The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1909-04-16
BIG COST OF PRIMARIES.

|
The dispatches yesterday morning
: referred 10 the dispute between Sen
ator Stephenson Of Wisconsin and the
Senate investigating committee which
Is lDquiring into his election expense
account, The difference between them
seems TO be somewhat as TO the time
| of filing the report and somewhat as
! to the separation of his expenses at
| the primary election. as distinguished
from what he may have spent at the
election of members of the Legisla-
| tuTc.
Senator Stephcnsons s main expense
| on his reelection was at the primaries.
He spent $l07 900 on this account, be-
sides the money he spent in establish
ing and running newspaper in ad-
Vocacy of his candidacy. He adver-
used largely in the newspapers, and
also spent huge sums in organizing the
vote. This organization he made sys-
tcmatic and complete, county by coun-
ty. Even the smallest counties cost
SloOO to organize for the primary cleo
ton; larger counties from $4,000 10
$1,000, each, to consolidate and make
effective the Stephenson forces. This
organization consisted in selecting com
mlttecs, precinct workers, men to run
carriages for voters, TO distribute cards
at the polls. TO argue the Stephenson
cause at the primary booths, chal.
lengers, checkers, and all that sort of
thing, besides the distribution of i'm
mense quantities Of folders, circulars.
posters, and the like.
His opponents at the primary had
to come forward also in like manner.
State Senator w. II. Hatton, who repre-
sented the La Toilette interests against
Stephenson, spent something over $50
600 i'll his own interest Former Con-
gresham Cook spent over $4,000 +.
f. McGovcrn, "the poor man s can
didate, spent $1,000, admitting that
he had to borrow the money. He was
Il high school teacher. with no money
above his earnings. Here is primary
election which cost the candidates for
Senator alone upwards of 100000 in
this one State. And half the money
was spent unsuccessfully, the candi-
dates thus being enormously out Of
pocket besides suffering the chagrin
of defeat.
1t seems to be conceded in Wiscon-
sin that under the primary law now in
effect there, this sort of lavish eXpend
iturc is inevitable. There is. in con
sequence, a pronounced effort to amend
the primary law by limiting the eX
penditurcs that any candidate may be
allowed to incur. 1T will be found very
difficult, however. to limit those ex-
penditures as long as there are wealthy
men ready to spend their cash in order
TO harvest political honors. But eyi-
IDENTIFY under the present primary law
in that State a poor man has no show
whatever at the primaries, so far as
a State candidacy is concerned. He
might stand some chance in a city. cs
pecially in small city or even in an
average county. but when 1T comes to
reaching the multitude of voters, evil
IDENTIFY the rich man hns it all his own
way; he can organize his forces, he
can pay his workers, and he can get
done those things that arc necessary 10
attract the public attention and win the
public support. But, after all. it is
hard TO argue that primary law show
ing results like this is any improve
mcnt over or in line of bctterment
upon, the old convention system of
nominating. In fact, most people would
think it "A good deal worse And yet
something of the kind seems to be in
cvitable in the primary law And this
added to the fact that the primaries
do not give majority candidates, makes
Il pretty strong argument against the
adoption of the primary system to take
the place of conventions in nominating
candidates for office.