People's party paper. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1891-1898, 1898-01-21

Gle from the pen of Eltweed Pomeroy
President of the National Direct Legis
lation League in the November issue o
the Washingtonian will be a full an
swer?
"Direct legislation is not principle
but the method of applying principle
and that principle is Democracy or the
rule by the people. To any one be
lieving in Democracy it does not neeC
argument but only explanation. L
looks back for the statement of it's I'M
derlying principles, not to Hamilton
and his compeers who wanted limi
ted, constitutional monarchy in this
country, but to Jefferson and Madison
and Hancock and Adams whose ring
ing words about the rights of the peo
pie still echo down the corridors Of
time.
For full statement of the principle
underlying Direct Legislation, am
going back to Jefferson's definition OF
Republic taken from letter he W ote
to John Taylor over century ago. He
said: Were to assign to this term,
(the word Republic) precise and
definite idea, I would say, purely and
simply it means q government by its
citizens in mass, acting directly and
personally, according to rules estab-
lished by the majority; and that every
other government is more or less Re-
publican in proportion as it has in it's
composition more or less of this ingre-
dent of the direct action of its citizens
The further the departure from direct
and constant control by its citizens,
the less has the government of the in.
gredient of Republicanism. If, then,
the control OF the people over the or
gans of this government be the meas
ure of it's Republicanism- and confess
1 know no other measure-it must be
agreed that our governments have
much less of Repu blicanism than
ought to be expected; in other words
the people have less regular control
over their agents than their rights and
their interest require; and believing as
do, that the mass of the citizens is
the safest depository of their own rights
and especially that the evils flowing
from the duperies of the people are
less injurious than those from the ego
ism of their agents, 1 am friend to
that composition of this ingredient. "
The advocates of Direct Legislation
are willing to take their stand on
those glorious words of Thomas Jeffer-
son as the strongest argument for the
principle at the bottom of Direct Leg
islation. Equally as strong though
possibly not as clear-cut quotations
could be made from Madison, Jackson,
Calhoun, aud others. But what is
Direct Legislation.
1t is the complete and constant con-
troll of the making of laws by the
voters. In small communities, it is &C.
complished by the New England town
meeting when all the voters assemble
three or four times year and vote on
all the local laws to govern them.
Jefferson said of these town meetings
that they were the most perfect inven-
ton of the wit of man for the exercise
of selfgovernment and its perpetual
ton"
In communities too large for the
voters to all assemble and vote on eve
ry question, direct Legislation is OBJ
tanned by the use of petition in what is
known as the Initiative and the Refer
endum. By the Referendum, no law
goes into effect under a reasonable
time, say in State 80 days, if during
that time reasonable minority of the
voters, say five per cent, sign and file
a petition for the reference of any law
to the people, it does not go into effect
till after the next election when the
people vote on it, and if majority
vote against it, it don't go into effect
at all. This does not mean that every
law is submitted to the people, but
only such laws as reasonable minori-
ty petition to have referred to the peo-
pie. The very fact that any law could
be so referred would kill off most of
the bad laws and it would be necessary
to refer only very few. The referen-
dunn kills the lobby for as often as the
lobbyist has bought or persuaded
enough of the lawmakers to pass his
measure, he has got to buy majority
of the people.
The Referendum is preventative,
negative; the Initiative is positive,
constructive. If the Initiative was in
force and you wanted a law for any
purpose, you'd draw it up in proper
form and circulate it as a petition. If
you get the requisite number of sigma
lures to it-say five per cent-theH it
goes to the legislative body when it
takes precedence of all other matter.
They have got to vote on it. They can
accept, reject, amend or do anything
they want with it. If it passes, it be-
comes a law subject to the Referendum,
the same as other laws. If they don't
pass it or pass it amended, it goes to
the people to vote on at the next cleo
ton and if a majority vote in favor
of it, it becomes a law no matter
every legislator was against
it, no matter whether every
in the heavens above
or In the earth beneath or in the wa
ters under the EARTH" said they did not
want it.
These two together constitute direct
which means the power in
the hands of the people whenever they
want to exercise it. 1t is simply the
of the right of petition. The
right is old, highly valued and largely
useless because the petitions do not
necessarily mean any action. They
are pigeon-holed or thrown into the
waste paper basket. But the Referen-
dunn and Initiative petition are differ
emit, they have got to be acted on.
They can not be neglected, smothered
or thrown into the waste paper basket