The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1900-08-08
As to Caucuses and Caucus Law.

The contention of some opposed to a
caucus law is that restriction of partici-
patton in the primaries by voters Of
another political party is limitation of
the free action of the people. On the
contrary the proposed limitation is de-
signed to be restriction upon the Ii
cense of some people. There 8 no
purpo TO exclude from caucus vo-
ter who has given proper evidence of
his intention in good faith to act with
the party, accept its principles and
support it's candidates. The purpose is
to prevent voters of one party from en-
tering the primaries of another party
to control its nominations in the interest
of certain candidates of the latter par
ty, or to make it impossible for political
managers or manipulAtors to run such
men into caucus for the purpose of so
controlling it's action.
To make the case specific: At the
Republican caucus in Randolph in 1896,
TO choose delegates to the State con-
vention for the nomination of a candi-
date for the governorship, there were
two tickets, one favorable to the candi-
dacy of W. W. Stickney, the other to
that of Josiah Grout. The Grout tick
ct was elected By majority of few
votes. 1t was known, and the facts
were not denied, that the majority for
the Grout ticket was the result of the
votes of Democrats, run into the eau
Gus by one w. B. Wall, local Demo.
cratic boss, working in the interest of
Mr.. Grout. Randolph had five dele
gates. In the State convention Grout
was nominated by one vote more than
the number necessary for choice. The
transfer of Randolph's five delegates,
elected by Democrats voting in Are
publican caucus, to Mr.. Stickney would
have nominated the latter-and would
have saved the State from the scandals
of the Grout administration. The un-
polluted Republican majority in Ran.
dolph was for the Stickney delegates.
The caucuses of two other towns of
Orange county, having four delegates,
making nine delegates in the aggre-
gate, were carried for Grout by the d.
rect agency of Democratic votes, in one
instance by the single vote of Demo-
crat who had but recently been dele
gate to the Democratic State conven-
ton at Montpelier.
The main purpose of caucus law is
to bride this license politicians take
with caucuses, to make it difficult to
currupt them in any way and pervert
them from their natural course. Be-
tween this and the Limitation of the
free action of voters at a primary meet.
ing there is all the difference there is
between fraud and regularity, between
honesty and dishonesty. As the Ben
nington Banner has stated, Just eau.
Gus law will impose no greater check
upon the free and proper action OF
voters at a primary political meeting
than does the Australian ballot law up.
on their voting at the polls.
The Australian ballot law makes the
duty imperative to protect the caucus
and the convention from fraud or ir
regularity of any kind. If the fountain
is corrupted at it's source the stream be
low will be impure. The Australian
ballot law renders it difficult to correc
the action of caucus or convention
The candidates nominated by thes,
primaries are on the official ballots
They have certain precedence Their
which gives them an advantage that i
easily made decisive. The need of
pure primary is even greater than O
the purity and protection the secre
ballot, with all it's formalities and intri
cacies, is assumed TO give the voter
The latter renders the former impera
tive, otherwise the Australian ballo
, law is made the sure instrument OF rec
istering and ratifyipg fraud and irregu
larity at the primaries. This groun
the JOURNAL held in 1896, in support
ing the Palmer bill of that year, an