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

dock and r. Parker Of the Law Dc
pertinent OF the University, while
!1cssrs. r. Caverley. l.. 3. Kucera and
r. 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 nou-a.-
tendance of the voters, minority nomi-
trading of delegates were most ramp
ant at the present time Tho 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
tho primary system would rc-awal.en
the sense Of responsibility in the in
diNidual voter: and the history OF the
Minnesota Primaries shows, it was
Gained. that it is far less expensive
to the Taxpayers than is tho present
system. Such laws as the Local
Option law" the "Two-Cent Rate"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, the affirn,u-
tive held, that the fact that in half a
century the new system has spread in
greater or less degree to thirty-s,x
states of the Union and that it has
never taken one backward step l..
conclusive evidence of it's superiority
to tho Convention System.
The negative dehatcrs objected thar
under the direct Primary System there
could be no satisfactory method nf
crystalizing public opinion into II def
mite political platform, that a fair
geographical distribution of candidates.
would no impossible and that the cam
didate who should have the mos.
r;oney to spend In Observation-Disclosures
would be the most likely nominee The
trick of nominating H. weak candidate
or ono ticket by the voters of the OPP
posing party was shown. Ivy a long
list of county election returns, to- br
Of frequent occurrence in this state
under the Primary system. The j,.!ir-
larry could not remain pure under
tie system: and Pres. Shurmann or
Cornell University was quoted to
prove that the passing popularity OF
the dcnagoguc would be the criterion
Ct success under the proposed mr;hol
f nomination. The negative, fur.hrr-
more. denied that the evils compss in
cd of in the Convention system were
inherent in that System.and held that
with proper snfc- guards they could
be eliminated. Notwithstanding ions
is the only one of the Ho-callcd evils
really inherent in the Convention sys-
tom, and If this is an evil then we
must confess our whole system OF
representative government to be an
cv:i. The negative neither denied nor
defended the abuse and the corruption
which have crept in under the prcscn:
system. but held that reform undcr
it should he proved impossible bafor.
trying Il new system. Their motto
vas "itv"lutinn not revolutions"
Each of the debntcrs spoke for IS
minutes and after the six had spoken
each ono was again allowed five min
,t"s for rebuttHl. This latter part
proved the most exciting half hour
u!ation of figures and quotations show
Cd how thoroughly 1imiliar these young
men were with The facts aud current
theories OF the question. The records
nf our state officials were probed with
out mercy and praise or blame given
without stint.
The stage occupied by the dcbaters
was draprd on one side with tho
"rnarOon and gold' of tho University
and on the other with the purple and
gray" Of st. Thomas. while the entirA
back ground was filled by huge
American flag. Inc hall was crowded
with visitors and from the number Of
aides present, one might surinisc that
the suffragettc movement is having
some effect at least in the Twin Cities.
During the dclibcration 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 he remarked that whatevrs
the decision might be. all were .;Atis
fed that each ono Of the debatcrs
rad done his duty conscientiousy. A
hearty round Of applause greeted this
sentiment. Then when the chairman