The San Francisco call., 1907-02-22
COMMITTEE OF BOTH
HOUSES MEETS TODAY
Assembly Names Conferees
at End of Half Day
of Oratory
PLAN TO DISAGREE
Amendment Is to Go Back
for Another Step in
Joint Action
By George A. Van Smith
CALL HEADQUARTERS.
1907 EIGHTH STREET

1907 EIGHTH STREET.
SACRAMENTO, Feb. 2I.-The Senate
and Assembly viii take mp the work of
adjusting their differences on the Held
Wright direct primary constitutional
amendment tomorrow morning. when
the conference committee appointed on
the hardly secured Joint rules will meet
and agree 10 disagree.
The Assembly spent the major portion
of fits two sessions today squabbIing
over direct primary legislation, to the
enc that the morning session resulted
IN the appointment of eonferees on the
Held-WrfEht amendment and the aft
ernoon session, equally stormy. resulted
IN the passage of the elections COM
mittee's substitute for the Stetson bill,
which provides composite of the IllI-
nois and Texas primary election laws.
hohlman of San Francisco gave notice
of reconsideration of this bill and to-
morrow, IL sufficient number of As
Hemblymen are present, the whole mat
ter viii be threshed ont again.
The conferees on the Held-Wright
amendment are, on the part OF the SEN
ate, Wright, Leavitt and Walker: on
the part Of the Assembly, Held. JOB
son Of Sacramento and Stetson. The
meeting Of the conferees tomorrow
morning viii probably result in a dis
agreement In order TO ger the matter
into free conference.
OPINIONS DIFFER LITTLE
There IS apparently little difference
Of opinion between the members of the
conference committee, but a strict con
struction Of the rules leaves only re-
cession or concurrence TO be agreed
upon or a report Of failure 70 agree.
Inen under the joint rules the matter
is thrown into free conference of six
members. selected in the same manner.
whence the conferees NAV bring out a
report Of amendment mutually agreed
upon Amer dments brought from d
free conference cannot be changed by
10 either House, and failure TO accept
them by either body kills the measure.
IS no further action on the subject
matter may be had, save through en-
tirely new matter and the regular
channels.
The Assembly INDUCED itself in an
hours oratory over the appointment Of
the committee. opportunity to appoint
which was the cause Of the adoption
OF theHrules- The whole gamut Of SEN
storiaI coercion was run by orators
prominent among whom were Grove l.
johnson and Philip Walsh The oratory
Of the morning session. however. was
but mild indication Of what was 10
be turned loose in the discussion Of the
Stetson bill in the afternoon
sTETsON BILL COMPROMISE
The Stetson bill is a compromise
measure. AS originally drawn ii pro-
.vided for the adoption Of the Illinois
idea rather ingeniously blended with
the Texas system. Briefly, the bill
provides for the direct nomination Of
candidates for the United States Senate
and the indirect nomination Of all other
candidates by binding delegates to vote
for the candidates who poll plurality
popular votes at the primary elections.
As originally drawn 1t could not be-
come effective without the enactment
of the Lucas bill, which contemplates
making the present primary law man
datory IN all precincts. The substitute
provides that its provisions shall not
be applicable as TO localities or officers
where the conventions making nomina-
tions shall be composed of delegates
less than two-thirds of whom are Sc
lected under the primary election laws
OF the State
ADVISORY VOTE ON SENATOR
Boiled down, it provides for the
direct nomination Of candidates for
the United States Senate and indirect
nomination Of all other officers with
a complication of indirect nominations
for one Congressman, a few legislative
caDQl0aIeS ana Inunlclpai candidates
IN several cities. The merits of the bill
were never discussed nor was the bill
ever analyzeo by the members Of the
Assembly.
IN so far as It provides for securing
a popular advisory vote on candidates
for the United States Senate Il is good,
providing substantially the methods
1 employed in Illinois and Wisconsin.
It's other provisions are in no wise
good. nor do they in any manner even
approximate q redemption OF the plat
form pledges for the enactment of
direct primary legislation. because
without the enactment Of the Lucas bill
II cannot possibly apply TO the noni-
nation Of State officers in any way.