The Caldwell tribune. [volume] (Caldwell, Idaho Territory [Idaho]) 1883-1928, 1908-10-03
SHORB MAKES REPLY
Editor Tribune:

A writer using the nom de plume
Voter" appears in the columns of the
Caldwell News to take issue against
me on the direct primary. From the
weight of argument l do not blame
him, her or it for not claiming his, her
or its offspring. But that makes no
difference. My contention is that the
direct primary is expensive. Voter |
says that it only cost Jones $96014 to |
defeat Ankeny for senator in the state
of Washington. Of course a $1,000 is
nothing. Probably Voter spends that
much every day in cigars. Then again,
MIR. Jones has yet to be elected. That
will cost something.
Ny contention is that the more
money it takes to elect man to
Office, the further that Office is taken
from the people. The following from
the Spokane Chronicle, which has
been an ardent supporter of the pri
mary, substantiates my contention in
every particular. The Chronicle is
leading Washington daily. 1t says:
While as rule the principle of
the primary election is satisfactory
and the voters would not like to go
back to the old political methods,
there is one feature about it which is
the subject of much complaint on the
part of candidates, both those who
were successful and those who were
defeated at the primaries. They claim
it is too expensive to carry on cam
paign under the primary law.
Some of those who were nominat-
ed have already been to greater ex-
pense than it ordinarily costs to make
the whole campaign under the former
system, and they must still submit
to an assessment equal to 10 per cent
Of their first years salary to pay for
the work of the central committee
during the next month. Those candi-
dates who were defeated have nothing
to show for the money which they
have expended, except their expert
ence. 1t is estimated that probably
Jour or five times as much money
was spent in the primary campaign
as will lbe spent in the real cam
paign."
And it might be just possible that
Mr.. Jones may have overlooked sew
eral items of expense.
But that is neither here nor there.
Voter" declares his, entire ignorance
of the possible effect of the direct pri-
mary. Every place that it has been
tried the clamor is raised that it is
defective. Now to the point Even
admitting that the present method of
conducting elections is bad, before a
change Is made we at least ought to
know that we are lettering ourselves.
Therefore, it is up to the advocates
CT the direct primary to prove beyond
peradventure two things.
1. That the present methods of con-
Quoting elections are bad and beyond
correction, and
2. That the direct primary will not
only cure all the defects of the old
system but that it will give better
more economical and less dangerous
method.
Voter" asks me if l believe thai
conventions can do no wrong. a
convention is composed of the people
.:ust the same as pond is composed
of an infinite number of drops o.
water. If each drop if water is pure
the pond will be composed of pure
water. If each drop of water has IL
1t impure elements, the pond will b.
impure. Just so the convention.
is composed of the people; 1t Is al
offspring of the people, and represent
their vices and their weaknesses, a.
we'll as their wishes and thei
strength. Therefore, If the people cal
do no wrong, the convention can d
no wrong; If, on the other hand, tn
people can do wrong, the convention
is very liable to do wrong, likewise. !
convention is creature of the people
and represents their choice. II tn
people will elect a body of men, eac
individual of which is their selection
that will do wrong, what reason haV
we to believe that when they ele'
pominees direct they will do any be-
ter: