The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1901-02-21
A Bad Beginning.

dav. Dairy and Food Commissioner
Adams speaking for, and ]. e. Mona
CHAN against. The character of the
respective speeches indicates several
things. If they may be taken as a
criterion of the approaching discussion
in the Legislature, it is probable that
little Roadway will be made IN the
matter and very few minds changed in
the process. On the whole, it would
seem that Mr.. Adams had the better OF
the opening debate, if so it may be
called. He did not, however, make
any adequate answer to the objections
raised to the bill. He presented the
s1DDOsed merits of the bill in not I'M
forcefu1 way, but he failed to meet the
strongest objections. Likewise Mr..
Monaghan failed to make the most OF
the weaknesses of the bill. The re-
sumo of the objections to the bill,
piven at the conclusion of his speech,
was the most effective part of his en-
tire speech. Each manifested dispo-
sition to regard his opponents in the
case as influenced by selfish consider
ations rather than good judgment and
the welfare of the State and the party
The objections to the measure which
Mr.. Adams saw fit to term ''a1leged"
are as follows:
That it deprives young men of the
political education obtained in CAUCUS
es and conventions,
That it will weaken party organiza-
tons and destroy party spirit.
That it will give undue influence to
newspapers.
That it will confer upon towns and
cities a greater power in the primaries
than the rural districts.
That it will cause the organization
Of irresistible political machines.
That it will elevate demagogues and
submerge statesmen.
That it is an experiment not war
ranted by existing conditions.
That it is the incorporation into law
of the gospel of suspicion"
That it is a scheme of discredited
candidates for convention honors.
That it means the selection of mi
nority candidates.
That it eliminates questions of ge-
ography and nationality in the selec-
ton of nominees.
That it makes an official primary
ballot of frightfu11y large dimensions
and a discriminating vote almost inn
possible.
That it will entail great additional
expense upon the State.
That the plan has failed where tried.
That convention utterances upon the
subject should have no weight with
the Legislature and that the proposed
law is a substantial indictment of the
American plan of representative gov
eminent.
That the candidates for State offices
and the Legislature should not make
party platforms.
Mr.. Adams speech was not we'll
calculated to relieve most of the best of
these objections of any of their
strength. He did not make even a
satisfactory attempt at meeting the
objection that it would materially in
crease taxation, that it would tend to
foster minority rule, that it would
comp1icate rather than simplify cleo
lions, that it would lend itself too
readily to machine politics, and that
it would eliminate questions of geOg-
raphy and nationality in the selection
of nominees. He talked great deal
about the objection on the ground that
it would put the farmer at a disadvan-
tage. Indeed, it would seem from Mr..
Adams attention to that objection,
that he gave it more credence THAI he
would care to state. Both gentlemen
showed so much anxiety for the farmer
that it would be difficult to imagine
how his interests could be overlooked.
Mr.. Adams sought to ridicu1e the in
consistency of the conduct of the op-
ponents of the bill when they strug-
g1ed so heroica11y to maintain the con-
vention, an institution whose demands
and mandates they regard as of so
small Importance and binding power,
while he himself, with all the others of
his side, are liable to the same criti-
cism, for are they not seeking to over
throw as pernicious an institution,
whose mandate they regard as the di-
rect command of the people.
1t is a matter of deep regret that the
two leading speeches at the very open
ing of the discussion should give so
little sign of fair and calm discussion
of this question, with the set purpose
of settling it finally on the pure and
simple basis of it's merits. 1t should
be understood by the Legislature that
the objection is not to the principle of