Gloucester County Democrat. (Woodbury, N.J.) 1878-1932, 1902-01-16

archists or indulge in a bitter denuncia-
ton of the unlawful acts of those who
hold to that faith. These doctrines are
now more widely spread and they who
adhere to them are greater in number
than is generally supposed. The preva-
lence of these teachings and the readiness
with which they are accepted give to the
thoughtful observer of the times and its
tendencies grave cause for anxiety and
alarm.
A feeling of unrest and dissatisfaction
with prevailing conditions has always ex-
| listed. Many would that they might be
changed and earnestly strive to bring
| about an ordering which they think would
make for the happiness of all. But they
| differ in their views and in the means they
| would employ from those who are opposed
| to all law and seek to destroy all author
| ity. How best to deal with the latter and
deter them from deeds of violence is a
problem demanding solution at your
hands. Cruel and unusual punishment
| should find no place in the laws which you
| enact. A law which depends on persecu-
| ton for its sanction can accomplish no
| permanent result. The experience of CEN
| turtles shows how futile have been mans
| efforts to stif1e the workings of the mind
or the promptings of sincere belief. Free
| speech is the palladium of our liberties,
| and the right thereto was only won after
| the bitterest and sternest struggle. No bill
| should be passed which will deprive any
| one of the right to give expression to his
| views so long as they are not subverSive
of just laws. Present laws are sufficient
| to protect the citizen against malicious
publications and utterances. Their en-
| forcement depends upon the willingness of
| the persons affected or the diligence of the
authorities clothed with power for that
| purpose. Some restriction, however, should
| be placed upon speech and publications
| the inevitable tendency of which is to en-
-
| of violence against constituted authority.
| But whatever may be the difference of
| opinion as to how far the right of speech
| should be abridged, all will agree that the
murder of those invested with Office by the
| choice of majority free to exercise its
| will and untrammeled in it's selection or
| the attempt to compass the death of duly
| constituted rulers merits severest punish
| ment. All order, all law, all government,
would be at an end If the killing or at
tempted killing of those in authority did
not meet with swift and condign punish
ment. Death to him after fair trial who
Stays president is recognized as proper
punishment by all except those who are
outcasts from society and the enemies of
all government, and surely the crime of
him who makes the attempt, although he
fail. to take the lift of ruler or the crime
Of him who conspires with others to take
that life. whether he be the president Of
our own or the ruler of another country,
10 more heinous than that of him who
would murder one whose death would
bring with 1t no consequences so farreach-
ing or be followed by no public disaster.
Our laws do not provide sufficient pun
ishment for this kind of crime. One more
adequate to it's enormity should be enact
ed. If the assault which ended the life of
the president had been committed in our
own state, it would have been punished
with death, but if death in the case of the
president, SO greatly to be deplored, had
not followed the wretch who struck him
down and whose name should remain only
in the official records of his trial and just
conviction could have been set free from
prison after confinement therein for less
than eight years. Such a possibility
should not be tolerated and should be re-
moved at once. You should also provide a
proper punishment for those who may
within our state conspire against the life
of the ruler of another nation. 1t is doubt
full if the present law providing for the
punishment of conspiracy embraces such
a crime, and all uncertainty should be re-
moved
Present Mode of EIecting Senator's.
Under present methods our representa-
tives in the senate of the United States
are elected by a majority of the members
of the legislature. This system represents
the compromise which was yielded by the
those who entertained profound distrust
of the intelligence and conservatism of the
people. In those early days it was thought
that legislature, itself elected by popu-
lar vote, would be able to exercise greater
wisdom in the selection of senators than
the people at large. The system has been
followed for more than hundred years.
Any change therein will arouse the oppo-
sition of the timid and conservative. The
preservation of established usages rather
than the adoption of new and untried
methods will appeal to them. But COM
parison of the results in legislation that
have attended the different methods of
electing our representatives in congress
and our senators diScloseS no reason why
we should fear the change or why we
should not abandon the old and resort to a
new method more in accord with the spirit
of a government founded on the will of
the people and responsive to a widespread
sentiment.
At the time the plan was first adopted it
was claimed that the conservative senti-
ment of the country would be best repre-
scented by those selected by the chosen
few, but observation and experience have
proved the utter fallacy of this theory. as
tested by the events of time. AS matter
of fact. so far as congress is concerned
the conservative and sane sentiment of the
country has on more than one occasion |
been represented in the lower house rather
than in the senate.
Some feeling of distrust-well founded
perhaps in the early days of the nation,
when intelligence was less widely spread
than now-prompted the adoption of a |
cumbersome method of choosing our pres |
ident. Experience in its practical work. |
ings soon caused it to be abandoned, and |
the people have for long time in effect |
voted direct for the chief executive of the |
nation. No other method would now be |
tolerated. There
for electing senator in the national legis- |
lature by a restrictive vote which cannot |
with equal force be urged in favor of the |
selection of our state senators in some |
similar manner. No objection of convinc- |
ing weight can be advanced against the |
election of a United States senator by |
popular vote that would not, with equal |
force. condemn the present method of |
electing our representatives in the state |
senate AS matter of fact, that conserv- |
atism of sentiment, that cautiousness in |
action, which 1t is thought comes from the |
manner of election and which is so greatly |
to be desired owes its origin not to meth |
cd of selection so much as to length of |
term for which the selection is made.
Not Always the Best Representation. |
All who are familiar with events that |
have TRANSFERRED in the legislative history |
of our country will admit that under the |
present system there has not always been |
obtained a representation such as one |
might wish or the best that was possible. |
The plain truth Is, reluctant as one may |
be to admit it, that from many of our
states there have been sent to the United |
States senate men who have been unfit |
and who would never have appeared as
candidates for that high office had they |
been compelled to face the ordeal of a
popular election. The state has frequent
ly been deprived of the services of its best
and most distinguished statesmen, and in
their place have been sent men who were
destitute of every appropriate qualification.
Certain prerequisites not always desir-
able have often been found indispensable
qualifications for a senatorial candidate.
1t is admitted that under the plan of elect
ing by a popular vote the same results
might follow, but the chances of such
misfortune are far less. The republic has
not suffered because its presidents have
been elected by the people.
Besides, the election of senators by pub
lie vote would introduce into the contests
for that office other and better conditions
Brains and capacity or, at least, populari-
ty would be the prime requisites for sue
cess, and other qualifications which are
often under the system now in vogue pri-
NAL requisites would be positive him
ORANGES. Proved capacity and distinguish
ed public service would be the qualities in
a candidate that would recommend his
election rather than residence or personal |
friendships and obligations previously in |
Cured. Wealth would not be handicap, |