The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 18??-1935, 1908-01-17
POWERFUL PLEA MADE FOR
THE DIRECT PRIMARY
CONTINUED from Page TAree)

70 a primary NACAN - -N~N
he ignored. There Is no argument in
describing as ridiculous absurd.
"preposterous," a system which pre-
walls in every other Democratic state
in the Union and in many Republican
states. which has never been aoan-
doned by any state that has tried It,
but is being constantly adopted oy
other states in every part Of the coun-
try. There is no argument IN cali
ING II a ridiculous burlesque, "a
Soncatenated yclp'-whatever that
may mean-or a ''rabble rebellion.
Neither is there any logic in meeting
Mr.. Carmacks proper and respectful
request by calling him a "sorehead.
a political adventurer," a "Bombas-
tes Furloso." bully" or "buc-
cancer" and just as little in describ-
ing those who support his appeal as
a "rabble," a "ludicrous squad or
bunch of job hunters" The people
can see for themselves that there is
neither truth nor decency in these
Characterization.
Arguments Answered.
In the domain of serious argument
the opponents of the primary cannot
present even plausible objection
without ignoring facts. Thus, Mr..
Brandon's long article in the Dover
Courier proceeds almost entirely upon
the assumption that if there be a
primary there will be no convention,
and the American has written column
after column on the same assumption
Yet as long ago as the first OF Octo
her Mr.. Carmack declared that at
the same time that the people voted
Tor their choice for Governor they
should elect delegates to a state con
yention to frame a platform, select
delegates to a national convention,
etc. It has been pointed out again
and again that this very thing is done
in nearly all the states where the pri'
mary system prevails. Again, the
American and other papers tell US to
look at Kentucky" and read the aw-
full "object lesson" of the result OF
primaries. There may be an object
lesson here. but it is very different
one from the one suggested. He who
has read the Democratic papers Of
Kentucky has read the bitter denun-
citation OF the "snap Senatorial pri-
mary which the Beckham machine
called for in advance of the meeting
of the Legislature that was to elect
McCreary's successor, as a proi1hc
cause of Democratic disaffecuon. II
the Patterson managers should exc
cute their threat TO usurp the func-
lions of their successors In once ana
cali a Senatorial primary If forced to
call one for Governor. they might pos
sibly have a like experience. But the
American ignores some other lessons
from Kentucky. That state has lost
two Democratic Governors and a Uni
ted States Senator under the old con-
vention system. The American has
printed columns Of denunciation OF
the tactics employed in the Goebel
convention and has repeatedly attrib-
uted all the troubles of Kentucky
Democracy, including the assassina-
4ion Of Goebel, to the high-handed pro-
eeedings in that convention. Yet 1t
now goes to Kentucky to get an OBJ
iect lesson" of the beauties OF the
convention system!
But let us hear some more argu-
ments from the same source: "A pri-
mary would be preceded by cam
paign that would create more or less
friction, and If the result were not
satisfactory the ticket would not be
benefited in November"
Again 1t says: 1T would mean two
canvasses of the state, one right after
the other, by the winning candidate. :
Again: Suppose the nominee should
already be Governor. He must not
only take time from his Office to can
vass the state before the primary but
must again canvass the state as the
nominee"
Americans Objections.
Now, I beg to ask. by what process
of reasoning or from what storehouse
of experience did the American gain
the idea that any of these objections
would be obvieted by having con-
yention instead of primary? VINO
told It that the convention system
was a sure preventive Of friction"
and that candidates never canvassed
the state except in primaries? II the
American wanted an object lesson,
why didn't II take the last conven-
ton? So far from avoiding TIC
N - h