Martinsburg herald. [volume] (Martinsburg, W. Va.) 1881-1920, 1908-04-11
CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS
PARTY LEADERS SHY AT Pro
POSED LEGISLATION.
Strong Sentiment in Favor Of Pub
Iicity in the Neutrality-suspicious.
Not Likely.

Washington, d. c., April Cam
palgn contributions are to be made an
, issue Of the approaching presidential
election. Heretofore contributions
have been solicited generally by both
great political parties from all sorts
of sources-from individuals, from
corporations and from Interested"
interests.
Now a campaign has been begun for
publicity Of campaign contributions.
1t is being supported especially by
democrats That does not mean that
it has no support from republicans.
because it has, but the republican
party as political entity has not
committed itself 20 the proposition.
1t is fact that many of the repub-
lican leaders in both branches OF con-
gress are opposed to the legislation
and, at the present time, there Is 1T
tie chance of the enactment OF the
legislation into law.
The practical politicians of both of
the great political parties are inclin.
ed to shy at the proposed legislation,
not because the contributions received
are used for Interior purposes, but be-
cause they believe that IL such law
should be enacted 1t would scare off
a good many contributions that other
wise might be received If used for
perfectly proper purposes.
In support Of the enactment OF a ma.
tional law respecting campaign con-
tributions, 1t is pointed out that nine
teen states and territories have pass
ed laws providing for publicity of
campaign contributions. These states
and territories: Alabama. Arizona,
California, Colorado. Connecticut,
iowa Massachusetts. Minnesota, Mis-
souri,, Montana. Nebraska, New York,
Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South
Dakota, Texas, Virginia. Washington
and Texas.
Some states lfave passed laws
which forbid corporations to con-
tribute to political campaign funds
but do not require publicity of all
are Florida, Kentucky and Tennessee.
campaign contributions Such states
1t was believed by the legislatures of
those states that TIE desired end
would be achieved by absolutely pro-.
hibitin'g corporations from contribut-
ing TO the support of political cam
paigns.
In SEVERAL states laws requiring
publicity of campaign contributions
once passed were subsequently re-.
pealed. These states are Kansas,
Nevada North Carolina, Ohio ana
Utah. The laws, in those states, were
found TO work badly in the opinion
of the Legislators, and they, therefore.
were annulIed
In other states publicity Laws have
been recommended by the governors,
and the matter still is pending before
the legislatures. Among these states
are Florida. Idaho, Maryland, New
Jersey. Ohio, Oregon anu West Vir~
gnia. I'm the state OF Ohio strong
sentiment exists FOR publicity of cam
paign contributions. The law enact
ed several years ago providing for
such publicity was offered by Secre-
tary Garfield, when he was a member
Of the Ohio senate. Bt was passed.
but didHnot operate to the satisfaction
of tlrsa~people. The liReihood is, how
ever chat similar law will be err
acted by the ohio Legislature at NO
diStantttime.
The demand for publicity of cam-
paign contributions is growing
throughout the country and ultimately
will be recognized BY the lawmakers
~ srs. In Al