Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1902-05-31


at the last election; that the Legislature
should accord to the people in full meas
ure the sovereign power of the ballot
l might cite many other expressions like
the above, but these sufficiently illustrate
the basis of the arguments oftenest used
IN favor Of the bill. Such phrases did
not then, nor will they now, settle the
case. The judgment of the people upon
this bill will not be determined by catch
phrases or platitudes. l prefer to con-
fine myself to plain speech and to sue
clint statement of facts. The people will
examine the facts for themselves. They
will pass upon all the questions raised
and decide them upon their merits.
What the Platform Demanded.
AT the last state Republican conven-
ton the platform contained the following
declaration:
The great reformation effected in
our general elections through the Aus
tralian ballot inspires us with confidence
to apply the same method in making
nominations, so that every voter may
exercise his sovereign right of choice
by direct vote without the intervention
or interference of any political agency
We therefore demand that caucuses and
conventions for the nomination of can
didates for Office be abolisl- ed by legis-
latlve enactment, and that all candidates
for state, legislative, congressional and
county officers be nominated at pri-
mary election upon the same day by
direct vote under the Australian ballot
1.-The propositions contained in this
convention utterance, specifically stated,
are as follows:
81. The Australian ballot has effected
great reform in our general elections.
50. The same method should be ap-
piled in making nominations.
80. The voter should exercise his SOW
ereign right of choice in making nomi-
nations by direct vote.
Il. No political agency should inter
vene or interfere.
"5. Caucuses and conventions should
be abolished by law.
So. All candidates for state, legisla-
tive, congressional and county officers
are to be nominated at a primary elec-
ton upon the same day by direct vote
under the Australian ballot.
Primary Law Favored.
"The Legislature convened January 8,
1901. In the Senate thirty-one out of
thirty-three, and in the Assembly eighty
| one out of 100 members We're Repub-
| licans. The party pledge was in the
mind and kept constantly before the
eyes of each Republican member. The
casual conversation of members, when
they first met at the capitol, turned al
most inevitably to the subject of a
primary election law. One said to an
other: 'Of course we are to pass a
primary election law After a few days,
one asked of another: Who is to pre-
! pare the bill and What are 10 be its
provisions? After many days of wait
/ ing the general inquiry was: When is
| the bill to make its appearance?
1.-THE whole matter became an ever
deepening mystery, but finally our pa
thence was rewarded. for on Monday
evening, January %, 1901. the cloud lift
| ed. The bill, all printed, ready for our
| files, was laid upon our desks. Then, for
| the first time, we all knew what sort Of
remedy was proposed for our much
! talked-of political ills. The committees
| on privileges and elections of both houses
| Immediately arranged for joint hearings
| upon the bill to begin the following week.
| All other legislative business was treated
| as of secondary Importance. A state Of
| fetal came before the committees and
/ opened the debate in favor of the bill,
| with a brilliant and effective presenta-
| ton of it in every light in which j. might
be made to appear necessary, wise and
| patriotic. He was most skillful and per-
| suasive, and his task was more than that
! of a phrasemaker. 1t was to show the
! hand and purpose that were ready to
| guide the Legislature.
Demanded in Existing Form.
''He ventured farther and farther in
| his claims and demands until he reached
| a point where he dared assert:
| 81 believe that this bill is properly
| drawn in all its details. 1t is not cum
| bersome, as has been claimed The sub
| stantial repeal of existing laws and the
| substitution therefor of complete sys-
! tenn of laws, providing for all of the de-
! tails necessitated by primary elections,
cannot be embraced within q few sec
! tions of the statutes. Even the friends
1 of the measure who have not carefully
| studied it have very generally, in private
| conversation and through the press, stat
| ed that the law might be defective in
| some particulars. But it is observable
| that thee particulars have seldom been
| pointed out. Naturally, the public has
| been inclined to think that a law as i'm
| portant as this, embracing thirty-ni sec
| lions, would contain some grave defects.
| If such defects exist, / have not been
| able to lind them. We ask that
the Stevens bill be passed substantially
in its present form
according to this advocate and leader.
| who is not a member of either House.
| the Legislature, without being consulted
| as to what the bill should be, without
| knowing what it was to contain before it
was printed and laid before them and
being yet in the dark even as to it's au-
! thorship, was expected forthwith to en-
act the bill into law. Mark the words
of the distinguished orator. We ask that
the Stevens bill be passed substantially
in its present form. He should have
known better the place in which he
spoke and the men to whom he spoke
From the foundation of the state, the
| practice of Wisconsin Legislators had
| been different from that which his words
and manner implied. He and those for
| whom he spoke found that constitutional
| obligations rested as well upon the men,
bers of the last as upon those of any
| former Legislature. The bill itself, no
| less than the arguments used for it,
| gradually aroused the Legislature.
Legislators Accepted Challenge.
can editorial writer, favorable to the
! enactment of the bill, said of it in a lead
| ing journal: Nothing more radical
| could be proposed within the limits pre-
| scribed by the party system, as will be