The Montgomery advertiser., 1902-04-15
M South Ca1era. April B.
Committee Has Not the Power.

Committee Has Not the Power. To the Editor of The Age-Herald:
 Replying to your request for my views on the question of State primary. am much reminded of an occasion when a certain judge told me he would hear me on certain proposition. but that he had already decided it in his mind against me. l am also reminded of your gentle insinuations that he who takes the oppo- site view of this question is certainly a most unreasoning man, and politician. However, I really believe you wish fair and impartial discussion. and therefore give you my views in which I have tried to be fair and in which l am certainly of doing what is best for the Democratic party and the State of Alabama.
 This question is divisible into three parts. and should be so discussed, name- ly:
 First-FIss the State Executive Commit tee the power to order a primary?
 Second-Is this power so. clear and ex- plicit as to leave no doubt or room for construction?
 Third-If the. boyer exists is 1t oppor- tune. or to the best interests of the Dem- ocratic party to call State primary at this time?
 Discussing these questions conservative ly. shall assume it as conceded that the power to determine it originally resided in the State Convention. No one will deny or take issue upon this proposition. If. therefore. the State Convention possessed this power. has it ever parted with it. or conferred 1t upon the State Executive Committed? If not. then the whole ques- tion fails. and no Democrat, having the good of the party at heart, would even agitate the proposition or suggest that also true that the State Executive Con- rnittee is the creature of the State Con- vention. It cannot be greater than its creator; 1t cannot have or exercise any power which 1t does not derive from the Convention itself and all power not so delegated is reserved to the Convention. If this authority has ever been specifi- cally. or by logical inference conferred, when was 1t? The advocates of the pri- mary place their whole contention and rest their entire case upon what is known as the Tompkins resolution. passed in 1892. and which reads as follows: Sec ond-To provide such rules in respect to the primsries as will insure a fair and ocrat. and give to each one his due and proper influence in the selection of dele gates and candidates"
 A primary carried with 1t the idea of a vote direct for the candidate without the intervention of delegates. The Committee is given authority to provide such rules etc, as to give each voter his due and proper influence in the selection of-what? ? Candidates only? No. but DELEGATES and CANDIDATES. Does this, then. clearly mean that it was the intention of the State Convention to confer upon it's own creature the power to abolish abso- iuely the thing which created it? Or did 1t mean to say that hereafter in se- lecting delegates to a State or other con ventior, the Committee was given an thority to provide such rules as would give to each one his due and proper in- huence in such < selection. Again. the Committee is sivep authority to provide such rules. etc.. as will give to each one his due and proper Influence in the SC. lection of delegates and candidates. no, delegates or candidates. Does it not fol low. therefore. that to order a primary and a vote for candidates only. would he to deprive. under this clause. a voter oi his right 10 vote for a delegate at ali Is the meaning therefore clear and ex. vention to abolish itself under any condi- lions? If so. why not have made some provision for the goverpment of the Com. fnittee in ordering primary in such event? Ample and explicit provision was made as to future conventions The fourth clause of the Tompkins resolution gives the Committee authority to provide for uniform primaries in all the countie: Conventions. and the specific rule is laid down in Section 6. that the Committee is Authorized "to select and determine the prinn facie rights of delegates claiming seats in the State Convention" In these resolutions not one word or line can b, found as tO any provision for holding 2 State primary. and it certainly clearly appears that 1t was expected that tho conventions would continue to be held Let us next inquire what has been the uniform rule since that time. The Stat, Executive Committee in 1894 called con. vention without dissenting vote. which was hAld, and no voice raised in opposi | tion to such action.
 The same thina was done in 1Sae thu I only change being as to the qualification of voters the bars being let down Al | that time, In 1898 and 1900. the ssmt thing happened, and during all thsBs