The Cairo bulletin., 1907-08-15
ILLINOIS COURT
ON ELECTION LAW
DECISION MAY PRODUCE CHAOS
If IT SHALL BE AGAINST
THE LAW.
CAMPAIGNS PLANNED
Under Present Law Throughout the
state Would BE Rendered Fruit
less--Direct Primary Law
May Result

Special to The Bulletin:
Springfield. H., Aug. 14-There IL
/, increasing interest among politicians
in the decision of the supreme court,
scheduled to be handed down in Oc-
tober, affecting the validity Of the
primary. election law It is becoming
clearer every day that the decision
will be of the highest Importance in
its effect upon current politics. AL
though the politicians as class
i never very seriously or enthusiastic
ally advocated the passage of a pri-
mary law-most of them preferring
TO continue under the old system with
which they We're familiar and which
gave real zest to political contests III
now that a primary law is in opera
tion, most candidates for office would
like to see it continued in force. AS
| a rule they have based their plans
and have calculated results under the
primary law, and to have the law
knocked out would necessitate good
many readiustments of political
fences, The restoration Of the old
system would wholly change the po-
litical situation in many counties of
counties We're considered the private
political assets of certain local
'bosses"-and in each case, in order
10 carry the county in an ante-con-
.yention contest it was necessary only
to win the favor of the boss" With
the passage of a primary law, condi. |
lions changed; for, although the law
was not wholly what the primary re-
formers wanted, it took from the |
boss" much of his old-time power
But the law was compromise be.
tween the boss" and the reformer. !
SO far as state contests are con-
cerned, while the voters of county
may instruct their delegates for a
certain candidate, against the decree
of the boss" the boss" has |
chance to win out in the state con-
vention If none of the candidates
should have enough instructed dele
gates to nominate him on the first
ballot. With the. new system can.
didates for state offices seem fairly
well satisfied and most of them are
hoping that the supreme court will
uphold the law.
II the supreme court i'm October
should declare the primary law un
there is no foretelling
what kind OF law. or whether any
ay at all, will take its place. 1t would
simply mean for the time being. chaos |
n state politics. If the legislature
hould be In session when the decis.
on is handed down-and the chances
re that such will be the case, for the
October session is likely to last
weeks instead of days as was
damned when the recess was taken
an effort undoubtedly will be made
pass new law. But with the
ther subjects that are to be con.
idered by the assembly, it is i'm,
robable that primary law can be
often through at the regular ses-
ion. The session is more likely to
nd without a new law. to be followed
once by special session called for
Die purpose Of primary election leg.
lation. A special session will mean
lat the members will get extra pay
n their services, and that the sub
ct to be considered and acted upon
i'll not be confused with any other
lbject
In that event, politicians are WON
'ring what kind of a law will be
lssed. Will it be alaw modelled after
e present one. in its general fen.
res, or will II be direct, plurality
imary lava law that wiz give the
to the candidate having
e highest number of votes at the
and that will thus do way
th conventions except for the pur-
se of declaring party principles?
he advocates OF a plurality primary
ere so numerous in the Legislature II
1905. and again at the special ses-
IN of 1906. that no law could have
en- passed If Speaker Shurtlef had
I come to the rescue and framed
the compromise which finally ba-
me law. The sentiment for plur- i
ty nominations was greatly
engthened by the result of the pri.
Try contest for state treasurer last
ar. when the candidate having al.
'st majority vote was defeated in
, convention. All in all. it is evi.
NJ that If the present law is killed.
ne wone will be enacted. if at all.
y after one of the hardest fights
legislative history.
J. MCAN DAVIS.