The San Francisco call., 1907-01-06
Republicans Have Power
to Redeem Promise

lators. He does not believe COM
stitutional amendment necessary. SAT-
isfed that adequate legislation can
be secured under the present consti-
tutional restrictions, he has prepared
bin, which he will introduce upon
the convening of the Assembly.
Leeds bill, though rather loosely
drawn, would with few amendments
serve as a splendid foundation for a
direct primary enactment. 1t has
some of the features OF the Oregon,
Minnesota and Wisconsin laws. 1t
avoids the petition clauses of the Ore
gon and Wisconsin laws; is compre-
hensive in that it embraces elective
officers from United States Senators
down. 1t IS weak in its provisions for
the machinery of the primary cleo
tions and methods of fling. 1t is
cumbersome in its provisions for fur
nishing party organizations with lists
of candidates. Probably through an
oversight, candidates for the United
States Senate are not required to
make an affidavit of party afhliation-
FACES JUDICIAL SNAG
Leeds bill includes the>one feature
of the Wisconsin law that even La
Toilette is willing to admit must be
changed-the strict alphabetical ar
rangement of names on the partisan
tickets, instead of absolute rotation.
1t provides a modification of the Min
aesota challenge that would quite
likely run into judicial snag. The
Leeds bill provides that if the par
tisan qualifications of a primary cleo
ton voter are challenged he must
make affidavit that he supported a
majority of the candidates of the
party he then proposes to affiliate
with at the last general election, and
that it is his present intention to sup
port majority of its candidates at
the ensuing election. Majority is an
ugly word and was sidestepped by the
Minnesota legislators, who did not
want their law to fall under the ju-
dicial AK. They used generally sup
ported" but the adoption of the New
York or Oregon registration systems
would make either unnecessary and
better serve the purpose, which is the
preservation of party integrity.
OPINION AGAINST LEEDS
If the weight of legal opinion were
not all against Leeds contention that
a constitutional amendment is unnec-
essary, his bill would have much to
commend it and could be easily pat
ted and nodded into safe and val
liable law. To attempt TO enact il
or a modification of it at the present
session is to invite disaster and de-
lay if not ultimate defeat of the re-
form its author seeks to accomplish
Leeds is young. He can afford to
make haste slowly and especially is
this true since the reputation that he
unquestionably wishes to make will
have more of the elements of stabil-
ity if his name is connected with an
enactment which will hold water rath-
er than with one rejected by the
courts, which rejection might sub
ject the young legislator to a sus-
picion of bad faith
Assemblyman Richard H Jury of
San Mateo has assured The Call that
he will be in favor of direct primary
election law when he is convinced
that it is preferable to the conven-
tion system Assemblyman p A.
Stanton of Los Angeles says he is
and always has been in favor of a
direct primary law and wants one
enacted by the Legislature at the en-
suing session. George L. Sackett of
Ventura is in favor of a direct pri-
mary law but is not clear as to his
views on a constitutional amendment.
w. F. ChandleTs1who will represent
the Sixtieth District, is also in favor
of a comprehensive law, but does not
make plain his attitude toward the
submission of a constitutional amend
ment.