The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-02-03

that we will. be for him at the conven-
ton, at the polls, and as president of
this republic
w. r. Stubs and w. A White each
gave out a statement Saturday endors-
ing the plan for the senatorial primary
provided in the primary election law.
Both admit that the system adopted is
not in accord with the principles of ma
jority rule, but they say that it is in
tage given to the less populous counties.
The following is Mr.. Stubs state
ment:
I'm answer to the numerous state
ments that are being circulated
throughout the state with reference to
the provisions for nominating United
States senators in the new primary
election law, 1 wish to say that the
sparsely settled counties in western
Kansas have always had, under the
provisions of our state constitution a
great advantage over the populous
eastern counties of the state, in the
election of United States senator. Ev-
cry county in Kansas that has $50 or
more votes has a constitutional right
to one representative in the state legis-
lature while a large number of eastern
counties with population of fifteen to
twenty and even thirty thousand have
exactly the same representation.
1.-THE nomination Of a United States
senator by popular vote would de-
prive every western county of it's con-
stitutional rights in this matter. The
provisions of the new primary election
law do not add to, nor take from, the
small counties in western Kansas their
per capita advantage provided for I'M
der our state constitution.
The federal constitution provides that
IJntfAd States Ch 10 a1aofad
by the legislature of each state. The
state constitution provides specifically
the legislative representation due each
county and any law that directly or in
directly interferes with constitutional
rights certainly could not be enforced
have at all times favored the election
of United States senator by popular
plurality vote, but am fully convinced
that, regardless of who it helps or hurts
politically, such a law should not be
enacted in Kansas, until either the fed
era1 or state constitution is changed.
wv. R. STUBBS."
Mr.. White says in his statement:
''Shere is some criticism of the pri-
mary election law just passed by the
Kansas legislature, because the law
permits the voters to vote by legisla-
tive district for United States senator.
Many people do not see why the man
ner Of voting for United States senator
should be different from the manner
of voting for governor or for state Of
f1cers. Considering the matter casual
ly this contention seems right. And
there can be absolutely no question
that as a question Of abstract justice
the popular vote of a party should
govern the party in nominations for
United States senators as well as for
state officers. Furthermore, there need
be little doubt of the fact that event.
ually this will come. But as the mat
ter now stands, under the constitution,
of Kansas, as it now appear on the
books, there is little doubt that to de-
prive the smaller legislative districts
of their constitutional rights, without
first amending the constitution. would
complicate matters, and might result
in throwing the primary law into the
courts, and making it useless for this
years work.
'The advantage Of the smaller leg
islative district-smaller in population
not only in senatorial elections but i'll
all law making has been endured in this
state ever since it was a state, and no
great evil has come out of it. The vote
of citizen in western Kansas, in mat
tiers legislative, whether in choosing b
senator or in enacting statute, is gen
orally a third more effective than it Is
in the larger eastern counties. For in
the western counties only $50 men are
needed to elect member of the leg
isIature, while in the eastern legislative
01Slr1CLS OFTEN twenty-five
voters compose a district. This ad-
vantage is of course undemocratic; Ii
does not promote majority rule. But
on the other hand, it is republican; it
recognizes that in a large geographical
area, or in a peculiar local habitation
are interests not altogether spelled and
measured by a mere count of noses.
For this reason a state like Rhode
Island little larger than a Kansas
county, or a state like Nevada, with no
more population than a New York
second class city, is given two mem
bers in the United States senate. 1t is
wrong according to the Democratic no
ton of strict majority rule. Personal
ly, I believe that majority is right. 1
believe that by the railroad and by the
telephone and by the telegraph we
have abolished distance which in the
DAYS of the fathers made the repre-
sentation of geographical locations just
and right. I believe that all voters for
United States senators in Kansas
should go into one pile. and that the
man who has the mostvotes should win.
But on the other hand, this Is a coun-
try of law, and the advantage which
the western Kansas man has as a mat
ter Of constitutional right today, should
not be taken from him except by a
constitutional change. This can come
in time. OF course it must come in
time, for always the right must Dre-
vail But the legislature just adjourn
ed had to act, not as it would like to