Aberdeen herald. [volume] (Aberdeen, Chehalis County, W.T.) 1886-1917, 1907-06-27
FOR MAJORITY rule
TAFT'S BROTHER OBJECTS TO !
RULE OF MAJORITY. |
Cincinnati TimeS-Star Objects to the
Initiative and Referendum. Editor
Taft Fears Legislation by and for
the People. The Reasons Why are
Very plain.


emily fired upon by Secretary Taft's
brother, the owner and editor of the
Cincinnati Times-Star. He is president
also of the Cincinnati gas monopoly. In
double column editorial in his paper
entitled "Mr. Bryan's Embarrassment, :"
he eays:
"Would Mr.. Bryan advocate the sub.
mission of a law passed by congress to a
vote of the people?"
This idea holrifies Mr.. Taft. But it
doesn't frighten the voters. and they
should bear in mind that Editor Taft is
a monopolist and Is frightened at the
prospect of losing his special privileges.
Mr.. Taft further asks: "Would Mr..
Bryan advocate that small percentage
of the people of the United States should
have the power to originate Federal leg
islation and all the people have the
right to vote upon it and be protected in
that right?"
The objections to such system which
Mr.. Taft publicly voices are as follows !:
First, 1t would clothe the colored men
with the power to originate and vote up.
on legislation.
What s the objection to this, Mr..
Taft? Throughout the South constitu-
tional amendments provide that voters
shall possess an educational qualification
and within the limits thus prescribed
the majority ehould rule. otherwise there
is machine rule. Southern statesmen
assent to this view, as is evidenced by
the large number OF them who have pub.
licly signified their adherence to major.
ity rule; namely, two from Kentucky,
one from Florida, two from South Caro-
lima, three from North Carolina, making
q total of twenty-four. In the words Of
Hon. r. N. Hackett, of North Carolina.
elected in place of Representative Black.
burn, who refused to pledge for the peo-
ple's rule; II am unqualifedly in favor
OF majority rule in TINS country 'unawed
by power and unbribed by gain by
whatever honest fair means it can be
obtained"
This data has been published by the
National Federation for Peoples Rule.
Second, the other objection which Mr..
Taft presents is that should national
issues be determined by the will of the
majority in majority of the states, it
"would deprive the small states OF the
disproportionate power which they now
enjoy in the senate and the electoral col.
lege and which is implicitly guaranteed
to them by the constitution"
= MIR. Tafts conclusion is, "Before Mr..
Bryan goes very far with his new-fangled
toy he will find himself embarrassed as
badly as he was over the railway mat
ter"
Mr.. Taft is simply exposing his igno-
rance. The proposal in this country for
a national system, and to which ITO
members of the national house are
pledged, is for double majority that is
a national measure voted upon shall not
pass unless in majority of the states
and in majority OF the congressional
districts it receives a majority of the
votes cast for and against it. Swizer-
land uses this double majority in natlon-
al affairs, and each measure that has re-
ceived the approval OF the voters in a
mai ,rty Of the districts has also been
approved by majority of the states.
This objection by Mr.. Taft is quoted
from the New York Tribune and we in
vite it to apologize for it's ignorance. If
it refuses the natural inference will be
that it Intentionally mislead its readers.