The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1904-06-15
Has Formulated Measure to
Govern Primary Elections.
HOItOn Nan Shows FaIlacy of
Senator Smiths Position.
POLITICAL MACHINE.
Says That the Senator Would
Build One.
Doesn't Believe in Forcing
People to Swear in Votes.

Probably no man in the state of Kan
sas mas made a closer study of the
question of primary elections tnan
John s. Hopkins of Holton- Mr.. Hop
kins is the father of Scott Hopkins, of
Horton one of the regents of the State
university. For several years he has
been making a study of election sys-
TENS not only in this country but in
foreign countries as well. He has
evolved a plan and formulated a bill
embracing it, which he brought to To-
peka for introduction during the last
! Legislature, but the people were not in
terested in primary elections then and
Mr. Hopkins bill did not get anywhere.
Now the outrages committed in pri-
maries during the past few months
have aroused public sentiment and
there is a demand for some kind of
new primary law. Mr.. Hopkins is run
ming for the legislature in Jackson
county on that issue and if elected his
chief effort will be TO secure the adop-
ton of his plan. In writing of it to the
State Journal he says;
Opposed to Conventions.
There are many who do not under
stand the difference between a primary
law electing delegates to assemble In
a convention, to choose and name NOM
inees for office, and direct nomina-
ton law by which the people them
selves select and name the nominees by
their ballots without delegates, or any
convention. Under the first system
politicians rule, under the second SyS-
| tenn the people control. The present
primary law for selecting delegates
can be amended at least in one material
feature; i. e. by having all the delegates
of all parties for all conventions select-
ed upon the same day. In regard TO
what amendments should be made, or
not be made, to our present primary
law, I have little to say and nothing TO
recommend, for / am unalteraDly OPP
posed to the thoroughly and necessarily
corrupt system of caucuSeS, delegates
and nominating conventions
During the last fifteen years. a ma
jority of the states have been adoptlIls'
amending and reamending their pri-
mary laws and endeaVorlng to enforce
by fines, penalties and punishments'
honest voting at primaries, and trying
to prevent voters Of one party alulhs e
assisting and voting for delegates OF
another party All kinds of schemes
and plans have been invented ana
adopted vet today corrupt voting COT
lions are more prevalent thsan al any
time during the last seNenty-nNe years
System Is Wrong.
While people are talking ABOUT re
forming the primaries, not sueees-
ton has been raised, SO far as nave
observed. what reformations should
he made or which sections OF our
present primary law should De
amended 1t would seem, ana expert
ence has proved the fact, that the
more laws and the greater the fines
and penalties prescribed to prevent
corrupt politics, more ways ana
means have been devised by poll
ticians to circumvent the laws me
whole trouble sof the matter lies in
the system. AS long as delegates are
chosen to attend conventions for the
purpose of selecting and naming can
didates for voters to vote for, so long
are the people reposing an imprudent
trust in delegates and politicians and
so long will delegates buy and sell
each other and politicians ana posses
It is admitted on all sides. some
thing has to be done" Shall 1t be
what the mass of the people want, or
what the politicians and the bosses
want?
While writing the above a copy of
the State Journal was placed upon
my desk. I soon ran upon F. Du-
mont Smith, the Irrepressible," and
his new primary law ideas.
It being along the line of my
thoughts and raising a few weak OBJ
/ jections to a law allowing the people
Office, will pay attention to answer
ing some of the ideas of Mr.. Smith
at once.
As to Dumont Smith.
| Mr. Smith says he would not allow
any voter to vote at party primary
unless he swears that he has voted
the ticket of that party at the pre-
| ceding election. Section 8 of a bill
| I have drafted reads as follows: NO
person shall be entitled to vote at any
| primary election unless he was a duly
qualified voter at the last general
election and voted in the precinct at
/ the last general election at which he
offers his vote" My voter must show
at the primary his name upon the
rolls of the last general election as
voter. ] do not think it wise for
] TT,
another and have him dictate, by his
vote, candidates for office unless he
/ has resided in the county in which he
! offers his vote long enough to become
thoroughly acquainted with the repu-
/ tatiOn and character of the men
whom he would make nominees. My
| bill does not require the voter to
swear to anything. Mr.. Smith would
| have the voter swear to everything.
Smiths Political Machine.
Why in the world does Mr. Smith
want to build UP a great political ma
chine and officer the same in January
of each election year? All commit
teemen for townships. counties, state.
and senatorial and judicial districts
can be elected and selected by sec
lions 26 and p as provided by my
bill at the time of holding the pri-
mary, they to act until their success
sors are elected at the next general
primary. The chairman of the voting
/ precincts form the county commit
tees as well as the district. judicial
and senatorial committees. The
chairmen of the county committees
form the state and congressional
committees Then Mr.. Smith jumps
to a conclusion and says, I'VE do not
want a direct primary election for
state nominees, such as they have in
Mississippi and other southern
states I agree with Mr. Smith in
that particular about the Mississippi
law, but why does he pick out Mis-
sissippi law as the basis of his objec-
lions to a direct primary nomination