New-York tribune., 1910-02-22
DEM4ND FOR REFORM,
oh'H'tssions Report -fdmits
rms DESPITE Marked Bias.

IT'S DcSpifc 4U0rhcd BIAS.
Albany, Feb. s1-The report of the special
riiect primary committee submitted to the
i-''e and Assembly tonight is bulky
O"iiieht' covering 200 printed pa2 Tes-
tiiiohN taken before the committee at hear
Ilss In Boston, Philadelphia Harrisburg
fh'sburg, Topeka. Des Moines. St Paul
-Haolsoh. Milwaukee. Chicago Indanapolis
,u DeIroit is now being printed 1t will
M some three thousand pages. This report
taxes up the testimony state bv state -iy
ing brief digest OF the direct primary
legislation of and summary of the testi
hhohy taken in each state followed bv The
coHlhl''ees observations on the success of
the laws
The committee shows its hand clearly in
lle section headed General Observations -
- eolceoeS that II could not be asserted
WIN commence that only idealsts or
poiucal opportunists are friends of the
olrect primary system. or said with truth
1uiness that only the bosses oppose tho
system Inc committee announces grave
~ that il is convinced no political move
heht in recent years has so excited the
pubic mind, has aroused so much aninos-
iiN, has split national parties into such
bitterly opposing factions, as has the aei-
tauon for and the operation of direct
:
states which are trying the experiment.
The observations continue:
The people have the right and shouId
exercise IL of selecting their own candi-
dates for public places, and by many any
plan which promises to accomplish this
desired result is welcomed and accepted
without question. whether theoretically de-
fenSible not. In all direct nomination
systems the disappointment comes when
the voter. in the exercise of the privilege
he has sought enters the election booth
upon primary day, demands the ticket of
his party and finds that instead of select
ing his candidates he must choose
between two or three a large number
of men who have simply nominated them
selves by petition circulated either by the
candidate or by some one employed in his
behalf
That the circulation OF such petitions is
OF little value index to the sentiment
of the voters the committee declares. bas-
ing this assertion largely on the result
Of the recent municipal election in Boston.
Comment on the lack Of uniformity in the
direct primary laws of Other states Is
made and the committee asks why. if
direct nomination laws accomplish such
good results" states which nominate
county and district officers directly have
no agitation 10 extend the system to state
officers. The report adds:
II is true that many other states have
adopted direct primary laws more or less
extensive and are cited TO this fact
as one of the reasons why this state should
enact a system of statewide direct nom
inations. The committee docs not coneede
the force of such argument II Is also
true that many of these states nave adopt
ed a bank guarantee law have lax divorce
laws and the state which has had state
wide direct nomination system the longest
-Oregon-haS also included the initiative,
referendum and recall in its local system.
Many Southern states have adopted consti-
tutional amendments designed TO prevent
,r1osI from a
franchise. Conditions in the Middle West
and in the Far West are very different
from conditions in n state like New York.
with more than one-half of its population
located within the bounds of one city. in
which is very large foreign born popula-
ton many of whom are naturailzed cltl-
zens but who cannot read or write the
English language. The same conditions eX-
ISL i'm every city of the state.
II is far easier to put upon the statute
hooks a bad law than TO get rid Of ii when
once enacted.
CONVENTION SYSTEM FAULTY
Admitting that the convention system mas
proved distinctly faulty. the committee de
cIares that II has found the evils OF the
convention system aggravated in States
having the direct primary system.
The committee says it's evidence tended
Ia Indicate that expenses were Increased
several fold under the direct system and
many men of slender means were tempted
TO enter the political arena, and when once
in found the necessities so great and the
temptations so many in bitter contest be-
tween members Of the same party that they
became financially and morally ruined
1t is contended by the committee that the
direct primary system has disorganized the
ma ioritv party, creating factions more bit
terly opDosed to one another than are op-
posing political parties and affordins op-
portunfty for the minority party to raid the
lrimaries of The dominant party. thus tend
ing 10 extinguish the minority party. Party
enrolment is advocated to prevent this, but
with the admission that this would not
overcome the evil
The committee maintains that whatever
legislation is enacted should he for all par
ties rather than for the control OF the
dominant party. and says that if the direct
primary system IS al educational system
il does not educate the minority party. This
party always selects its candidates by
marty agreement. places them upon the pri-
mary ticket and then sits quietly by ard
enioys the factional fights engendered in
the ma iority party, or enters into its pri-
maries because OF The solicitation of
friends or to help nominate weak candi-
dates. who can he defeated at the election
In New York City the committee believes
thera would be few primary contests In the
Republican party except in districts where
it is dominant and fusion would be very
improba bic. Outside OF New York City the
Democratic primary would be III most cases
a needless. formality and useless ex-
ncnse The committee argues that if
there is any doubt about The proprietY of
e9.cting 2 direct primary law. no expert
-