The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1910-01-02
THE COMPULSORY PRIMARY.

j TIE Ph1hAh1s
The Lynchbnrg News argues that the
Roanoke convention did not authorize
a compulsory primary. and tina; there
fore the Democratic party has no moral
right 70 establish one. The point is
] interesting; the News defends 1t well
/ but we cannot say that We are con-
/ WINGED. This conventions resolution
after specifying certain definite points
/ IN which the state COMMITTEES was 70
Improve the present primary plan. IN
structed that body to prepare and pre-
sent 10 the Legislature "a bill TO legal
! ize and protect all primaries Our
understanding of this resolution is
that It directs the COMMITTEES TO frame
a primary law, on some points OF which
II is given specific instructions, but
on other points OF which 1t is left quite
Tree 10 use It's own discretion. It is
true that the committee was not told
% make the primary compulsory. Nei-
the- WAS Il told TO make Il optional
70 be kicked aside whenever Its deter
I--.-4S- <---- ~ opponents might
happen to get their lucky chance.
It seems TO US that the News goes
pretty Tar when i, declares that. under
e compulsory provision, although the
majority sentiment of ths Democratic
party may hereafter desire change
in method of nominating It shall be
powerless IN itself TO ensc; that
change TO US 1t seems that the ma
jority sentiment of the Democratic
party has al ali times a very ready and
( convenient means OF making that
/ change. This isethrough the Leglsia-
ture, which Il entirely controls. The
4 Democratic party now employs the pri-
mary method OF nominating, by direc-
ton Of its party convention. At pres
ent the convention meets every four
years The Legislature meets every
two years. If the party desires to dis
card the primary It would have the
strength to repeal the compulsory fea-
ture at any session OF the Legislature.
But why is It assumed that the party
will, or may, desire TO discard the pri-
mary? Why must we be careful TO
c leave this system SO open that we can
a escape from it at any time at the short
r est possible notice.
The fact that most other states, after
: experimenting with the optional pri-
mary. have now adopted the compul-
sorry primary. does not, 1T is true, prove
that tine latter is best for Virginia.
But It does aeem that the experience
OF these States should be worth some
Thing to us. The Dispatch is not
certain how far the compulsory pri-
: mary ought to be insisted on. Yet for
the life of us we can see no reason for
bitter opposition to IT. The Iynchburg
News offers none that we have been
, able to grasp, except that a compulsory
primary would be harder to get rid OF
than an optional one We cannot say
that we are much impressed by this
/ reason. Virtually all the laws that the
t Democratic party has written on the
r statute books of Virginia are compul-
Il sorry laws. They say shall" and
:. "must" not may" They have the
e courage of their convictions. We do
e not know why the primary law must
y be put in different class from all
: these other laws. made tentative and
: permissive, while they are made man
: datory. unless it be that It's hackers
$ honestly lack confidence in it. Why
| shrink from enforcing a good thing
If the Democratic party really believes
that the primary is the best nominating
system known. why on earth should
j it hesitate to REQUIRE all parties TO
use It for the general good OF the
State2