The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1897-08-29
THE PRIMARY QUESTION AGAIN.


The Lynchburg News reproduces a re-
cent article from The Times on me sub
jet of senatorial primary with the
following comment:
The News and its Richmond contem-
porary are not far apart in this affair.
We are agreed that the scheme sought
to be thrust on the Roanoke convention,
without previous consideration by the
people Of Virginia in single county or
precinct, was crudely devised and ought
TO have been defeated. We are agreed
that, If the primary plan shall be adopt
ed. IL should be done under the forms OF
law, with all the safeguards. restraints
and penalties that are essential TO a free.
| fun and fair expression Of preference by
the party; and we are agreed that the
change. ~ made, should originate with
the people and be passed on by the
people in their county conventions. The
News is not convinced. as the Times IS,
that the primary plan is a good thing.
And we hold this opinion, as our Rich
mOnd contemporary does its opinion,
without regard 10 whom the primary
plan may help or hurt. We simply con-
slider it a dangerous flank-movement up
on the system embodied IN the Federal
constitution by wiser men than any we
now have in public life. and positive
menace to state sovereignty.
As TO specific lily exposing the methods
employed by certain politicians at Roam
O1e TO obtain votes for the ill-devised
scheme that was beaten before the state
convention. The News has stated that
that was a part Of the INSIDE history
Of the contest: intending thereby 10 in
ply that this paper was prevented by
reasonable considerations of prudence
from speaking as plainly about the mat
ter at this time as 1t could wish TO do.
We assert. upon our knowledge OF the
facts. that the vote recorded for the Sen
atorlal primary scheme in the convention
did not represent its strength before
that body upon the merits of the ques-
ton: but was largely obtained by In
huences and considerations that ought not
to prevail in a Democratic convention
upon question of such moment and
magnitude. As far as The News Is con-
cerned. It has no concealments of its own
TO make: and, II a contingency should
arise which would seem to require palmer
speaking. on its part. it will not hesitate
10 maintain its ground without fear Of
the result.
We appreciate the deicacy of our
friends position and we will not press the
question as to the "insde history" TO
which reference has been made. however
much we may like to know the facts
in detail.
But after ALL that has nothing TO do
with the main issue. The Times Is no,
unmindful Of the fact that there are OBJ
iections 20 a senatorial primary and
from our observation OF its practical
working in South Carolina, we see very
clearly that it is by no means a perfect
plan, We would infinitely prefer an
amendment TO the constitution by which
senators in Congress might be chosen by
popular vote. But the present method
Of choosing them through the Legislature
has been so unsatisfactory. we would
try the primary plan as being the next
best thing to popular elections.
But we insist upon legalized primary
and we would like to see this made
leading issue in the selection OF candl-
dates for the Legislature. If such law
is enacted with the proper safeguards
TO prevent frauds, we believe that II
would prove TO he eminently satisfactory
as giving the people the right TO say by
direct vote whom they would have 10
represent them in the Senate. AS rule
we fight shy at changes, and we are
very slow to give our consent TO any
radical departure from that inspired In
strument upon which this great republic
was founded. But conditions have
changed and there have been so many
deadlocks abuses and scandals In the
elections throughout the several states
of senators by the Legislature that we
commit ourselves TO the primary plan ir,
the interest as We have said, of good NOR
ais. pure government and clean politics