The Black Hills union and western stock review. [volume] (Rapid City, S.D.) 1904-19??, 1905-02-24
TO saw that such law will permit

To say that such a law will permit
Senator PettigreW to control the re-
publican party of the state is a start
ling admission to come from men who
claim to have managed the party's adj
ministration so well and SO wisely that
they have destroyed both the demo-
cratic and pouplist parties.
The facts are that PettigreW' name
is being used as "bogie man" to whip
men into line who are not shrewd
enough to see through the elise cry
and get them into a caucus for the
purpose of controlling them by the
unit rule.
Why South Dakota Wants 1t.
We maintain that the petition should
be construed according to the plain
and manifest intention appearing upon
it's face and the Dresul Dtion is that
it is presented in good faith; that the
men who signed it and the men who
circulated and filed it are qualified
electors of the state and not common
criminals.
We maintain that there is demand
for this law here as we'll as in illinois,
where the republicans declare for it in
their state platform and where the gov
ernor elected by over 100000 majority,
insists that it must be enacted into
law.
We maintain that there is demand
for it here as well as in Wisconsin,
where it was adopted at the last gen
eral election by a majority of $4,000
votes.
We maintain that there is a demand
for it here. as we'll as in North Dakota.
where the republican party declared
for it in the state platform and the
senate has just passed 1t with only
seven votes in opposition. and where
the majority of the house is pledged
to it.
We maintain that there is a demand.
for it here, as well as in Nebraska,
Montana, Michigan and other states.
where it is being agitated.
We claim this because conditions all
over these northwestern states are very
much the same, and the people are alike;
the abuses are the same.
We charge boldly and without hesita
ton, that the men who are leading, by
stealth and poisonous innuendo flight
against the request made by these $500
citizens OF this commonwealth are afraid
to trust the common people of the state.
The position they take is narrow, sell
fish, self-conccted and cowardly. Tho
war is on. Choose you will. Bus re-,
member that this issue is to remain un-.
til the people have had an opportunity TOT
vote directly for or against this law. /.
Issue Larger Than Men.
The question is larger than the men en-
gagged in the controversy. How the law
may effect the political fortunes of some
one man, or set Of men, is Of small mo-.
mGnt.
If every public offceholder in the state,
and every person who signed this petition
should die tomorrow, others equally ablet
to take their places could be found att
once. Time and again experience has
proven this. But the right of the people
to rule, and to require a respectful recog-.
,1r;;l,
erately placed in the fundamental law of
the state, Is something no man nor set,
of men can ignore with impunity; mort
evade by bubbles and false pleas; nor by
raising barren technicalities
This request Is constitutional. 1t is re-
spectful. 1t comes from 5000 citizens Of,
this state. The duty of the legislature is
simple and plain. Will it perform that
duty freely and without attempt at cir;
convention and evasion, or will it not?
1t is for that branch of the state gov
eminent to determine 1t is for US to wait
patiently and respectfully until the legis-
lature has acted or failed to act.
Fear the People,
Crime hates publicity. Corruption fes-'
tiers in secret. We charge that these men
fear the people. Members of this legis-:
lature have been heard to refer sneeringly
to great and worthy class of our people.
as Ignorant Norwegians," who could not;
| read this proposed law and should not
be allowed to vote it into effect.
These arc the excuses and subterfuges
put up 10 justify the throttling of the,
cons titutional request of 5000 citizens. I
1t is barely possible that out of 5000
| names signed to that petition fairly good,
| Legislative body could be selected, equal
| in Judgment, experience and wisdom to,
the honorable body now in session. They,
ask that the measure be submitted to the
people for approval. Is this legislature
warranted in assuming that they do not
know what they want and that it has
| knowledge superior to theirs?
The friends of the primary law say no
| to that proposition and challegne their
| opponents to go to the people upon the
merits of the case