The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1908-07-10

~
are greatly exercised at this time about
the who's, why's and hows of "getting
the nomiIStio SO far as national
politics is concerned, one might search
the Constitution and the laws forever
and never find one word to authorize
political convention g mandate. Yet
n vast number of the voters of the
United States place the action of the
convention above their own convictions
and vote for the nominee regardless of
personal preferences. And the members
of the electoral college,--none has ever
disobeyed the command of his party
convention.
Political party nominations are neces-
sary to the career of the American
statesman. No man is so great that
he can enter public life without the aid
or the capacity to control nominations
of nomination to help him to office,
to help others to office. The infrequent
successes of independent candidates for
minor offices mark the exception which
but proves the rule. Therefore, it is
apparent that the whole fabric of our
political institutions rests upon the
political party nomination. The voters
can choose no better man for president
than is nominated by the parties. The
so-called independent voters can never
select man to serve in the, White
House. That section of the public may
induce a party to take it's choice by
bartering promise of the "independ-
entD vote, but under ordinary circum-
stances it must take what the parties
| give it; the greater of two goods, or
the lesser of two evils.
! Just at this time it is interesting to
mark the progress of the nominating
machinery of the American political
parties. In the beginning there was the
caucus, then came the delegated con-
vention, and now the direct primary
election bids fair to carry the machin-
cry to it's most democratic extremity.
There is great talk of conventions that
are boss-ridden, and the like. There has
been such talk before; ever since con-
ventions were held in fact. The great
er volume of complaint now is but the
evidence of the increasing purpose OF
the people to take the power of nomi-
mating into their own hands.
| Leaving aside the hosts of municipal,
county, state and congressional offices,
for which nominations are already made
by direct primaries in many states, it
is interesting to apply the theory of
the direct primary to the nomination
for the presidency, the most important
| function exercised by political party.
The trainers of the Constitution did
not believe the people possessed suf-
ficient wisdom and Judgment to select
the chief executive of the Federal
government. They battled long over
the proposition of leaving that selection
to the national legislature, or of entrust-
ing it to the several state legislatures.
In the end, they left it to electors to be
appointed by the various states-not
by the people of the states-in such
manner as each state legislature might
direct
The Constitution was null and void
from the very beginning, so far az
the spirit of this provision was con-
cerned. The people had every con-
fidence in their ability to select a pres
ident, and they were very careful to
choose as electors only those persons
who would reflect the popular will.
Thus the electoral college came to be
merely an empty form, so ar as the
constitutional function of choosing a
president is concerned. 1t is very far
from being an empty form in that it
provides a system which gives the
smaller states more power in proportion
to their population than would obtain
in direct vote; and thus makes the
selection of a minority president DOS.
sible.
The fathers declined the proposition
to vest the power of selecting pres
ident in the hands of Congress out of
consideration for the integrity of the
tripartite system of government they
were establishing, in which the checks
and balances of and between the ex-
ecutive, judicial and legislative de-
partments were so nicely adjusted.
But Congress soon perceived that the
electoral college was amenable to the
popular win. Therefore it set about to
captain and command that will, thus
virtually giving Congress the power to
name the president.
Political parties appeared in Con
gress before lines were drawn among
the people. The Congressional caucus
| was the result. From 1888 until 1900
the presidents We're named by informal
party caucuses of members of Con
gress. The attacks on "King Can
cus' were begun in the public
press as early as 1900, although
the first formally convoked nominating
caucus was not held until 1904. From
that time until 1924, liking Caucus''
ruled supreme, and the presidents were
in fact chosen by the members of Con.
gress.
If that method of selecting party
candidates for president had prevailed,
it is safe bet that the list of presi-
dents from Monroe Is time till now would
not contain a single name which it now
bears Congress has always looked at
things from point of view quite diff
ferent from that of the voter. 1t does
not require great mental agility to
imagine that the present Republican
members of Congress would not choose
Mr.. Taft, or that the Democrats in Con
gross might prefer another than Mr..
Bryan. Certain it is that no Congress
sional caucus would have nominated
Theodore Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln
or Andrew Jackson.
1t was the certainty that caucus