt to repeal the new system, and failed by only two of the necessary DIRECT PRIMARIES ;i two-thirds majority, but the attempt aroused a storm of in- dignation. The results obtained from the new system give a hopeful outlook for the future, and show beyond doubt that, given a chance, 'the people are right/ " Outlook. 67:477-8. March 2, 1901. Direct Primaries Demanded. The reform of primary elections is before the Legislatures in a dozen different States, and in the Central West has been the foremost subject of discussion. The recent trial of direct primaries at Minneapolis, Minn., has forced every one to recognize that disinterested citizens will attend primaries almost en masse if they are allowed to vote directly for can- didates instead of merely for delegates to nominating con- ventions; and in all the Northwestern States there is a strong popular demand that nominating conventions shall be abolished, just as they have already been in South Car- olina and Georgia. In both Michigan and Indiana bills abol- ishing conventions in the counties containing the largest cities of each commonwealth have been passed by the House of Representatives, though in Michigan at least the Senate has rejected the reform by a small majority. The conflict centers in Wisconsin, where ex-Congressman La Follette for years leader of the anti-monopoly wing of the Republican party is now Governor, and is using all of his great influence to secure the adoption of a direct primary law covering the entire State. Governor La Fol- lette, it will be recalled, won his fight completely in the nominating convention, and obtained for direct primaries an indorsement which seemed to pledge every legislator professing party loyalty to support a comprehensive direct primary law. But pledges of this sort, which are opposed by powerful interests, are more readily made during cam- 72 SELECTED ARTICLES paigns than redeemed after their close, and Wisconsin is now witnessing the spectacle of legislators who profess to favor nominations by the people in the abstract, but oppose the concrete bills to carry this principle into effect. As usual, the opposition to the reform professes the same ends as the reformers. The opponents of the bills are "as much opposed to machine rule as the reformers," but they object to the proposed primary election law because the difficulty of going to the polls in the rural districts will "lessen the political influence of the farmers," because the expense of making a canvass among the general body of voters will embarrass the "poorer candidates," and because the election will be generally burdensome to the whole body of voters. In reply to the first of these objections it only needs to be remarked that the movement for direct primaries has re- ceived its chief support from the farming districts of dis- tinctively farming States, because the caucus system always put political control in the hands of a knot of politicians in the cities or country towns. In reply to the second objec- tion it only needs to be recalled that the direct primary movement has received all its support from the opponents of the political control of moneyed interests. One of the chief objections to the caucus system is that it prevents the candidacy of men unable or unwilling to buy their nomination or become the tools of powerful interests which will buy it for them. The third objection to the direct primary that it imposes a burden upon the whole body of voters is valid enough, but the same objection holds against all democratic institutions. The distinctive thing about democracy is that it imposes political duties upon the whole people, instead of leaving one man or a few men to look after public affairs. The fact that direct primaries do impose upon all the duty of taking part in the nomina- tion of public officers is one of the chief arguments in its favor. This duty creates a better citizenship, and a better citizenship is even more important than the better govern- ment which it finally secures. DIRECT PRIMARIES 73 Outlook. 67:654-5. March 23, 1901. Direct Primaries. The Minnesota Legislature, with but fourteen dissenting votes, has extended to the whole State the direct primary system, tested in Minneapolis last fall. The only important change made is that the voter is required to state with what party he generally affiliates before taking part in the pri- mary. This advance in Minnesota, however, is almost coun- terbalanced by the unexpectedly slow progress reported from Wisconsin. There is danger that the Wisconsin Legislature will refuse to enact the*tlirect primary law which nearly ev- ery member thereof was pledged to support by the plat- form upon which he was elected. The primary plank in the Republican platform and the Legislature is almost solidly Republican read as follows: "The great reformation effected in our general elections through the Australian ballot inspires us with confidence to apply the same method in making nominations, so that every voter may exercise his sovereign right of choice by direct vote without the intervention or interference of any political agency. We therefore demand that caucuses and conven- tions for the nomination of candidates for office be abolished by legislative enactment, and that all candidates for State, Legislative, Congressional, and county officers be nominated at primary elections upon the same day by direct vote under the Australian ballot." The bill presented to the Legislature, with the support of Governor La Follette, seemed to us an excellent measure for carrying out this pledge. There were in it details that appeared needlessly cumbersome, and there were radical proposals affecting the organization of the State Committee and the formulation of State platforms which were not nec- essarily involved in a direct primary system; but all of these features could be submitted to a party caucus, each of whose members would be bound by the party pledge to abide by the decision of the majority. The proposals relating to the 74 SELECTED ARTICLES organization of State Committees and the formulation of State platforms seemed to us admirable. The State Com- mittee was to be made up of the chairmen of the county committees, who were to be directly elected by the voters and the State platform was to be framed by the candidates chosen by the voters for the various executive and legislative offices. The former feature made the party machine directly the servant of the whole party, and the latter gave over the drafting of the platform to the men who could be held most directly accountable for its provisions. However, these de- tails were not essential to the fulfillment of the party's pledge, and no legislator can be condemned for refusing to support them. But the legislators must be condemned who refuse to take the Governor's bill as a basis for caucus ac- tion and formulate a measure acceptable to a majority of their number, by which their promise to the people may be kept. Outlook. 67:838-9. April 13, 1901. Direct Primary in Minnesota. A notable victory for the direct primary system has just been gained in Minnesota. Two years ago the Legislature of that State passed a bill permitting the county of Hennepin, which comprises little more than the city of Minneapolis, to use a system of direct primary voting for the nomina- tion of all candidates for offices voted for within the country. The success of the trial of this plan was phenomenal, sur- passing the expectations of the advocates of the reform. When it was seen that a larger percentage of the voters participated in the primaries in Hennepin County than was usually counted at the polls, a demand at once went up from the rest of the State for an extension of the law. This de- mand was most insistent in St. Paul and Duluth, the two DIRECT PRIMARIES 75 remaining large cities of the State, but the legislators from the country districts soon became aware that their constitu- ents also were anxious to be relieved from the control of the boss and slate-maker by securing for themselves the benefits of the Hennepin primary law; so that the scheme of some of the Minneapolis politicians to have the law re- pealed met with so little encouragement when the Legisla- ture met this winter that it never saw the light. Several primary bills were at once introduced by members of both parties, and a measure extending the system to the whole State passed the House of Representatives with little oppo- sition. In the Senate the bill did not have such plain sailing, for a determined fight was made against it by a few mem- bers friendly to the machine. Attempts were made to amend the bill to death; but while the debate was going on, several of the lukewarm Senators heard from home in so emphatic a manner that when the final vote was taken in the Senate only twelve Senators out of sixty-three went on record as opposed to the bill. The law covers nominations for Con- gressional, legislative, county, and city offices, and district judgeships; it does not apply to State offices nor to lo- cal offices of villages and towns. The exception of State of- fices was conceded as a compromise to carry the measure through in the House. In towns and villages where all the voters know each other, the evils of the machine nomina- tions have not had a chance to develop. The main provisions of the new law are summarized as follows: "Any person who wishes to become a candidate for the nomination to any office may do so by filing an affidavit with the county auditor and paying a fee of ten dollars, or, if the office is to be voted for in more than one county, by filing his affidavit with the Secretary of State and paying a fee of twenty dollars. No person defeated at the primary election can go on the official ballot at the final election. The pri- mary election will be held on the seventh Tuesday before elec- tion, which is also to be the first day of registration, and any person entitled to register may vote. Australian ballots are to be provided for each party participating in the election, ;6 SELECTED ARTICLES and each voter must declare his party affiliation before re- ceiving a ballot. If challenged, the voter must make affida- vit relative to his party preferences." This most important reform has been brought about, not by strenuous agitation, but rather by the logic of events and by the powerful influence of a highly successful experiment which refuted every objection that could be urged against it. Outlook. 68: 140-1. May 18, 1901. Direct Primaries. The reform measures especially urged at this Convention were direct primaries and uniform municipal accounting. The first subject was introduced by a review of the primary system from its introduction by Samuel Adams, as the means by which men of the middle and poorer classes in sympathy with popular government should secure the election of men favorable to their principles. In small rural districts the primary early developed into a "party town meeting," and its nominees were almost uniformly acceptable to the whole party. In the larger districts, however, the impossibility of assembling all the voters led to the introduction of the delegate convention system. This for a time worked well, but with the growth of these communities the delegates came to be less and less closely in touch with the whole body of voters, and finally the conventions passed under the con- trol of little knots of politicians known in rural committees as the "court-house ring" and in the cities as "the machine." The movement to restore popular control of party nomina- tions first developed strength in the rural districts, where the farmers demanded the right to vote directly for candid- ates instead of voting for delegates to choose candidates. The direct vote system took root and grew almost without cultivation wherever the soil was democratic, until it had DIRECT PRIMARIES 77 taken possession of vast numbers of counties and Congres- sional districts in the West and South. Its success in these rural districts and the growing opposition to machine mis- rule in city and State government have been the cause of its recent triumphs in South Carolina, Georgia, and Minne- sota, and the strong popular demand for its establishment in other commonwealths. One of the speakers on the subject was Mr. E. A. Hempstead, the editor of the "Crawford Journal," of Meadville, Pennsylvania, who gave the history of the system in his county, where it was introduced by the Republicans in 1860, and from which it has extended, over a wide territory under the name of the "Crawford County system." In the forty years of trial, the average vote in Re- publican primaries of Crawford County has been seventy- four per cent, of the average vote at the general election fol- lowing, and the two attempts made by political leaders dur- ing the seventies to reintroduce convention system were voted down the first time by a majority of more than three to one, and the next time by a majority of eighteen to one. In the discussion the Minnesota plan of presenting the names of all candidates on an official ballot and holding the primary on a registration day was warmly commended. Outlook. 68:396-9. June 15, 1901. The Rights of Man: a Study in Twentieth Century Problems. Lyman Abbott. What are the relations of what we call the political ma- chine to a democratic government? We are accustomed to say that we elect, that is, choose, our officers; but that is a mistake. Originally the fathers proposed that we should elect a certain number of Presiden- tial electors; these electors would gather together at Wash- ington or in their several States, and would determine who ,78 SELECTED ARTICLES should be our President. We think we have abolished the electoral college. No, we have substituted another electoral college. No one supposes that the Convention that met at Philadelphia nominated Mr. McKinley. We all knew that Mr. McKinley was selected before the Convention met. No one supposes that the Convention which gathered at Kan- sas City selected Mr. Bryan; we all knew that Mr. Bryan had been selected before the Convention met. A small body of gentlemen, more or less intelligent, patriotic, disinterest- ed if you please, the ablest, the most patriotic, the most dis- interested men in the country, for their personal or political character has nothing to do with the method of nomination met together and decided that Mr. McKinley was the man the Republican party should nominate for President. And another small body of men similarly selected Mr. Bryan for the Democratic candidate. The one body of men organized primaries, out of which grew the one Convention which came together ready to shout itself hoarse when Mr. McKinley was proposed; the other body of men organized primaries, out of which grew another great Convention which came together ready to shout itself hoarse when Mr. Bryan was proposed. And then the people went to the polls; if a voter did not like Mr. McKinley, he could vote for Mr. Bryan; if he did not like Mr. Bryan, he could vote for Mr. McKinley; and if he did not like either Mr. McKinley or Mr. Bryan, he could vote for Mr. Debs. In point of fact, in State and Na- tion, our officers are primarily selected for us by a small, self-appointed committee, and the people at the polls ex- ercise a veto power over their selection. This is partly a result of 'having an ignorant and an un- interested voting population. A great body of voters who either do not know or do not much care about political questions, will necessarily follow a leader or leaders, who- ever the leaders may be, and will do whatever the leaders tell them to do. Universal suffrage, if it is exercised by men who are either ignorant or indifferent respecting political prin- ciples and political duties, necessarily means government by an irresponsible oligarchy; though the majority have this DIRECT PRIMARIES 79 recourse; that they can, whenever they please, turn the oli- garchy out of office; whereupon a new and sometimes better oligarchy takes its place. This is called overturning the ma- chine. In short, the actual results of democratic institu- tions do not justify the very optimistic expectations of Jer- emy Bentham as Mr. Leslie Stephen has interpreted them to us in his admirable volumes on "The English Utilitarians:" "There are two primary principles: the 'self-preference' principle, in virtue of which every man always desires his own greatest happiness; and the 'greatest happiness' prin- ciple, in virtue of which 'the right and proper end' of gov- ernment is the 'greatest happiness to the greatest number.' The 'actual end of every government, again, is the greatest happiness of the governors.' Hence the whole problem is to produce a coincidence of the two ends, by securing an identi- ty of interest between governors and governed. To secure that we have only to identify the two classes, or to put the government in the hands of all. In a monarchy the ruler aims at the interest of one himself; in a 'limited monarchy' the aim is at the happiness of the king and the small privil- eged class; in a democracy the end is the right one the greatest happiness to the greatest number. . . .The people will naturally choose 'morally apt agents,' and men who wish to be chosen will desire truly to become 'morally apt,' for they can only recommend themselves by showing their desire to serve the general interest. 'All experience testifies to this theory.' though the evidence is 'too bulky' to be given. Oth- er proofs, however, may at once be rendered superfluous by appealing to 'the uninterrupted and most notorious experi- ence of the United States.' " * There are three answers to that very optimistic argument. The first is Senator Clark, of Montana; the second is Sen- ator Quay, of Pennsylvania; the third is Richard Croker, of New York. What we have to do is, in the first place, to diminish the ignorant, the uninterested and careless class of voters; in 80 SELECTED ARTICLES the second place, to increase the power of the interested and thoughtful class of voters. The first is to be accomplished not by a formal educational or property qualification, be- cause the formal property qualification is liable to develop a class which cares more for property than it does for funda- mental principles and because a formal educational qualifica- tion is always liable to be misused and misconstrued. Make it a rule that a man must read the Constitution of the United States in order to vote, and the judges of elections will be rigid in their interpretation of the intellectual qualifications of one voter, and lax in their interpretation of another. Add the provision that he must also understand the Constitution, and Democratic judges will be sure to think that a Republican voter does not understand, and Republican judges will be sure to think that a Democratic voter does not understand. What is needed is an automatically working ballot which will not only compel thought but also consideration and interest which will exclude not only the ignorant but also the careless voter. In Maryland to-day there is a proposal pending for the use of an Australian ballot without any party emblems upon it.* Simply the names of the men to be voted for are upon the ticket. The man who cannot read the name cannot vote the ticket, for he will not know for whom he is voting. The man who does not care enough about politics to inquire about the candidates cannot vote for he will have no emblem to guide him. A ticket so constructed that every man who votes it must know who the men are whose names are on the ticket, and what they represent, would automatic- ally exclude from the polls a large proportion of those who are careless voters, and practically all absolutely ignorant voters. This is the advantage of the Australian ballot, and I have no wish to see it supplemented by any such provision as that in New York State, which allows to the man who de- clares that he cannot read and write the right to take a po- litical friend with him to show him how to read and how to mark his ballot. The other remedy is to increase the power of the careful DIRECT PRIMARIES 8l and interested voters; and this is to be done by enabling them to nominate as well as to elect their officers. And this nomination of officers is to be brought about by what is known as the direct primary. It is idle to tell busy men that they ought to go to the primaries; idle because they are busy men; idle because poli- tics take all the time they can now give to it out of their business and personal affairs; idle because, when they get to the primary, they find a slate made up for them which they must vote, or vote in solitary grandeur against it. There may be exceptions, but, generally speaking, the pri- mary as at present conducted is a contrivance for enabling a few men to determine for whom the many may vote. The direct primary does away with such primaries and with the delegate conventions which grow out of them. On cer- tain conditions prescribed by the law, any person may an- nounce himself, or be announced, as a candidate for any office. On the day of registration every voter, when he regis- ters, drops a ballot in the box which indicates whom he elects to be the candidate of his party. The person receiving the greatest number of Republican votes becomes the Republican candidate, the person receiving the greatest number of Demo- cratic votes becomes the Democratic candidate; the same principle applies to the candidates of other parties, including any who choose to regard themselves as Independents. The best way to indicate both the method and its results is to give a concrete illustration of its operation in a single in- stance: "The direct method of voting at primaries was first adopt- ed by the Republican party in this county in 1897. It is called the Crawford County system, deriving its name from the county first to adopt it. Any member of the Republican party, by registering his name with the Republican County Committee, can become a candidate for the nomination for any office he may elect. All the members of the party, on a day stated, vote, as in elections, directly for the man of their choice. There are often as many as five or seven can- didates for the same nomination. The ones receiving the 82 SELECTED ARTICLES highest number of votes for the different offices are declared to be the nominees of the party. Under the delegate system an aspirant for political office secured the consent of the boss. Under the present system this would injure the can- didate's chances of success. Under the delegate system the consent of the boss was given in return for contributions as- sessed according to the emoluments of the respective offices. The money thus pooled was used in buying the votes of a sufficient number of the delegates to control the conven- tion. These delegates were chosen by about one-fifth the entire vote of the party. How vicious, corrupt, and oligar- chial this system had become is illustrated by an editorial in the Scranton (Pa.) 'Truth' of September 8, 1897, immediately after the last of the Conventions, reporting that the price of a delegate was in the neighborhood of two hundred dol- lars, and that something like twenty thousand dollars had been spent in controlling the Convention."* The writer from whose report this account is taken is au- thority for the statement that the nomination of Captain James Moir, as Mayor, by the direct primary system cost him $98.50, and he adds that "the greatest compliment that can be paid him is that he is the kind of man who could never have been nominated under the old system." In the primary election by which he was nominated 7> votes were cast. In South Carolina, out of 120,000 possible white voters, over 90,000 participated in a direct primary for Gov- ernor. These facts indicate the three advantages of the di- rect primary: first, the number of voters who participate in it; second, the removal of temptation to bribery by the re- moval of the necessity for it; third, the improvement in the character of candidates, who are willing to accept a nomina- tion spontaneously given by all the people, but are not willing to enter into competition for a nomination by a committee of professional politicians. The evils of democracy are mostly due to corruptions or adulterations of democracy; the general remedy for the evils of democracy is more democracy. Democracy does not mean merely universal suffrage; it means the universal exer- DIRECT PRIMARIES 83 cise of judgment, conscience, and common sense by every man in the community. And we have not given a fair trial to democracy until every member of the community is brought to exercise and act upon his own judgment, not merely to ratify and confirm the judgment of another. A ballot which automatically excludes the ignorant and in- different voter, and a direct primary which enables all voters who are not ignorant and indifferent to participate in the nomination of candidates, will not constitute a panacea nor exclude all corrupt or inefficient officials from the Republic; but, by decreasing the power of the ignorant and the indif- erent, and increasing the power of the intelligent and the interested, much can be done to overthrow the oligarchy which now too often wears the democratic mask, and pre- tends to be the servant while it is really the master or "boss" of the people. Outlook. 69:473-4. October 26, 1901. Direct Primaries in Boston. The brief experience of Boston with a new primary elec- tion system has been so satisfactory that at the Democratic State Convention, October 4, a plank was adopted for a great extension of the system. The situation in the Boston Senatorial districts had become particularly bad by reason of the trading of politicians in the different wards and by the manipulation of delegates. In the Legislature of 1901 a pe- tition was presented for the abolition of Senatorial conven- tions in the county in which Boston is situated which in- cluded nine out of the forty Senatorial Districts in the State and for the substitution of a system of primary elections within the respective parties. This petition had a Demo- cratic origin, but was put into law by a Republican Legis- lature and signed by a Republican Governor, so that there is no partisanship in the reform thus far. By this act the 84 SELECTED ARTICLES voters in their respective ward caucuses vote for nominees of their parties to go on the ticket to be voted for on the Australian ballot at the State election in November. After the caucuses the figures for all the wards in a Senatorial dis- trict are added, and the man who has the highest number of votes is the party nominee for State Senator. The party member of the State Committee is also elected by the sev- eral caucuses in the same way, there being one member for each Senatorial district. This system went into effect in Bos- ton this year, and it has proved so satisfactory that an effort is expected at the coming session of the Legislature to ex- tend it to the whole State. The Democratic plank on the point was as follows: "We favor the establishment by law, in place of separate party caucuses, of a single primary election, conducted under the regular election laws, at which all party candidates or delegates shall be chosen by means of the Australian ballot. Such a measure is the logical conclusion of a course of legis- lation tending steadily toward that end; it would greatly simplify and purify the operation of nominating machinery and increase public interest in party action." The Convention went so far in its indorsement of primary elections in place of delegate conventions that it demanded the application of the new system in all cases below the State Convention, and even favored the nomination of candi- dates on the State ticket by primary election when five per cent, of the voters desire that method. The practical success of the experiment this year in Boston is the essential fact in this matter, looking at it historically. The people have had their fill of delegate conventions. Outlook. 70:745. March 29, 1902. Gains and Losses for Direct Primaries. Although political reformers, quite as much as ministers, DIRECT PRIMARIES 85 complain that times of prosperity are times of moral apathy, some reforms are steadily making headway. This winter has witnessed in New York State an awakening on the sub- ject of direct primaries which few dared hope for a year ago. Not only have the anti-machine elements in both parties giv- en the reform increased support, but the Republican organ- izations in both Brooklyn and Manhattan have to a remark- able extent recognized the wisdom of permitting the rank and file of the party to nominate directly the party candi- dates. In Brooklyn the reform has obtained the qualified support of Lieutenant-Governor Woodruff, while in Manhat- tan the Republican Club of New York County last week adopted a resolution recommending "the adoption by law of a system of nominations for public office by direct vote." The discussion preceding the adoption of this resolution ex- posed the flagrant way in which delegate conventions are often manipulated so as to defeat the wishes of constitu- encies, and when the vote was taken only two votes were recorded in the negative. It is not expected that the Tam- many organization will play into the hands of the independ- ent Democrats by showing any such favor to popular nomin- ations, but the very fact that popular nominations would limit the power of the Tammany machine is a strong argu- ment in favor of the system with the Republican Legisla- ture. Along with these unexpected gains in New York must be recorded an only half-expected loss in Indiana. The direct primary law in that State was a compromise measure, which left the adoption of the direct primary system optional with the party committees, and allowed these committees to regulate the conduct of the primaries. At the Republican primary held in Indianapolis a fortnight ago the party ma- chine provided no booths in which the voters could mark their ballots in secret, and the open marking of ballots on the tables provided by the committee was attended by the pur- chase and sale of votes to an alarming extent. The abuses of this election, however, have fortunately not discredited even the locally direct primary system, since the advocates of the system have all along demanded a secret official ballot, 86 SELECTED ARTICLES which the experiment proves to be essential. The further fact that this Indianapolis primary brought to the polls four-fifths of all the Republican voters of the city demonstrated the pow- er of the direct primary to awaken civic interest. Outlook. 72:486-7. November i, 1902. Direct Nominations in Massachusetts. An illustration of the truth of the saying that the cure for the evils of democracy is more democracy seems to be afforded by the experience of Massachusetts with her trial of direct nominations as a substitute for political conven- tions. This year the second step in the experiment has been as conspicuously successful as the first step was last year. Attention all over the State has been drawn to the work- ing of the new law for direct nominations for candidates for Representatives in consequence of its evident success in the Republican caucuses on September 24. The essential section of the Luce law, as it is called, from the Somerville Representative who secured its passage through the Leg- islature, reads as follows: "Every nomination by a political party of a candidate for representative in the General Court, or any elective city office except a member of the school committee of Boston, to be voted for only in two or more wards of one city, shall be made in caucuses by direct plurality vote." Testimony to the success of the law comes from all parts of the State from Pittsfield, from Brockton, from Spring- field, from New Bedford while not a word of disapproval has been noticed from any city. This evident public satis- faction is but a repetition of the experience of 1901, fol- lowing the adoption of the same system for the Senatorial districts in Suffolk County, which includes the city of Bos- ton. The law of 1901, limited to territory in which the pop- ulation is very compact, in order to relieve the convention's DIRECT PRIMARIES 87 evils where they were greatest, applied to candidates for the State Senate and to members of the State committees of the several parties. So general was the satisfaction, upon its first trial, with the abolition of the Senatorial conventions, with their quarrelings and failures to represent the judg- ment of the people of the district, that at the last session of the Legislature various bills were introduced extending the system to the entire State, more or less. Mr. Luce's bill was the most elaborate. During the previous summer he had visited Wisconsin and Minnesota, studying their system of primary elections, and his bill was a sweeping document, applying to nearly everything but the State con- ventions, and working radical revolution in the caucus strength. But it was too radical and sweeping for the Leg- islature. Determined and wide opposition sprang up against it, and all that could be got through was the provision quoted above. But it has justified itself better than the average member expected. Still further, the second year's application of the law of 1901 for the Suffolk Senatorial districts has only strengthened the favorable impression made last year. In five of the nine districts contests existed for the nomination on the Republican ticket. Under the old system the result would not have been positively settled until the conventions of delegates elected by the several wards in the districts had done their business. This year, as soon as the total popular votes in the several caucuses had beeen added, the result was known. What appeals to the public in this reform is the quick settlement of the strife, the justice done to all parties, the prevention of political trickery in conventions, and the de- thronement of the professional politicians. Care is neces- sary to guard the caucuses. Members of one party must be prevented from voting in the caucuses of the other party, but that is a matter of detail. Such a provision is equally necessary under the old system, and does not lie against direct nominations exclusively. Already the success of this system has led to a demand for extension of the law, and it is seriously proposed to carry it so far as to dis- continue even the State Convention itself, with its historic 88 SELECTED ARTICLES associations. Doubtless that step will not be taken for years, but it is significant that it is contemplated. Outlook. 74:537. July 4, 1903. The Joint Primary Plan in Massachusetts. The plan of direct primaries, adopted in Massachusetts through the Luce Joint Caucus Bill, which has just been signed by the Governor, differs in several respects from the laws having the same general purpose in view adopted in other States and hitherto described in these columns. The law takes effect in Boston this fall, but in other cities and towns its acceptance is to be voted upon at the next State election. All caucuses of all parties are to be held at the same time and place. A would-be candidate must present a nomination paper signed by at least five voters, and in the case of higher officers by a number of voters equivalent to five for each ward. The vote at the primary will be in all, or almost all, respects exactly like that at the election. It will be in charge of the paid election officers who have charge of elections, the two leading parties being equally represented. The voter must audibly state with which party he wishes to vote. This provision has been criticised as opposed to the principles of the secret ballot, but a primary is not an election, and it is not unfair to ask the man who wishes to take part in a party nomination to accept, for the time being at least, party membership. The law pro- vides that voters on one party shall not within a year share in nominating the candidates of another party. This is designed to prevent the flooding of a primary as a political trick by one party with votes really belonging to another party. The voter who affiliates himself with one party at the first pri- mary he attends must continue to act with that party in the primaries until he decides to go to the election com- missioners and in writing change his party affiliation, and even then he must wait ninety days before the change takes effect. This law seems to be an honest and sensible attempt DIRECT PRIMARIES 89 to apply the principle of direct primaries. Its actual work- ing out will be watched with great interest by the public at large. Outlook. 75:237. October 3, 1903. More Victories for Direct Primaries. Louisiana has now been added to the list of Southern States in which all candidates for State offices in the dom- inant party are chosen directly by the people at the pri- maries instead of by delegates to State conventions. The machine, of course, and the interests which supply it with the sinews of war, resisted the change, but the popular demand for it was too strong to be resisted. Ten years ago it used to be remarked very frequently that "it is impos- sible to get voters to attend the primaries." To-day in the South it is only the primaries that the voters do attend. The regular elections are foregone conclusions, and rel- atively few voters go to the polls. It is only through the direct primaries that popular government at the Soutr remains a reality. This fact perhaps accounts for the more rapid growth of the reform at the South than at the North. In the North also, however, the reform continues to make rapid headway the growth of the boss system having re- vealed the necessity of direct popular nominations to keep the control of the government out of the hands of a small class representing private interests. In Boston last week there was the first trial of the new Massachusetts law providing that the primaries of both parties be held at the same time and place, and that voters select the candidates for the offices to be filled instead of merely selecting dele- gates to perform this important task. Though the officers to be named at last week's election were unimportant local ones, the vote was fifty-six per cent, of the total at the last 9 SELECTED ARTICLES presidential election. The only serious criticism brought against the new system was aimed at a provision requiring voters to state with what party they voted at the last election. A few voters refused to answer this inquiry and left the polls without voting, while many others answered it under protest. This provision is of course not an essen- tial part of the direct primary system, and has in fact been opposed by nearly all the advocates of the system. It was incorporated in the Massachusetts law in order to meet the objection that, unless the voters are required to state their party allegiance, the members of one party may take part in the primaries of the other in order to dictate weak nominations. Experience shows that very few men are willing to lose a vote in the primaries of their own party in order to take part in the primaries of the other. If the law requires that the primaries of both parties be held at the same time and place and that each voter shall cast but a single ballot, it insures that each party shall make its nominations with little if any interference from corruptible elements in the other party. The success of the trial of the new law in Boston gives promise that the direct primary system will be made mandatory in the other cities of the State. Outlook. 79:225-9. January 28, 1905. The Development of Self-Government: Some Lessons of the Late Election. Charles J. Bonaparte. "No man is free who is not master of himself"; no voter is free who is not, in truth and not in mere semblance, master of his vote; no people, whatever the name or form of its government, is free unless its rulers are those, and those only, it would have as rulers. If its action be hampered, its wishes be overridden, in their choice, whether this con- DIRECT PRIMARIES 9! strain! be the work of a foreign conqueror, a legal autocrat or oligarchy, or an extra-legal ruler or ruling body, a "boss"' or a "ring," a "leader," a "machine," or an "organization," then, in all these cases alike, the result is the same, the people is not free; a community thus governed has not self- government. Of course it may have a good government, much better than it could give itself. Freedom to a baby means death; to a youth it means often the wreck of all present or future usefulness and happiness; even a young man, left too soon "Lord of himself, that heritage of woe!" may have every reason to echo the bitter words of the poet. So a people, as suggested by Mr. Mill, may be in a state of "nonage" socially and politically, which for a time at least would make self-government in its case no less "a heritage of woe" than for the untrained, unformed individ- ual. Such a people may well thank Heaven if it find, as Mr. Mill says, "an Akbar or a Charlemagne," that is to say, a just, wise, brave, unselfish "boss" (whether he call him- self King, Emperor, Dictator, or something else matters little), or an enlightened and public-spirited "ring" or "ma- chine" (whose members may or may not be enrolled in a Golden Book), to guide its infant steps in national life; but the American Nation is not such a people, and our political leaders and organizations fulfill no such self-sac- rificing function. We claim to be free, and, in so far as we are not what we claim to be, the impairment of our liberty works, not for good, but for grave and shameful evil, to tarnish our fair fame as a nation, to debase our politics, to degrade our public men and corrupt individual, no less than popular, morals, as well as to waste our material resources, lessen general wealth and comfort, and clog civilization. Where Americans most thoroughly and most truly govern them- selves, they are best governed; where they are, or may now seem to be, too lazy or too luxurious or too much en- grossed by merely personal interests to give time and thought to their own government, those who govern them, 2 SELECTED ARTICLES govern them ill, and the worse, the more completely the people abdicate its duties and its sovereignty. Among us the development of self-government means the growth of righteousness: what hope for such growth may be gleaned from the results of our recent elections? I. The Result in Missouri. Political Weakness of Iniquity. In 1900, McKinley polled 314,092 votes in Missouri; Bry- an 351,922. Flory, the Republican candidate for Governor, obtained 3,813 more votes than the former; Dockery, his Democratic opponent, 1,877 less than the latter. When the last Presidential nominations were made, the State was con- sidered by most politicians of both parties safely Demo- cratic; but the candidacy of Joseph W. Folk obliged the Republicans to deal with a very interesting problem of political strategy. Mr. Folk was a public prosecutor who had gained much credit by vigorously prosecuting certain notorious criminals of great political influence in his own party organization. He had done, it is true, no more than his plain duty, the duty he was chosen, sworn, and paid to do; but he had done it in earnest and not merely made a show of doing it, had really tried to bring "boodlers" and "grafters" to actual punish- ment; and such conduct would seem to have been sufficiently noteworthy in an officer intrusted with some share in the administration of justice in Missouri to gain him at once the admiration and confidence of the public and the bitter hatred of men who prey upon the public. The latter had tried hard and had failed to prevent his nomination; they were no less ready to do all in their power to elect his competitor, should he have one, for there is no politics in systematic and professional iniquity; and it was "up to" the Republican politicians to say whether he should have a competitor. I have called this a question of "political strategy," for it undoubtedly seemed such, and such only, to those who decided it; that it appeared to their minds in any wise a question of morals I think altogether unlikely. Would it pay their party better to bid for the aid of the "Boodle DIRECT PRIMARIES 93 Ring" by nominating a candidate against Folk, or to assure his election by making no nomination for Governor, and hope for reward in the increased vote which popular ap- proval and gratitude might bring to the National ticket in Missouri and elsewhere? Such was the problem; and they chose the former course. What they have said were their reasons need not detain us; what these were in fact can be a matter of conjecture only, but of conjecture founded on a wide experience. They probably believed the State's electoral vote lost anyhow, but thought the partisan excitement of a Presidential campaign would keep its supporters in line for the whole ticket, and the money and intrigues of Folk's Democratic enemies, con- centrated in hostility to him alone, might draw enough Dem- ocratic votes to his competitor to give them a Republican Governor as a consolation prize. Let us note the outcome. Roosevelt obtained 321,449 votes, or 7,357 more than McKinley, while Parker polled only 296,312, or 55,610 less than Bryan results in themselves striking and significant, but due to general causes, evidently weakened rather than fortified in their action by the local circumstances. Wai- bridge for Governor polled 296,552 votes, 24,917 less than Roosevelt, and 21,352 less than Flory in 1900; while Folk received 326,652 votes, or 30,320 more than Parker, and was elected by 30,100 plurality. The open enmity of the "bood- lers" far outweighed, therefore, as a source of political strength, any aid they could render: so far from saving the Governorship from a political wreck through a tacit alliance with Folk's enemies, the eminently "practical" pol- iticians who guided the course of the Missouri Republicans exposed their party to a mortifying discomfiture in the con- test for this one office at the moment of an otherwise com- plete and brilliant victory. For one in public life here, the notorious hatred of men constitutes a handicap always perilous and usually fatal political asset; avowed or even suspected support from such men constitutes a handicap always perilous and usually fatal to political success. 4 SELECTED ARTICLES II. The Result in Wisconsin. Political Weakness of Wealth. Wisconsin was formerly a doubtful State, but the issue of honest money seems to have made it safely Republican As it became such, however, it became likewise the scene of a prolonged and bitter contest within the Republican party, a contest which gradually assumed the shape, so familiar in the history of ancient Greece or mediaeval Italy, of a strugle between an established oligarchy and a "demagogue," suspected and accused by his adversaries of seeking to become a "tyrant." I place in quotation- marks these two question-begging terms, to show that I use them in their original and not in their modern or ethical sense. Governor La Follette has led a popular revolt in his party against its "machine," and his enemies say he aims to become an omnipotent "boss," controlling a per- fected "machine" of his own; had he lived in the days and land of Pisistratus and Solon, he would have called him- self a "demagogue," and been charged with meditating "tyranny." The merits of this controversy need not detain us, but it has two features worthy of a moment's attention. The in- fluences controlling the Republican organization and against which La Follette has contended were, or are generally believed to have been, wielded by certain very wealthy men and corporations, so that his fight has been, at least in popular belief, that of a man against money-bags. Moreover, the money-bags, or those who held and on occasion opened them took the view, to which capital has been always and everywhere prone, in politics, that "all is for the best in this best of all possible worlds," or, at all events, if there be anything amiss, whoever may try to set this aright will do more harm than good; they are "stand-patters," and have left to their enemy the role of a professed reformer of abuses. These two characteristics, or perhaps I should say these two aspects of the same characteristic, of the contest in DIRECT PRIMARIES 95 Wisconsin, make its result interesting. In 1904 Roosevelt obtained there 14,110 more votes than McKinley had in 1900, Parker polled 35,127 less than Bryan received four years before: the State voted on National issues much as was to have been expected in view of its votes in the past and of the simultaneous votes of other states. The real interest of the election, however, lay in the strenuous effort made to defeat La Follette through a separate Republican nom- ination, and, to judge of the results of this effort, it will be more instructive to compare the Republican and Demo- cratic votes for Governor with those of two years previ- ously. In 1902 Mr. La Follette had polled 193,417 votes as a candidate for his present office, his Democratic com- petitor, Mr. Rose, polling 145,818; in 1904 the possibility of victory increased the Democratic vote to 175,301, but La Follette's also rose to 227,253, so that, with all the "bar'ls" tapped to defeat him, his plurality over Mr. Peck was actr ually 4,353 more than it had been over Mr. Rose. Many persons have feared, many still fear, lest the Amer- ican people be one day enslaved by its own money; I do not share these fears. I believe that, in general, for each vote bought two or more votes are lost through its pur- chase, and the more, the more undisguised the barter; that greater cause for concern exists lest mere enmity to pro- ductive and beneficent wealth, or the affectation of such en- mity, may prove a profitable stock in trade to dangerous and noxious counterfeits of statesmen. The two victories of McKinley have, indeed, gone far to remove any reason- able apprehension of the latter peril; as to the former, it can hardly seem serious to one who knows and reflects upon the recent result in Wisconsin. III. Results in Minnesota and Massachusetts, in Illinois and New York. Decay of Party Discipline. A patriot, typical of a class still too common among us, said once that his ballot would be cast for the devil were his Satanic Majesty the regular nominee of his party. As 96 SELECTED ARTICLES I have said, such voters are yet too numerous for the public good, but their number is plainly dwindling; political man- agers are learning by an experience sad for them that the odor of brimstone costs votes to a candidate, however "reg- ular." Partly through the educational effects of the Aus- tralian ballot, partly through the softening of political prej- udice resulting from frequent participation in non-partisan movements such as those for Civil Service Reform and good city government, partly from the mere growth of the community in enlightenment and common sense, more and more of our citizens each year think for themselves and vote as they think, and less and less ask their respective party organizations to think for them and to tell them how to vote. Some striking illustrations of this truth are furnished by the late elections. In Massachusetts and in Minnesota the Republican can- didates for Governor were somehow unpopular; for some reasons, good or bad, or partly good and partly bad, the people didn't like either of them. Perhaps, in each case, the candidate ought to have been liked better than he was; but, however this may have been, he wasn't; and there is little doubt, indeed no doubt at all, that these facts were well known to the Republican managers in both States. They thought, however, that they had safe margins: McKin- ley had carried Minnesota in 1900 by 77,560 plurality, Van Sant, for Governor, two years later by 56,487; Massachusetts had gone Republican in 1900 by 81,869, and in 1903 elected the very Governor just defeated by 35,984. Conditions might not, indeed have justified what Mr. Croker called a "yaller dog" ticket in either State; but such a ticket was not thought of; and the statesmen probably believed that, with the candidates offered and in a Presidential year, malcon- tents might be prudently asked, "Well! what are you going to do about it?" What they did about it was to give Mr. Roosevelt almost unprecedented majorities, but to leave both the unappreci- ated gubernatorial candidates to the pleasures of private life. In Minnesota the Republican National ticket received DIRECT PRIMARIES 97 votes and 161,464 plurality, while Mr. Dunn's vote was only 141,847, and he was defeated by 6,250 plurality, his competitor polling 148,097 votes to Parker's 55,187. Gov- ernor Bates was no less unlucky; he received 1,003 less votes than he had polled the year before and 59,141 less than Roosevelt, while Mr. Douglas had 70,970 more votes than Gaston in 1903, and 68,924 more than Parker. These results may be fruitfully compared with those in a State where the Republican candidate for Governor was no less heartily approved by the people than that for President: Illinois seems to have been such a State. Roose- velt obtained there 34,760 more votes than McKinley in 1900, while Deneen for Governor polled 54,282 more than Yates in the same year. It is true that Roosevelt's plurality was a little larger than Deneen's (305,039 against 299,149), but the overwhelming success of the latter shows none the less conclusively why candidates unlike him met elsewhere a fate so widely different. It may be fair to here consider the experience of New York, for this seems, in some measure, a qualifying illus- tration, although I think it such in semblance only. In 1902 Mr. Coler, the Democratic candidate for Governor, obtained 22,988 votes less than Bryan had polled in 1900, a loss for which the decreased interest of a non-Presidential year more than fully accounts; Mr. Odell's vote fell off 156,842 from that of McKinley sufficient proof, it was generally believed, with apparent reason, of the candidate's marked unpopularity. In 1904 Mr. Higgins was expected to suffer from Mr. Odell's indorsement, and seemingly he did: his vote was 46,269 less than Roosevelt's, 8,728 less than Mc- Kinley's four years previously; moreover, his adversary's ex- ceeded Parker's by 48,723 and Bryan's by 54,318; neverthe- less, so thorough and decisive was the discredit of the entire Democratic ticket that Higgins received no less than 80,560 plurality, a heavy falling off from Roosevelt's 175,552 and even from McKinley's 143,606, but nearly ten times what Odell obtained in 1902. This result shows to my mind the exercise of, to say the 98 SELECTED ARTICLES least, no less discrimination by the people of New York than by the people of Massachusetts and of Minnesota; Herrick had not the good fortune of Douglas and Johnson, not because the voters cast their ballots more blindly in New York, but because, whatever may have been the weak- ness of his competitor, it was in large measure offset by his own: the people weighed the merits and demerits of both candidates, and would not be forced to choose one merely because in the other, or the other's principal backer, there was some room for improvement. Who Are the People? Since the time of the Three Tailors of Tooley Street, and, indeed, much longer, this has been matter of dispute in politics. When we say "the people of Massachusetts" and "the people of Missouri" wished Roosevelt for President, and yet Folk in the one case, and Douglas in the other, for Governor, we are confronted by the undeniable facts that only a comparatively small minority of the voters in either State can be shown to have entertained both these wishes. So far as we can judge from the figures, about one cit- izen in thirteen of those who wanted Roosevelt, also wanted Folk, about one in eleven of those who wanted Folk didn't want Parker. In Massachusetts the proportions were, it is true, a good deal larger: over one-fifth of Roosevelt's sup- porters wouldn't support Bates; considerably more than one-fourth of Douglas's wouldn't support Parker. Neverthe- less, even in Massachusetts, if we add the ballots cast for both Roosevelt and Bates to those cast for both Parker and Douglas, we obtain an overwhelming majority of the entire vote polled, so that what we have described as "the will of the people" appears to be the will of but a few among the individuals composing the people. To understand this we must remember that in the human body politic, as in the human body physical, development of will power is a specialized function. The former has al- ways its hewers of wood and drawers of water, to do as DIRECT PRIMARIES 99 they are bid, like the hands and feet, the arms and legs; locomotor ataxia is no less a malady in politics than in physiology. Other classes are its vital automata, working, as do the heart and lungs, at their several treadmills, with no thought beyond their daily tasks and daily needs, yet on whose continued labor depends its continued life. The hunger for gain of still others among its members makes them, like the stomach, in seeming blindly selfish and greedy, but, under proper control, none the less indispensable to its health; like a man, a community languishes when it loses its appetite. Finally, it has the equivalent of a brain, the seat of its political consciousness and the source of its political will, an organ which, in politics, thinks and decides for its whole mass. The brain is always a small portion of the organism, even in man only two or three percent., but its proportionate size grows steadily as we ascend the scale of physical being. If one man may say truthfully, or with any approach to truth, "L'Etat, c'est moi," the State of which he speaks has, politically, but the rudimentary brain of a fish or a rep- tile. Now, this language, or its equivalent in colloquial American, may be used with quite as much justification by one of our "bosses" as by the Grand Roi; when "the old man" is "the whole thing" in our public life; when what he says "goes" in legislation and administration; when his smile makes and his frown unmakes our legal rulers, it is a matter of detail whether he wear a crown or a plug hat, drink champagne or bad whisky, receive the homage of his courtiers in a palace or "jolly" the "boys" in a corner groggery; in the one case no less than in the other, he is the people's political brain; for political purposes, he is "the people." Our late elections show clearly that he and his like are not the American people now, and at least tend to show, so far as we may forecast the future, that they will grow less and less the people as the people shall grow stronger and richer. For some among us our National greatness and our National wealth are causes of anxiety, even of alarm, 100 SELECTED ARTICLES nor would I treat such fears lightly; but the lesson of last November is a lesson of hope; on the whole, the people then chose for itself, and, on the whole, it chose wisely and well. Outlook. 79:611. March u, 1905. The Primary Law of North Dakota. The movement toward the nomination of public officers by direct vote of the people and the abolition of the so- called convention system has received a stimulus by the pas- sage of a primary law in North Dakota which has just been signed by Governor Sarles, and by the agitation in favor of primary election by the Legislatures of South Dakota and other Western States. North Dakota's primary law is the result of a compromise between the radical and con- servative political forces of the State, the former favoring a sweeping provision which would include all State officers, and the latter a law which would exempt from its operation the Governor and most of the leading State officers. The compromise law covers city and county officers and mem- bers of the legislature, but exempts judges and other State officers. To satisfy the radical forces, however, the conserv- ative members of the Legislature consented to a provision by which delegates to the State convention will be elected by direct vote, thus doing away with county conventions. The North Dakota primary is a notable contrast to the new Wis- consin law which was approved by the people at the last election and will go into effect this fall. The Wisconsin law, which is largely the result of Senator Robert M. La Follette's labors, is perhaps the most sweeping primary law in the United States. It covers all State officers from the Gov- ernor down, except judges and the State Superintendent of Schools. A unique feature of the law is that it provides for DIRECT PRIMARIES 101 the nomination of candidates for United States Senator by direct vote of the people. The supposition is that the can- didate nominated by the people will be elected by the Legisla- ture. This is about as near an approach to popular election of United States Senators as can be made without the pas- sage of an amendment to the United States Constitution. The Legislature of Minnesota, which was one of the first States to adopt a primary law, is in the midst of a vigorous debate as to the advisability of extending the law to all State officers. The Minnesota system, which is very sim- ilar to the one adopted by North Dakota, has worked in a fairly satisfactory manner, and there is a strong sentiment in favor of extending it to cover the Governor, Attorney- General, Justices of the Supreme Court, and other State officers now nominated by State conventions. A unique plan is under consideration and will probably be adopted. This plan provides for the holding of State conventions and for the submission of the three candidates for each office receiving the largest votes to the people to be voted upon at the primary election held in September. This plan will prevent a multiplicity of candidates and will provide for the adoption of party platforms by representative conventions. World's Work. 6:3715-6. August, 1903. The Progress of the "Direct Primary Reform." Direct primary elections have at length reached Massa- chusetts a political reform born in Kansas and tried in as new a State as Oregon before being publicly agitated in the older communities. The principle for which a Dem- ocratic candidate in Michigan and a Republican candidate in Wisconsin made the last campaign for the governorship was accepted in Massachusetts by both great parties with an enthusiasm that emphasized the purely popular quality of the system. 102 SELECTED ARTICLES The direct primary means simply the replacing of nom- inating conventions for party candidates by a system of choosing candidates in a regular election by the ordinary voters. Indeed, so closely was election day procedure copied in the famous Hennepin County system in Minnesota that citizens on registering as voters received a bunch of party ballots pinned together. Each voter retired to a booth, marked his choice of candidates on his own party ballot and then deposited the whole set in the ballot-box. Nomina- tions in this way differed very little from elections. When the system had been tried it proved unsatisfactory, and Michigan remodeled the law, requiring each voter to name his party, and permitting him then to take only his party ballot. This is the procedure now commanded by the Mas- sachusetts law. The essence of the reform is that the direct primaries be mandatory and under legal supervision. In the South, where many States have direct primaries, the machinery of the system is not legally controlled, but in party hands. Mr. Ernst Meyer, who published an exhaustive study of the sub- ject in "Direct Primary Legislation," quotes a party rule in South Carolina, which has shut out Negro voters, thus: "Every Negro applying for membership in a Democratic club, or offering to vote in a Democratic primary election, must produce a written statement of ten reputable white men who shall swear that they know of their own knowl- edge that the applicant or voter cast his ballot for General Hampton in 1876 and has voted the Democratic ticket con- tinuously ever since." Pennsylvania and Ohio, and other Northern States, have direct primaries not unlike the Southern ones. In Indiana, a voter who cannot declare that he voted the ticket of his chosen party in the last election is not allowed to vote in the primary. But in New Jersey, Maryland, Minnesota, and now in Massachusetts, the system follows in general the revised Hennepin County plan, though the laws of no two States are quite alike. The people of Wisconsin and Mich- DIRECT PRIMARIES 103 igan undoubtedly desire direct primaries, but the State Senate in each case blocks the way. The flaw in the system is that a compact faction, even a base one, can outvote elements that do not combine. The worst elements of both parties are said to have combined to nominate the notorious Mayor Ames, of Minneapolis. In South Carolina last summer the four anti-Tillman can- didates for the Senate received nearly twice as many votes as the two Tillman candidates, yet the two Tillman men went on the party ticket as nominees: their faction had centred its forces; the other had not. Yet in Minnesota, which has tried the system longer than any other State for Oregon's direct primary law was speedily declared un- constitutional the system is declared to be working well. The workings of the Massachusetts law will be watched with especial interest, since under it a voter is permitted to declare allegiance to a national party in one primary and enroll if he wishes with an opposing citizen's party in the primary for municipal nominations. Municipal Affairs. 2:177-81. June, 1898. Reform of the Primary. George L. Record. The Convention System An Evil. We have seen this system in complete working order in some of our states to such an extent that it is fairly within the truth to state that the people have no choice whatever in the selection of their party candidates. That this should be so is natural, and, on reflection, the reason for it immedi- ately appears. A convention is made up of delegates who are selected at the primaries. These primaries are under the control of political parties and are held at times and places selected by the party leaders. The time of holding the pri- maries is usually inconvenient, and the place is usually both inconvenient and obscure. The actual voting is surrounded 104 SELECTED ARTICLES by no safeguards. The delegate usually has not committed himself to any candidate. The average voter, therefore, is confronted by this condition: He seldom knows where and when his primary is to be held; if he does know, his experi- ence tells him that, if he goes to that primary, he will find on the ticket, especially in cities, a list of men, nearly all of whom are comparatively unknown to him; further, he has no knowledge of the candidate for whom the delegate will cast his vote in the convention. Here is the root of the evil. Here is the explanation of the apathy of the average voter in reference to primaries. Here is the true and philosophical explanation of wh}' the average voter will not attend the pri- mary. Broadly speaking, the reason is that at such primary he performs no useful function. He expresses no real choice, and he influences in no way the selection of the candidate of his party. The average man has a definite and positive preference as to who shall be the candidate of his party for a given office. This is true in the city and in the country. The convention system prevents the average voter from ex- pressing this choice or preference, and thus destroys all in- terest in the primary. Consider our experience relative to the election of a president. It was the intention of the founders of our gov- ernment that the people should vote for electors in the dif- ferent states. These electors were to come together at a stated time and select as president of the United States the man, who, in their judgment, was best fitted for the position. These electors were really delegates to a convention, and were to use their judgment and exercise their discretion. But as we all know, this system soon fell into disuse, and now the elector exercises no discretion or preference of his own. Sup- pose the system had continued as it was planned. Sup- pose in the year 1896 we had been called on in the different states to vote for electors who were not pledged in any way as to whom they should select as president, but were at lib- erty to select a democrat, or a republican, or a populist, or a prohibitionist, or some man who had not publicly been mentioned as a candidate. How much interest would be DIRECT PRIMARIES 10$ taken in such an election? What percentage of the voters would attend the polls on election day? The answer is plain. Such a system would destroy all interest in the election. Very few would even go to the polls* and general apathy would exist. That is the trouble with the primary as it exists to- day. The selection of a delegate is neither interesting, use- ful or profitable. It involves the taking of pains and the in- curring of trouble for no tangible purpose. In the city, the primary is usually held in the back part of a saloon for an hour in the evening and on insufficient notice. A tired man will not leave his home to attend this primary for the pur- pose of selecting from several men, more or less obscure, one or two delegates whose action at a convention to be held at a distant day he cannot forecast. This is the rule of human experience and is perfectly natural. After the delegates are chosen, between the time of their selection and the convention, they are subjected to all kinds of improper influence for and against certain candidates. The average delegate hopes that his -personal fortunes will be affected by the selection of this or that man, and the ac- tual selection of candidates under these conditions is the re- sult of motives among which that of expected personal ad- vantage is predominant. Direct Vote at the Primary. What, then, is the remedy? It is the abolution of the con- vention system, root and branch, and the substitution there- for of a system providing for the selection of the candidates of political parties by direct voting at primary elections, called at a convenient time and place, and conducted by pub- lic officials. As a result of many years of study of the ex- isting political conditions and the causes thereof, I have worked out a primary system which, I believe, will establish conditions of political life and political action which this generation has never known, and which would be fatal to the boss and the machine. The system, in substance, is as follows: I. All conventions of delegates are abolished and nomi- I0 6 SELECTED ARTICLES nations are made by direct vote of the people, a plurality ruling. 2. The first registry day is placed four or five weeks be- fore election day, and is made a primary or nominating day for all parties. The registry board at the several places of registry acts not only as a board of registry, as now, but also as a primary or nominating election board, for all po- litical parties and during the whole day, exactly as at a regu- lar election. 3. Only official ballots can be used, which are made up as follows: Any fifty voters belonging to any political party can sign a certificate requesting the city clerk, the county clerk, or the secretary of state, as the case may be, to print upon the official primary ballot of said party the name of the person named in said certificates as the candidate of their party for the office or offices named in the certificate. The effect of this is that all shades of opinion will be represented on the primary ticket. 4. The city clerk or the county clerk, as the case may be prints a separate official ballot for each party, or a blanket ballot, is preferred. This ballot contains all the names, al- phabetically arranged, which have been filed with the said clerks or the secretary of state by the certificates above stated. 5. The city or county clerk hires suitable rooms for the registry and primary election in each precinct, precisely as at present, and causes the booths now in use on election day to be set up there, and distributes to the registry or nomin- ating election board the official ballots, made up and printed as above stated. 6. The voter on registry day comes to his precinct reg- istry place, registers, announces his party affiliation, receives from the board an official ballot of his political party, enters the booth, makes a mark opposite the names of the candi- dates whom he favors for each office for which a candidate is to be voted for, and then deposits this ballot in the box exactly as at a regular election. If preferred, the ballots of DIRECT PRIMARIES 107 all parties could be given to each voter, and he could be al- lowed to vote then without declaring his party affiliation. 7. At the close of the day, the registry and election board counts all the ballots, and sends a certificate to the city or county clerk, stating the number of votes cast for each candidate on the ballot of each party. 8. The city or county clerk, or secretary of state, from these returns ascertains which candidate has the plurality on the ticket of each party. The candidate having the plu- rality of all the votes on each party ticket is declared to be the nominee of that party for the office in question, and his name is printed by the city or county clerk on the official ballot of that party which is prepared for the regular elec- tion. Its Advantages. The advantages of this plan are manifold and obvious. There is the widest publicity concerning the time and place of holding the primaries. At present, few know when or where primaries are held, and whenever a bitter factional fight is on in any party, the dominant faction calls the pri- maries at an inopportune time and at inconvenient places, so as to prevent a large vote. As a matter of fact, few voters know where or when their party primary is to be held, but everybody knows where and when to register. Under the proposed system, the act of participating in a primary would consume but little more time than the act of registering itself. Secondly, interest in the primaries would be vastly great- er than formerly. For the reasons previously stated, few now care to attend the primaries, because they can only vote for a delegate to a convention, whose action at such conven- tion is uncertain, and often exactly contrary to the prefer- ence of the voter at the primary. Under the proposed plan, every man can make known directly what persons he pre- fers to have as the candidates of his party, at a convenient time and place, and without extra trouble, the act of regis- 108 SELECTED ARTICLES try and voting being practically identical. This would re- sult in an exceedingly large vote at the primary. Thirdly, this system would result in the selection of bet- ter men as candidates for office, or rather the selection of can- didates under better conditions. The present system practic- ally disfranchises the mass of the voters of a party, and con- fines the selection of candidates to professional politicians and bosses, who select as candidates the men that can be depended upon to work for private or partisan ends. The plan suggested throws open the privilege of selecting candi- dates to the whole people, and the successful candidate owes nothing to any machine or set of politicians. In a conven- tion, the average delegate votes largely as his personal in- terests dictate. He hopes to benefit personally. At a pri- mary participated in by the bulk of the voters of a party, the average voter would cast his vote secretly in a booth, and usually this vote would necessarily be cast without any hope of private or personal advantage. A convention is actuated by the hope of personal advantage. At a primary where the direct vote prevails, the average voter, in the nature of things, can have no personal motive in casting his vote, and his ac- tion at such primary is necessarily unselfish and for the best interests of his party, as he sees it. The mass can hope for no office or political reward. Then again, under the present system, the voter, on elec- tion day, is often compelled to choose between voting for an unfit man or for a nominee of an opposing party. No other alternative exists. The plan presented above sets apart a day for the selection of candidates, and the single question of fitness, separated from all other questions, is then passed upon by the voters for each party, under condi- tions which attract the mass of such voters and secure the selection of candidates by them, uninfluenced by motives of personal or private advantage. Further, the change in the conditions surrounding public officials should not be forgotten. To-day, if an official elect- ed by the people desires re-election, he must have the sup- port of the machine at the primary. To obtain this support DIRECT PRIMARIES 109 he must obey the machine, and the requirements of the ma- chine are usually incompatible with the public interest. If the system advocated prevailed, the public official would ca- ter to the people, not to the machine; that is, he would so act as to strengthen his hold upon the mass of the voters. Gunton's Magazine. 14: 155-7. March, 1898. Reform of Primaries. It must not be imagined that this protective legislation, however complete, will either suppress bossism or guaran- tee complete integrity in management of primaries. All that law can do is to furnish the fullest opportunity for free- dom and integrity, and ample means for punishing dishon- esty; but when all is done that can be, primaries, like regular elections, will be no purer than the -majority of the people who attend and manage them. After all, the integrity and wisdom of party primaries must depend upon the integrity and patriotism of the voters. Those who are sanguine enough to imagine that statute law can create political purity and abolish bossism are doomed to disappointment. The boss does not exercise his influence over political organiza- tions by virtue of any law. He acquires that influence and leadership by the exercise of some personal quality. It may be by the high quality of political leadership, or by the low quality of political rewards, but it is always by some per- sonal quality that appeals to and commands the confidence of those who are sufficiently interested in politics to partici- pate actively in the primaries. It is a peculiar fact, in connection with this subject that the greater part of those who are most interested and from the purest motives in reform of primaries (and who are in the greatest danger of unwittingly legislating away political free- dom in order to suppress political abuses), are the very peo- ple who seldom or never attend primaries at all. They are 1 10 SELECTED ARTICLES very largely people who belong to the so-called "better ele- ment;" who will not associate with the "rabble," and they look upon primaries as somewhat beneath their dignity. From various motives not unworthy motives they avoid the caucuses and primaries, leave the management of this in- itiatory part of political action to others, and then complain if it does not go to their liking. This continues until things go from bad to worse and ultimate in an outburst of indigna- tion and a bolting crusade. Often this has the effect of de- stroying the influence of party organizations upon important public issues, and defeats the very object most desired by handing the government over to the very people whom every sentiment of political integrity and social decency demands should be kept out of public office. Whatever safeguards of law may be thrown around the primaries, nothing can guarantee honest action and wise leadership except the constant and active attendance of those who believe in honest politics and wise public policy. No re- form will be permanent until these people attend and take part in the primaries, with the same interest that they dis- play in finding fault after corrupt practices have been devel- oped. The bosses cannot be dispossessed of their leadership by any legislative enactment. If they are to be displaced at all it must be by substituting superior leadership, by bringing to the front men of larger views, more popular personality and more patriotic impulses. In other words, the present bosses can be deprived of the power they now exercise only by sub- stituting better and stronger leaders. If stronger leaders cannot be found, or will not come to the front, if men with loftier ideas of pure politics and public policy insist that they are too good to participate in the primaries, then the leadership that can lead on the plane of those who do attend the primaries will remain in control, and will continue to dictate the candidates and policies of the great political par- ties in state and nation; and no amount of periodic denunci- ation or legal enactments can prevent them from so doing. DIRECT PRIMARIES III Reform of the primaries is needed. Legislation safe- guarding every phase of our political machinery should be enacted. Every opportunity that now exists for fraud or co- ercion, which the law can reach, should be stopped; but all this will avail nothing toward purifying the source of Ameri- can politics unless the people who believe in pure politics actively participate in the primaries and the leaders capable of leading on a higher plane of political integrity and patri- otism come to the front as active workers, earn the confi- dence of the voters, and prove their capacity for leadership. Political confidence is not handed around like a new hat. It grows, and only the person can have it who earns it by demonstrating his capacity to lead, not by austere dictation or supercilious faultfinding, but by doing the things that are to be done and proving by active devotion to public inter- ests that he possesses the qualities of statesmanship and is entitled to the faith of the citizens. Those only, who, by their acts command followers and' inspire the faith of the voters, can become leaders. If we do not have leaders, we are sure to have bosses, or political chaos. Any attempt to legislate the boss out of existence can result only in failure or despotism. It is higher leadership, more patriotism and less snobbery, that is really needed to purify the primaries, rather than a disfranchising type of legislation. Annals of the American Academy. 20: 616-26. November, 1902. Test of the Minnesota Primary Election System. Frank M. Anderson. An outline of the Minnesota law and its consideration un- der these divisions: the size and distribution of the vote; whether party nominations were actually made by members of the party; the quality of the men who offered themselves as candidates for party nominations; the quality of the sue- 112 SELECTED ARTICLES cessful candidates; the kind of methods employed in the cam- paign prior to the day of voting; the effect of the primary system upon party organization, methods and subsequent success; the attitude of the people towards the system after its trial. Annals of the American Academy. 20:640-3. November, 1902. County Primary Elections. An account of an election in Bucks County, Pa., in which the convention system forms a means of keeping the control of party machinery in the hands of the worst ele- ments of the County. Annals of the American Academy. 25: 203-17. November, 1905. Municipal Nomination Reform. Horace E. Deming. A plea for the direct nomination system, so modified that candidates are chosen for the political policies they stand for rather than for their affiliation with a political organization. Arena. 28:585-95. December, 1902. Theory and Practice of the New Primary Law. William Hemstreet. MR. Hemstreet advocates a law for compulsory attend- ance at the primaries, believing that the old-fashioned con- vention system may be made the best if all the people will turn out and delegate the right man at the primaries. DIRECT PRIMARIES 113 Arena. 29:71-5. January, 1903. Primary Election Reform. Edward Insley. Good definitions of primaries, direct primaries and open primaries are found in this article. The author states six points that he considers essential to a good primary law. Arena. 30: 295-301. September, 1903. Caucus or King. William Hemstreet. A plea for a larger attendance at the caucus. Atlantic Monthly. 79:450-67. April, 1897. The Nominating System. E. L. Godkin. A history of the methods of nominations with an exposi- tion of the evils of them. Forum. 33:92-102. March, 1902. Primary Election Movement. Albert Watkins. A survey of the gains in primary election reform in the various states with especial notice of the Minnesota system. Gunton's Magazine. 20:323-32. April, 1901. Doom of the Dictator. The Editor. An argument that the death of the dictator is essential to the life of the democracy because he exercises his power in these two directions: first, by dictating nominations through II 4 SELECTED ARTICLES the coercive use of patronage; second, by controlling the nomination of candidates to the legislature, he can dictate legislation. Gunton's Magazine. 26:23-8. January, 1904. Caucus Diseases. William Hemstreet. On the belief that the root of political distress is the dis- like of the caucus, the author pleads for a reform that will insure the attendance of the better class of citizens. Nineteenth Century. 4:695-712. October, 1878. The Caucus and its Consequences. Edward D. J. Wilson. An argument against adopting the caucus in England with many references to its evils as found in America. North American Review. 137:257-69. September, 1883. Facts about the Caucus and the Primary. George Walton Green. A detailed account of corrupt practices at caucuses and primaries in New York, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Chicago, Cincinnati and many other places. Review of Reviews. 17:583-9. May, 1898. The Movement for Better Primaries. William H. Hotchkiss. A discussion under three heads: first, its causes; second, DIRECT PRIMARIES 115 its expression in various states; and third, the New York pri- mary law. Review of Reviews. 24:465-8. October, 1901. The Minnesota Primary Election Law. A. L. Mearkle. An outline of the primary election law as first tried in Minneapolis in September, 1900, mentioning its original fea- tures, describing its operation and commenting on its bene- ficial and evil effects. Review of Reviews. 31:337-41. March, 1905. Political Movements in the Northwest. Charles Baldwin Cheney. The article sums up the practical working of the primary system in Minnesota and Wisconsin. World To-Day. 8: 290-7. March, 1905. Colorado Election Frauds. Arthur Chapman. A disclosure of the frauds in Colorado's election of 1904 and an account of the efforts to convict the "Big Mitt" men, followed by statements by Governor Adams and Ex- Governor Peabody. SELECTED ARTICLES ON DIRECT PRIMARIES [REPRINTS] SUPPLEMENT MINNEAPOLIS THE H. W. WILSON COMPANY 1905 Milwaukee Sentinel, September 28, 1904. F. M. Barnard says Primary Election Law not a Success. "The primary election law has been tried and found want- ing in Minnesota," said Frank M. Barnard, assistant sec- retary and treasurer of the Kettle River Quarries company of Minneapolis, yesterday. "Even its most ardent support- ers agree that it needs a great deal of amendment to make it useful. In theory, the law is all right, but it has failed absolutely in practice. "We have just had one of the evidences of its failure. The notorious 'Doc Ames' who is under an indictment on a charge of corruption, after being released from the pen- itentiary on a technicality, made a run for the nomination for congress and stood third when the votes were counted. He had 6,000 votes, while the two above him received 11,000 and 8,000, respectively. Two other candidates received less. It would have taken but little change in the votes to have given Ames the majority. Such a thing would never be possible under the convention system, for although such a man might have a certain following, the better ele- ment would always be able to combine against him. "Another incident came in the nomination of a man named Johnson, who ran for park commissioner, as a joke. He said he did it only to see what would happen, and was nominated without making an effort, merely because his name was Johnson and he lived in a Swedish district. "As a whole, the method is a most expensive one for the candidates, for they must stand two campaigns. Two years ago the campaigns were modest, but now the nomination campaigns require as much money as the election campaigns. This will keep out all but office seekers who are willing to spend the money." 120 SELECTED ARTICLES Milwaukee Sentinel, October 24, 1904. M. M. Riley Cites Faults of Primary Election Law. That the incorporation of the proposed primary election law into the statutes of Wisconsin would enlarge the field of the professional politician has been demonstrated by Attorney M. M. Riley, whose letter to the Sentinel on the subject appears below. Mr. Riley has made a computation, based on the provisions of the law and the number of election precincts in the state, and finds that if all parties that are entitled to places on the official primary ballot avail themselves of their right to nominate candidates, there will be 22,908 nomination papers filed. All this is contingent upon there being no contest within the parties for any nomination. Where contests are instituted the number of nomination papers will be multiplied. As the law provides that the man who circulates the nom- ination paper must make oath that he personally knows the signers of the paper, it follows that a new field of activity will be opened for the man who makes politics a business in campaign years and looks for profit to the men who are seeking office. The figures furnished by Mr. Riley are in- teresting in as much as they give for the first time an approximate estimate of the number of men who would find employment in this new occupation. Should the circu- lators of petitions have the foresight to organize themselves into a union, the result might be startling. Mr. Riley's letter follows: "The proposed primary election law to be submitted to our citizens for approval at the ensuing election is a vicious measure for these reasons: "i. It make the exercise of the elective franchise more costly and increases the burdens of taxation levied for elec- tion purposes. It is estimated that the cost of a general election is approximately $150,000 or $80 per precinct. Should the proposed bill be approved, the expense of holding a general election would be more than doubled to every town- DIRECT PRIMARIES 121 ship, village and city within the state, which would have to be provided for by addition taxation. "2. It surrounds the elective franchise with complicated machinery and makes the nomination of party candidates more expensive and cumbersome. "4. It takes from the people the right to freely select those candidates they deem best qualified to serve them in public office and makes the soliciting of public office by pol- iticians a business by itself. "5. It incorporates, recognizes and makes provision and place for the employment of the local boss and political heeler as a necessary adjunct to nomination for public office. "The extent to which the proposed law gives life and em- ployment to the precinct heeler and ward boss is only to be arrived at by resorting to figures showing the numbers necessary to employ to secure a nomination. "There are seven county officers to be elected in each county viz.: Clerk of courts, county clerk, register of deeds, sheriff, district attorney, coroner, and county treasurer; so that the candidates of each party would be obliged to cir- culate in Milwaukee county 168 separate nomination papers, if there be no contests for the nomination of any office within the party ranks. Every candidate contesting the nomina- tion for office adds twenty-four to the number. "There are to-day seven (7) different political parties entitled to a place on the official ballot, and if each of them place, as they are entitled to, a ticket in the field, it would require the circulation of 1,176 nomination papers. "There are 1,863 election precincts in the state, and eleven congressmen to be elected, each of whom must circulate nomination papers in one-tenth of the precincts in his dis- trict. Nomination paper for all congressmen requiring one- tenth of the whole, or the circulation of 187 separate papers by each party. Should all parties entitled to a place on the ballot make nominations the number of nomination papers necessary to be circulated would be 1,309. "There are seven county officers to be elected in each 122 SELECTED ARTICLES of the seventy-one counties in the state, or 497 in all, each of whom must circulate petitions. It would, therefore, be necessary to circulate 3,379 in five precincts in each county, making 9,895 in all. "State officers for each party require the circulation of forty-eight petitions, 336 in all. There are 100 assembly- men to be elected, requiring the circulation of 312 nomina- tion papers by the candidates of each party, or 2,184 in all. Thirty-three senators, require the circulation of a like num- ber. "The total number of nomination papers required to be circulated under the law for state, county, congressional, and legislative officers being 22,908, without a contest for nomina- tion to any office of the several offices within the party ranks. "The contests for places within the various parties would largely increase this number if all parties now entitled to a place upon the ballot continued to put a ticket in the field. The practical result would, however, be the suppression of all minority parties and leave the majority party a clear field, without opposition, which is evidently the purpose of the proposed law. "The proposed law apparently includes, in addition to the foregoing, nominations for city officers, but it is not pos- sible to ascertain the number of nomination papers required. In the city of Milwaukee, however, it would require the cir- culation of 1,728 nomination papers for city and ward officers alone, when there are no contests within the party. "6. It is our own boast that under our representative form of government opportunity is open to all alike and that there is no position to which the humblest and lowest citizen may not aspire. We point with pride to Lincoln, Garfield, and others in our history who have risen from pov- erty and lowly surroundings to the highest office within our people's gift. But if the proposed primary election bill become a law, while in theory public offices may be open to all alike, they will in fact be confined to those with the longest purses or the strongest 'pull/ DIRECT PRIMARIES 123 "7. The proposed law is destructive of the old time idea of the fathers of the republic that 'office should seek the man and not the man the office.' But it is noticeable that men who secure a nomination and election to public office these days are generally around where the office can find them, ready and willing to sacrifice themselves on the altar of public duty. "The proposed law is also directly in opposition to the constitution of the United States and is evidently intended to render nugatory its provisions as to the selection of sen- ators." M. M. Riley. Milwaukee, Oct. 23. Milwaukee Sentinel. November 3, 1904. W. M. Spooner Points Out Danger of Coercian in Primary Law. Special dispatch to the Sentinel. Phillips, Wis., Nov. 2. "Everyone in this audience knows that under the present caucus system, with all its faults, no man need know how another man votes. Everyone knows that no man need be constrained by fear of losing his position, if working for a corporation, by voting as his conscience dictates. Everyone knows that if 100 men (we will say railroad employes) go to the caucus booth, fifty voting one way, for the candidate the railroad may want nominated, and fifty for the candidate the railroad does not want nominated, that railroad com- pany need never know which fifty voted for and which fifty voted against the candidate they wanted nominated. But under this La Follette primary election law no em- ploye, nor any other laboring man, can have any voice in the selection of men whose names are to be placed on the primary election ballot without signing his name to a nom- ination paper and thus rendering himself liable to persecu- tion and the loss of his position. 124 SELECTED ARTICLES "If railroad and other employes desire to place themselves politically in the absolute control of their employers, then let them pass this La Follette primary election law and that desire will have been accomplished." Milwaukee Sentinel. March 22, 1905. Primary Law Is Denounced. For the first time since the new primary election law went into effect it was given a trial in the state yesterday, and reports that were received last night from cities that had experience with the substitute for caucuses stated that it had given no general satisfaction. Complaint was heard everywhere that the primaries had failed to arouse any special interest and that the expense had been altogether too high and in many cases, where there were no contests, needless. In Wauwatosa the expense of holding the re- publican primary was greater than that of an election. In some places in the state, Cumberland for instance, it cost as r r> t ch as $2 to cast each vote. Wauwatosa voters expressed themselves as sorely disappointed over the operation of the law. In New Richmond there was not a single contest, but the cumbersome operation had to be gone through just the same. Another complaint was the complicated system required by the new law. In some cities many voters refused to go through the necessary red tape, and insisted on inserting names not included in the nominations. Among the cities which held primaries were Appleton, Racine, Janesville, Oshkosh, Sheboygan, Watertown, La Crosse, Cumberland, New Richmond. One reason for the lack of contests was the unwillingness of business men to make a canvass for signers to nomina- tion papers. In most cases, it appears, there is great delay DIRECT PRIMARIES 125 in completing the count because of the mistakes made by voters under the complicated system. Milwaukee Sentinel. March 23, 1905. Primary Election in Wisconsin. The first test of the Wisconsin primary election law was made Tuesday last. While it was not a full test, it cannot be denied that it was a fair one and in so far as an opinion may be based on this experiment the law has earned and is already receiving severe condemnation. The law did not, as it was asserted it would, call out a full vote of the people who were represented to be anxious to participate in the nomination of candidates for office by a direct vote, at a primary election. In Wauwatosa but 175 votes were cast in the four wards, and twenty-eight primary election officers were required to see that the 175 voters did not neglect any of the formalities incident to the ceremonious occasion. In Cumberland it cost $2 to supervise the casting of each vote at the primaries. At Madison, Racine, Appleton, New Richmond, La Crosse, and, in fact, every city in the state where a primary election was held, dissatisfaction was gen- erally expressed with the working of the new law, partic- ular objection being made to the cost of the experiment. Milwaukee Sentinel. March 23, 1905. Primary Law too Expensive. Special Dispatch to the Sentinel. Marinette, Wis., March 22. The effect of the primary law also was unfortunate in its 126 SELECTED ARTICLES revival of "dirty politics." There was more mud slinging between certain candidates for the republican nomination than there has been in years before under the old system. All candidates agree that many important changes must be made in the law, as it costs more than the gross revenues of minor offices to secure the nominations. Special Dispatch to the Sentinel. Kenosha, Wis., March 22. Kenosha had its first test of the primary election law yes- terday, and there is a general call for its repeal to-day. Less than one-sixth of a normal vote of the city was cast, and the officials in charge spent most of the day on the mass of tangled figures. As a result of the workings of the law the republicans have no candidates in four wards of the city and no candidate for the office of city assessor. The dem- ocrats are equally handicapped, no petitions having been filed in some of the democratic wards. The primary cost the city more than $300. Special Dispatch to the Sentinel. Baraboo, Wis., March 22. Little interest was taken in the primary election for city officers yesterday. Out of 1,600 voters in this city about 240 were cast, costing the city about $1.25 for each vote. It is the universal opinion of nine-tenths of the voters that the law ought to be repealed. Milwaukee Sentinel. March 24, 1905. Press Comments on Primary Election. Special Dispatch to the Sentinel. Oshkosh, Wis., March 23. General feeling with regard to the operation of the primary election law here is one of pointed dissatisfaction. Few people are speaking in its defense and candidates and voters DIRECT PRIMARIES 127 alike denounce it. Caucuses and conventions have been held without expense to the city, but the primary cost the munic- ipality something in the neighborhaad of $1,000. This makes the cost of each of the 4,000 votes cast 25 cents. Further, it is urged that business this spring must undergo the disturbance of two elections instead of one. The cam- paign for the primary on both the republican and the dem- ocratic side was as hard fought as a regular election. One of the democratic candidates is believed to have expended $j,ooo in the effort to be nominated. House to house can- vasses were made. The city was flooded with heralds and dodgers, and paid workers congregated on the dead line at the polls. The obliteration of party lines and its effect on party organization is one of the worst features of the result that the republican party will have to face. Although Roosevelt carried the city by over 2,000, a much greater number of votes was cast for the two democratic candidates for mayor than for the two republicans. This is explained by the state- ment that the republicans deserted their party champions for the reason that the party platform of the democrats was in evidence and the business element distrusted the stand of the republicans. The moral effect of the showing causes apprehension among the republican party managers, who fear that election day may bring defeat to their candidates. A variance of opinion between the state attorney general and the city attorney caused confusion and may lead to litigation. The attorney general ruled that names written in should not count. City Attorney Stewart held that they should, and the canvassing board follows the local authority. The result is that a number of candidates will be placed on the official ballot who, according to the attorney general, have no standing. A large number of ward offices and one justiceship nom- ination should be vacant under the ruling of the attorney general. The canvassing board has filled these nominations from "scattering votes." This will result in test lawsuits. One of the allegations made in reference to the election 128 SELECTED ARTICLES is that the large number of votes received by one of the democratic candidates for office of mayor indicates that the republicans attempted to execute a coup on the democratic party by forcing the nomination of the weaker candidate. The charge is also made that "dirty politics" was indulged in and some of the candidates are in a bad frame of mind because of the attacks made upon them by opponents in their own party. Axes are being sharpened that will be wielded with effect on the first Tuesday in April. Special Dispatch to the Sentinel, Fond Du Lac, Wis., March 23- The strongest advocates of the primary election law in this city have little to say for it since they have had a prac- tical opportunity to demonstrate its merits. Nearly all admit that it is a clumsy and expensive political machine without material excuse for its existence. At a primary election on Tuesday the only contest on the city tickets was for the nomination of two justices of the peace on the republican ticket, there being three candidates. The party did not have any candidates for constables, and the democrats renominated the present justices and con- stables without opposition. In the sixteen wards, where candi- dates for twenty-four aldermen and sixteen supervisors were to be nominated, there were just six contests. In all the other thirty-four cases there was but a single candidate on each side, making sixty-eight, and they could all have been nominated by acclamation within a few minutes without the intervention of a primary election. Under the new sys- tem there were over 100 members of inspecting boards and clerks on duty from 6 o'clock in the morning until 9 o'clock in the evening, after which the few votes had to be counted. In the wards where the few contests were a good vote was polled, but in the other wards it was small. The expense of the general primary election is as large as that of the usual general election, and it will amount to at least $200 for each contest that was made for nomina- DIRECT PRIMARIES 129 tions. In some of the wards one or the other of the parties had no candidates for alderman or supervisors. The voters attempted when they gathered to supply the deficiency by writing in the names of candidates on the ballots, but the inspectors refused to count the votes thus cast on the ground that they do not conform to the law as interpreted by the attorney general of the state. An attempt will be made in some of these instances to have the deficiency supplied when election time comes, but it is doubtful if names pro- posed after the primary election will be allowed to go on the official ballot. Altogether the thing seems to be a pretty mess, and citizens do not know what to do to re- cover the rights to vote for such candidates as they desire to support. Special Dispatch to the Sentinel. Racine, Wis., March 23. Democrats have won their point in regard to a defect in the primary election law and City Clerk Schroff will act con- trary to the opinion of the attorney general. When the primaries were about to be held there were eight blanks on the democratic ticket for aldermen and supervisors and several on the social democratic ticket. The city committee proposed to fill in the blanks, but was told that this could not legally be done. The tickets went before the voters blank, so far as the democratic ticket was concerned, but many were filled in by the voters. The democrats claimed that the city clerk must place the names of candidates re- ceiving the largest number of votes on the regular ticket at the April election and threatened mandamus proceedings to compel the clerk to insert the names. City Attorney Walker advised that the tickets be filled out with the names. It is said that the law is full of defects and if followed out would deprive the voter of his constitutional rights. 130 SELECTED ARTICLES Milwaukee Sentinel. April i, 1905. Michigan-Wisconsin Debate. Special Dispatch to the Sentinel. Madison, Wis., March 31. Michigan's representatives attacked the primary system on the ground that it is too complicated for the purpose of nominating officers and that it is impracticable to hold a primary whenever it is necessary to elect officers. They claimed that the system restricts the vote and cited instances tending to prove this statement to be correct. Reference was made to the experiment in Minnesota and the complaint that has been made there in regard to it together with the demand from many quarters in that state to return to the old system. They maintained that the system delegates the power of government too much to the masses that are not fit for the control of it ind that it was never the intention of the founders of the government to delegate the power of the government entirely to the people. Another argu- ment used was that in the primary election the members of the weak party with little fight for nominations may vote on the ticket of the party and nominate a weak man against their own party candidate. The expense question was brought out as another point against the system and the Michigan men contended that a poor man, however worthy, could not afford to run for office as he could not afford to pay the expenses brought on by the system. Speech of R. M. La Follette on Primary Election. (Delivered before the Michigan University, March 12, 1898.) But stop and think what such a primary election law would do for political parties as well as for the public service. It would destroy the political machine because it would abolish the caucus and the convention by the easy manip- ulation of which the machine controls in politics. It would appeal to every member of the party to partic- ipate in the primary election because it would insure every member in the party an equal share in the selection of its candidates and in shaping its policy. DIRECT PRIMARIES 131 It will quicken and invigorate as with new life the rapidly expiring interest of every citizen in the nominations of his party. If we will guarantee to the citizen the same orderly and decent surroundings, the same certainty of casting his ballot unmolested and having it honestly canvassed, and re- turned at a primary election, as the law now affords him at the general election, then he will take the same interest in attending upon the one as upon the other. Aye, if we assure to every citizen a voice in nominating the candidates of his party, we shall inspire in him a patriotic interest in both the primary election and the general election enduring be- yond the heat and fervor of the campaign. It would greatly strengthen party organization. There would be no reason for bolting because each member of the party would know that the candidates had been fairly nom- inated and were true representatives of his party principles. He would know that they were not the creatures of the ma- chine, or of a convention-combination, or born of the barrel. It would greatly improve the character of the nominations. Men would be nominated because they stood for something; because they had right convictions, and the power and the courage to declare and defend them; because they had proven their wisdom, their statesmanship, their patriotism, their faithfulness in the service of the people. The man of no opinions, or of extreme opinions could never win the con- fidence and support of the great body of conservative men in his party. The boss, the heeler or the corruptionist would not offer himself as a candidate for nomination at a primary election under the Australian ballot. It would bring into public life the best talent of the times. No man could be nominated to office except there were weightier reasons, than that he was a millionaire, or in the service of the corporations, or "wanted by the organization." Men are to-day mainly selected for office through the agency of the caucus and convention, not for their distinguished abilities, but because they can be depended upon to vote on the "right side." If the legislators who elected United States senators were nominated by the direct vote of the 132 SELECTED ARTICLES people, many men, now in the United States Senate, and many men who aspire to go there, would find themselves obliged to serve their corporations as private citizens. It would elevate the public service. Why is it that public servants are so indifferent to public opinion to-day? Why is it that platform pledges are fast becoming with us here in Wisconsin as "false as dicers' oaths"? Why is it that the nominees of the caucus and the convention scorn the good opinion of the rank and file of their party? It is be- cause they are wholly independent of the rank and file the great majority of their party! Between the nominee of the convention and the great body of his party stands the political machine. It nominates the candidate nominates him often times against the will of a majority of his party. It is his master; he its humble servant. The servant obeys his master. If the official owes his nomination to the ma- chine, and he desires to continue in office or to advance, he will obey the machine and ignore his party and the public. If he owes his nomination to the direct vote of the people, cast at a primary election, under the Australian ballot, he will do the people's service. With the nominations of all candidates absolutely in the control of the people, under a system that gives every mem- ber of a party equal voice in the making of that nomination, the public official who desires a renomination will not dare to seek it, if he has served the machine and the lobby and betrayed the public trust; if he has violated the pledges of his party and swapped its declared principles to special interests for special favors. But under a primary election the public official who has kept faith with the public can appeal to that public for its approval with confidence. He will then have every incentive to keep his official record clean. If he have no loftier stan- dard than mere personal success he will nevertheless so administer his office as to earn the commendation, "Well done, thou good and faithful servant." The nomination of all their candidates by the direct vote DIRECT PRIMARIES 133 ot the people is the spirit, the very life of representative gov- ernment. It is plain, simple, practical. It is their right. It will come. Whoever seeks to thwart or defeat it is an enemy of representative government. Let him beware! Whoever would control as the agent of the machine will encounter lasting defeat. Let him beware! The country is awakening, the people are aroused. They will have their own. The machine may obstruct, misdirected reform may temporize, but "be of good cheer, strengthen thine heart," the will. of the people shall prevail. I appeal to you, young men and old, plain citizens and pol- iticians. You are confronted with a great responsibility. In this contest, you must either stand for representative govern- ment or against it. The fight is on. It will continue to victory. There will be no halt and no compromise. Speech by Hon. James G. Monahan against the Primary Election Law. (Delivered before the Committee on Privileges and Elec- tions of the Senate and Assembly of the Wisconsin Legisla- ture, February 12, 1901.) I am opposed to this bill First. Because the provision which makes it necessary for a candidate before he can get his name printed on the pri- mary ballot, to secure two per cent, of the voters of his party to sign a petition asking him to be a candidate and those voters must reside in five precincts or townships in case of a county office, and twelve counties if for a state office, im- poses upon a candidate an unnecessary expense, and will deter many modest men, with but little money, from becom- ing candidates; increases the activity of the boodler and the professional politician, lengthens the arm of every boss and increases the strength of every machine in the state. Second. It will practically deprive the farmer vote from 134 SELECTED ARTICLES any voice in either county or state affairs. It is useless to sneer at this proposition as some do. Sneering doesn't meet the argument. When one class of voters resides within a few minute's walk of the polls, while the other must come by teams, from one to eight miles, the handicap is too great, the conditions too unequal to contend that the farmer vote can protect itself, or candidates for state offices residing in rural communities could possibly have any show of success. Should this bill become a law, Milwaukee and the other large cities would dominate the state. In county affairs Madison and Stoughton would control in Dane county; Janesville and Beloit in Rock; Darlington and Shullsburg in Lafayette. The date fixed for this primary election is the first Tues- day in September, when the farmers are busily engaged in threshing and cutting corn. These- men must come from one to eight miles to vote. What percentage of them would leave their work to do so? The bill makes primary election day a legal holiday; also registration day in the cities. This will bring out a full vote in the cities, and as a result, candidates from the country districts will invariably be defeated. This argument is met by saying that the coun- try vote will combine against the cities. This can't be done unless a combination is made among the candidates and people outside the cities; and when this is done, you have simply built up a machine and installed some additional bosses. Third. "Unnecessary taxation is unjust taxation." And this bill will impose a tax approximating $150,000 upon the people of this state. A general election costs even more than this, and men who have examined this bill carefully say it will prove even more expensive than a general election. In presidential years we will have two primary elections, one in April to nominate presidential electors and elect delegates to the various national conventions; the other in September to nominate state and county officers. This will put the law in operation twice, for which the people will be DIRECT PRIMARIES 135 taxed in a sum approximating $300,000 for something which now does not cost them a cent. Fourth. Under the provisions of this bill we abandon the system that the majority shall rule for one that minorities may govern. For example, suppose in one of the counties four candi- dates entered the field for the nomination of assemblyman under the provisions of this bill. Each of the first three re- ceives 300 votes, while the fourth receives 305 votes. He would be the nominee, notwithstanding the fact that he re- ceived but 305 votes out of a total of 1,205 cast. Under the present convention system, when there are several candidates, delegates can vote for their first choice, and if it is found he can not be nominated, they can vote for their second choice. Delegates are always anxious to nominate a "strong tick- et" one that will win at the polls. Hence they inquire closely into the character, record and ability of the candi- date before supporting him, and this is one of the reasons why we have so few dishonest or incompetent officials. Under the proposed new plan, the voter has no opportunity to converse with anyone outside of his voting precinct, as to the character or ability of the candidate; no opportunity to express a second choice in case his first choice cannot win. And the chances are even, that some political hustler who has money to spend, time to work, and a disposition to do both, will defeat men for the nomination who are in every way better qualified, better men, and would make better officials. Fifth. This bill takes away from the people the right to make the platform, and gives the power to the candidates for state officers, state senators and members of the assem- bly, and the various parties will have a candidates' instead of a people's platform. This is getting near to the people with a vengeance. The bill provides that "The candidates for the various state offices for senate and assembly nom- inated by each political party shall meet in the assembly chamber at 12 o'clock noon on the second Wednesday after 136 SELECTED ARTICLES the date of the primary election and formulate a platform for their party." To us it seems that this provision is one of the lamest of this wholly bad bill. The idea that the people are going to surrender a declaration of their principles to a hundred and twenty-five candidates whose sole object is to be elected, and who would make a platform look like a crazy quilt if necessary to further that end, is a proposition too ridiculous for serious consideration. Sixth. The provisions of the bill make it impossible to consider location or nationality in the nomination of the tickets. Under the convention system these matters are al- ways given due consideration, and usually with satisfactory results. The last republican state ticket was not only well distributed geographically, but representatives of American, German, Scandinavian and Irish races were nominated. Del- egates discuss these matters when they meet at conventions. It is part of their business. But under this proposed system how can the voter- who has no opportunity to discuss affairs with anyone outside his precinct find out where a candidate lives or to what nationality he belongs. If anything of the kind is attempted, will it not be necessary to have a boss or machine in every precinct to tell the people how to vote? The answer to this is that the voters could tell from the names on the ballots what the nationality of the candidate was. In some instances this is true, but I submit, if any man could tell from the name that Harvey was an American, Hicks an Irishman, or Davison a Norwegian. The Irish and Germans, residing as they do largely in cities, might be able, in a measure, to protect themselves, but the Norwegian is a farmer, and what show would he have? Seventh. The bill in principle is a long step toward the abandonment of representative government, bequeathed to us by the founders of this government, for the vagaries of populism. DIRECT PRIMARIES 137 Speech by Hon. M. G. Jeffris against Primary Election Law. (Delivered before the Senate and Assembly Committees on Privileges and Elections of the Legislature of Wisconsin, February 19, 1901.) That there is some room for improvement in the caucus, convention, and Republican political system now in vogue any fair-minded man will concede, but it must come from their improvement and not their destruction. It discourages proper political activity where it is essen- tial for the benefit and welfare of the state and nation, and forces politics upon the people where they should be entirely excluded. In state and national matters it weakens proper politics, and in municipal matters where they have no place interjects them. If one should be willing to swallow his modesty and after taking the steps necessary to get a nomination paper and file his paper and his declaration that he will qualify and act if elected, but which steps and which declaration really mean, and will be so understood, that it is his earnest desire to fill a state office, and that he proposes to make a fight to gratify his desire, he is qualified to start in the race. He must be either one wheel of a machine or be prepared to make a fight of his life if he has any hopes of success. Forty days before the primary election, that is sometime in July, and having his machinery in operation months, or possibly years, before, he must file a nomination paper which shall contain the names of at least two per cent, of the voters of his party distributed over at least twelve counties of the state. These voters must be proven to be such, with their residence fixed, by affidavit. Of course he has retained a fairly good lawyer to look over his papers and see that they comply with the requirements of the 39 sections of this bill. If he cannot afford to go to all this trouble he should keep out of the race because before the law the rich and poor stand equal. Aside from the candidate for the office of governor, com- paratively little will be known of the others beyond their own 138 SELECTED ARTICLES immediate surroundings, and they must proceed to make themselves known if they desire to attain the first place in the wild race for office. If this bill operates as claimed by its advocates there will be many candidates. Men who are financially able will run up their lightning rod in hopes that in the jumble to follow in the free-for-all they will stand just a chance of being struck. A candidate is selected who receives a small plurality, but, who, maybe, receives less than a tenth of the vote cast. A man who would have no chance whatever if the party of the state through its representatives had selected its candidates. Would it follow that he is the best man, the most available candidate, or that he had any particular qualification for the place not at all. Who is he bound to be? He will be the one who has best organized his forces one who has been spending his time in politics and has the most grafters following in his train one who can get the most newspapers to blow his horn.. Will it be said that this is all true of the convention system? It is not true to any such great extent at least. Under this law great power is given to railroad corpo- rations. They can organize enough voters swiftly and se- cretly to control every nomination. An individual would be powerless as against them. Under our present system they have never dared to take hand in political matters. Where nominations were made on bare pluralities their means of organization are so great that they would be able to dictate. Corruption in one county under this law would affect the entire state so far as nomination of state officers are concerned. Would we get the most desirable timber for candidates? How many men who are not purely professional politicians would undertake to get a nomination? A serious objection to this bill lies in the fact that for a man to obtain any kind of an office he must almost of necessity go out begging for it. You and I can pick out men both in the Senate and Assembly who, if they had to go around and get up a nom- ination paper and then work for a nomination, as provided DIRECT PRIMARIES 139 for in this bill, they would never have been in either house of our legislature. And these men are among your most val- uable members. The promoters of this bill say that it will do away with machines. That is its purpose so as to give more power to the people. It follows that if it does this it will at least invite contest for office and not withstanding the fact that a Republican state party, a Republican congressional, sen- atorial, and assembly district may, with practical unanimity, desire to send back a faithful Republican, it cannot do so without going through all the machinery of this bill. Should your party desire to return one of you gentlemen to the legislature in acknowledgement of your services here, still the same process would have to be gone through to secure your nomination and get your name upon the official ballot as a representative of your party, as though you came before the people for the first time. Keep constantly before you that we are considering a par- ticular bill, a bill that has not had the approval of the people or of any convention. Under it to vote at a primary election one must swear that he belongs to a certain party and in tends to vote with that party at the next election. What becomes of the young man who has never voted and who cannot swear that he belongs to any party. How about the great floating vote which each party appeals to on prin- ciples? They are both disfranchised because they cannot swear that they belong to a political party, although they may intend to vote with it in the future. In my judgment such a bill is unconstitutional. This would be an election. The constitution fixes the qualifications of electors. A dec- laration that he now belongs or intends to belong in the future to some political party is not one of the constitutional qualifications. This legislature cannot add or take from the constitution. Certainly the gentlemen will not claim that the Republican convention obligated the Republican legisla- tors to pass a law which conflicts with the state constitution. We are considering a bill which I believe contains one of the most vicious principles that can well be presented to any legislative body. If the legislature of Wisconsin is to 140 SELECTED ARTICLES do anything upon the subject upon which I am about to speak, it should do exactly and diametrically the opposite thing to that provided in this bill. This bill provides that it shall apply to all elections except those for judicial, village, township or school district offices of special elections. This bill then includes city, county, and general municipal election. There is a concensus of opinion by all of the best thinkers upon the subject of municipal government that party politics in so far as municipal government is concerned, should be entirely abrogated. In this bill there is at least one provision that can only be properly characterized as absurd. It provides that after the nominations the candidates and certain committeemen shall promulgate a platform. The committeemen are in some instances appointed by the candidates. These committeemen are compelled to assemble at their own expense. There is not the excitement of a convention to draw them. They come to approve a platform made by candidates. A majority lays down a platform. How about the minority which disapproves of a majority declaration? We are told not to worry about such trifles. The caucus and convention system grew and are main- tained not for the primary purpose of selecting men to fill offices. They had their origin, and their maintenance is for the primary purpose of selecting and promulgating principles and of then selecting men to carry those principles into effect. Under this bill principles are relegated to the rear. Principles are of no importance. Under this bill the vital question before the people all the time is who shall fill the offices? Not what shall a party stand for, not what are its ideals, but who shall draw the salary? And the bill is so constructed that the men who hold hardest and fastest to the ideals, and the men who believe in the establishment and maintenance of principles, are sent to the background, while the hustling, pestiferous demagogue who is brazen faced enough to chase up and down the state for votes, is the one who shall administer our affairs. The man whose sole motive is to get an office, declares for us after he has got his nomination what we stand for. 14 DAY USE RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED LOAN DEPT. RENEWALS ONLY TEL NO. 642-3405 This book is due on the last date stamped below, or on the date to which renewed. Renewed books are subject to immediate recall. LD 2lA-40m-2,'69 (J6057slO)476 A-32 General Library University of California Berkeley YC 09339 210080 '