The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1898-06-21

routina legislation, there would be no
noticeable change from our present
system. Bills passed would have to
wait q certain time before becoming
laws, but a large number OF laws now
enacted do not 60 into operation until.
some time after their enactment. Usu
ally under the operation Of the initia-
tive and referendum there ia q certain
class OF bills called emergency mea
ures," which can go into effect imme
diately after their enactment. This,
however, does not prevent the people
from Initiating" q movement for the
repeal of any such law. There would,
therefore, be but little temptation for
O legislature 60 abuse this privilege
and adopt even emergency measures"
which were known to be Objectionable
to the people.
The number of signatures TO O petit
ton requisite to secure the submission
or reference Of a bill, is q matter Of
detail, and varies in different places
where the system ia in operation. 1t
should be large enough to insure that
there was q reasonable demand, and
small enough so as not to make the n
forcement of the demand impractical
BILE.
In practical operation it is usual to
require not more than 5 per cent. Of
the voters in q state matter, more in
a county, and from 10 to % per cent.
in a municipality. It would be easier
to get 25 per cent. of the names i'm @
country village than to get 5 per cent.
OF the names in q State.
It is a mistake to suppose that under
the initiative and referendum all legis.
Iation would be done by the people.
The greater part of the work would
still be done by the legislature. But
the power OF the legislature would be
abridged. The members would not
longer have power to defeat q law
which the people demanded, for, il
they refused TO pass such q law, the
people could pass it over their heads.
The members Of the legislature would
no longer have power to enact laws to
which the people demanded, for, il they
did, no bill passed by the legislature.
could become a law unless the people
gave consent, either by silence or by
notifying the bill at the polls.
The power would be taken from the
members of the legislature and vested
in the people.
Under the initiative and referendum
the viii of the people would be rehsc.
ted with reasonable accuracy in the
legislation enacted.
Under our present system, even sup
posing the unsupposable) that the
members of helegislature are perfectly
honest and true TO their platform
pledges, it is impossible for the viii OF
the people to be reflected in the legis
ton. A party platform cannot enum-
crate all the questions before the peo-
pie, nor can any one tell, when candi.
dates are elected on a party platform,
which measures advocated in the
platform influenced the voters.
In fact, under our present system,
it is entirely possible for q party with
a number of planka in it's platform to
be successful, though a majority Of the
people were opposed to every plank in
the platform, and another party to be
defeated, though a mel Jrity of the peo-
pie were in favor Of every plank in the
platform.
To illustrate: Suppose party No. 1
stands for
Free silver,
Free trade,
Prohibition.
Party No. 2 stands for
Gold standard
Protective tariff,
License.
No, suppose there r four voters,
A, B, O and D. The principle would
workout the same if it were four thou
sand or four million, but is easier to
see the working in small numbers:
A, B and @ favor free silver.
B, Q and D favor free trade.
B, o and A favor prohibition.
D alone favors gold standard.
A alone favors protective tariff.
B alone favors license.
There is majority of 8 to 1 in favor
Of each principal of party No. /.
A votes for party No. 2 because he
is so strongly in favor Of protective
tariff that he is willing to sacrifice free
silver and prohibition to get it.
B votes for party No. 2 because he
is so much in favor Of license that be
il willing to sacrifice free silver ard
free trade to get il.