Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1906-02-28
State Senate Defeats Primary
Measure, Democrats Voting
With Standpatters
1T LACKED BUT FIVE VOTES
The Vote Came After Day of Siren
uous Debate and Sincere Effort on
the Part Of Friends of the Measure
Likely to Become Main Issue in
the Coming Campaign.
[By Ora williams.l

by Ora Williams.l
Special to Times-Republican.
Des Moines, Feb. 2S-The primary
elections bill went to it's death yester-
day afternoon at $3.50 o'clock. The
democratic amendment did not save it
tute, was discarded as wholly made
quate. The democrats did it. Here is
the vote:
Ayes-Bruce,C ,Crossley, ,Dowell Eckles,
Ericsson. Garst, Hopkins, Hughes, KIM
mel. Kline. Lewis, Lyons. Maytag,
Smith of Mitchell. Stirton, Turner
Warren. Wilson of Fayette, Winne
Young of Ca. .houn, Young of Washing
ton-21
Nays-Bleakely, Brooks, Courtright
Crawford, Durham, Elerick, Gale, Gilli-
land, Harper Hartshorn, Hasselquist,
Hayward, Hogue, Jackson, Jamison,
Jones, Lambert, Molesberry. Newberry
Saunders, Smith of Des Moines
Spaulding, Stookey, Stuckslager, Tay-
lor. Wade, Whipple, Wilson of Clinton,
Young of Lee-29.
Hayward explained his vote saying
he favored the primary principle but
his people are opposed to this bill. New
berry would have liked to vote for the
bill but his constituents opposed. Two
democrats voted for the bill-Lyons
and Stirton-and the others all against
the bill. 1t was claimed for time that
Bruce would have voted against the
bill If his vote would have been vital,
but this is not certainly known. Every
standpatter in the senate was present
and voted against the bill. 1t is re-
garded as certain that If three more
democrats mad voted for the bill it
would have been carried.
The debate on the primary bin, Con-
tinued in the senate for two days. was
decidedly interesting even though it
is true that nearly all the arguments.
pro and con, had been threshed out in
the newspapers and elsewhere. The
discussion merely demonstrated that
factional lines had been drawn, and
that chiefly by reason Of some OUT
ward influence operating upon the
members who are under domination of
a political boss. and that no matter
what was said or done in the senate.
there would be few changes of votes.
The chief interest centered at all times
around the democrats and what they
would do in the end. When the Lyons
amendment was introduced and passed
it was felt by the standpatters that
they had lost their case and the pro-
gressives were correspondingly happy.
But that was on Monday. On Tuesday
the rumor went the rounds again that
the democrats had been captured by
the Blythe forces and that a sufficient
number had been secured to vote
against it to make certain it's defeat
Just how these democrats were won
back again by the Blythe crowd was
not made plain, but the story came
from SO many sources that it left no
doubt that between sunset and sun
rise there had been things a-doing.
The debate yesterday was participate
ed in by Saunders, Gilliland, Lewis.
Courtright and Crossley. Saunders
made an eloquent plea for his bill and
smoothed the way for going back on
the primary principle While yet pre-
tending to be for it. Courtright mere
ly killed time on the measure Lewis
answered some of the objections made
to the principle. He especially defend-
ed the plurality nominations, and said
that In Lucas county there had been
nominations made in this way for more
than thirty years without harm. HE
cited the fact that this is the rule in
nearly all cases where primaries are
held and if the Saunders bill should
he taken up it would force, a change
in very many of the counties Of the
state. where they now enjoy plurality
non1ina tions. In fact the Saunders
hill would be extremely distasteful to
the counties where primaries are now
used.
In concluding the debate, after the
previous question had been ordered,
Senator Crossley devoted a good deal
of his time to Courtright, who had set
himself up as a great constitutional
LAWYER and had declared that the stat
utes in force in many states are un-
constitutional. He also said that
Courtright who had consumed more
than +wo hours of time in putting holes
in the bill, as he had claimed had not
attended a single meeting OF the com
mittee where tne ulscussioA was iAe1o
on this bill Two years ago he had
taken an interest in the bill and had
assisted in perfecting it, and his sug-
gestions Of that time are in the Dill
now. vet Courtright insists that the
bill which he helped to frame is un-
constitutional.
Tn conclusion the able young senator
from Madison declared that If there
was anything factional or partisan in
this bill or in the discussion. it had not
been put there by himself. He sug-
gested that if the bill should be de-
feated there would be another legisla-
tive session year hence. and he
the Madison county senator-expects
to be here and he gave assurance there
would again be before the senate pri-
mary election bill. He also suggested
chat in the meantime there would be