The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1910-11-21
THE PRIMARY LAW.

Judging by the election results it
appears that the opponents Of the pri-
mary election law--now that the
measure is on the statute books-be-
lieved it was up to them to accept the
primary results and support the pri-
mary nominees-while the former adj
vocates of the primary law seemed to
have regarded themselves as free
agents and disregarded their pet
measure and its results.
OF course there were exceptions.
Some men had honestly advocated the
primary law and felt in honor bound
to support the men named under its
provisions. Others felt that a man
who went into the primary law plan
ming to participate in its advantages
and beneflts-could in honor-do moth
ing more than abide by the verdict of
the people. Unfortunately there were
some men without sufficient political
honor to be obligated by the rules Of
the game under which they were play
ing.
w. c. Taylor of The LaMoure Chron-
icle, an ardent supporter of the pri-
mary law, and a man who stood hitch
ed afterwards-had an editorial re-
Gently on the results and in discussing
the moral obligation features OF the
primary law. sensibly says. in part:
But while the opportunity offers, the
writer wishes to say that, unless con-
WINGED in the meanwhile by reasonable
argument that his present conception
of the moral obligation which the
operation of a primary election law
imposes upon the members of politi-
cal party is wrong, he will in the flu
ture be found supporting the nominees
OF his party who are chosen under that
law. Because 1t seems to us that If
the results of the operation of the
primary election law are in no wise
binding, either morally or from the
standpoint Of party expediency, then
the law is most prodigious farce and
should be repealed.
But Is the law inherently faulty? Are
not whatever faults and mistakes to
which its operation have given rise in
this state chargeable directly to those
who made use of it? With factional
lines clearly drawn and the essential
differences between the stalwarts and
insurgents matter of common knowl-
edge, how can the nomination of a
mixed ticket" be justified? McCum-
Der and Gronna, Hanna and Helgesen
Johnson and Burdick-stalwar and
insurgent chosen with delightful Inn
partiality-what sense was there in
that? How can situation so hope
less be remedied in a subsequent gen.
eral election unless party lines are tt
go down completely and political chaos
reign supreme?
The writer Is unqualifedly opposed
to compromise where principle is in.
volved. But he is not yet convinced
that the acceptance of majority rul,
as expressed by our primary election
law involves compromise If he haC
believed that the election of C. A
Johnson would have been destructiv,
Of morals or vitality injurious to tn,
welfare of the state, then he woult
have refused to support Johnson. Blu
no such deduction could fairly b.
drawn.
The Chronicle hopes that this mat
ter will be thoroughly agitated an
threshed out to some conclusion befor
another election is held 1t is un
pleasant to be placed in a positio
where ones good faith may be chal
lenged or where adherence to one
conception of right and duty is mad
a subject Of criticism or suspicion.