The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1909-03-27

dock and r. Parker of the Law De-
lsrtment Of the University. while
:icssrs. r. Caverley. l.. r. Kucera and
+. D. Mccarthy of st. Thomas Col
lego took the negative.
The affirmative held that In the
c. INVENTION System there were certain
Inherent evils among which no,,-a.-
tendance of the voters. minority nomi-
rations lacks of dcliberation. and the
trading of delegates were most ramp
ant at the present time. The Primary
system could not be worse in t.ese
respects than is The present Conven-
ZION system, and In fact, is designed
particularly to eradicate these evils.
Governor Folk was quoted to prove
the primary system would rc-aWHl.en
the sense OF responsibility in tile in
dividual voter; and the history OF the
minnesota Primaries shows, il was
GAINED. that it is far less expensive
t" the Taxpayers than is tho present
system. Such laws as the Local
Option law" the "Two-Cent Ratc"luw
and others demanded by tho people of
Minnesota prove the superiority of
the primary system as a medium
through which the popular will may
express itself. Finally. tho affirn,a-
1,
c'rtury the new system has spread in
greater or less degree to thirty-s'N
states of the Union and that it has
never taken one backward step Is
conclusive evidence Of it's superiority
to the Convention System.
The negative debaters objected thar
under the direct Primary System there
could be no satisfactory method of
CrystalliznE public opinion into n def
mite political platform, that a fair
geographical distribution of candidates.
would he impossible and TINT the cam
didate who should have the mos.
r;oney to spend in elf-advertiser,ent
would be the most likely nominee The
trick of nominating 1. weak candidate
or one ticket by tho voters of the OPP
losing party was shown. by a long
list OF county election returns. tn be
Of frequent occurrence in this state
under the Primary system. The judic-
larry could not remain pure under
tie system; and Pres. Shurmnnn OF
Cornell University was quoted to
prove that the passing popularity OF
| the demagoguc would be the criterion
Ct success under the proposed mrihod
{: f nomination.. The negative, further
more. denied that. the evils comlHs in
cd of in the Convention system were
with proper safe guards they could
be eliminated. Notwithstanding ions
is the only ono of the so-callcd evils
really inherent i'm the Convention sys-
tom, and If this is an evil then we
must confess our whole system OF
representative government to be an
tN.i. III JItSdAiFt IItiIItI u'uIStl iva
defended the abuse and the corruption
which have crept in under tho preaen.
system, but held that reform under
it should be proved Impossible bafor:.
trying a new system. Their motto
vas: "Icv"utinn not revolution"
Each of the debatcrs spoke for Is
! Il. J,o RI
each ono was again allowed five min
,les for rebntta. This latter part
proved the most exciting half hour
Of the contest, and tho ready manip-
ulation OF figures and quotations show
I'll how thoroughly timiliac these young
mel, were with The facts aud current
theories OF the question. The records
Vt our state officials were probed with
out mercy and praise or blame given
without stint.
The stage occupied by the dcbaters
was drnpcd on one side with thu
"lnarOon and gold' of the University
and on the other with the purple and
gray Oh 81. IUOIIluS, WHO lHc S'lIN q
| back ground was filed by a huge
| American nag. The hall WAS crowded
with visitors and from the number Of
ladies present. one might surtnisc that
tho Suffragette movement is having
some effect at least in the Twin Cities.
| During the elaboration of the
| Judges. the hum Of quiet but
animated conversation showed
| the interest which the debate
| had aroused. Before Mr.. Lyons opened
the envelope containing the decision VI
the judges lie remarked that whatever
the decision might be. all were .'Atis
fed that each ono OF the debatcrs
lad done his duty conscientiously. A
| hearty round Of applause greeted this
sentiment. Then when the chairman