The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1910-01-27
Committee Authority,
VS.. Committee Power.


To be perfectly fair and to give its
contemporary the benefit of all of the
argument which its column and hall
editorial contains, The Journal pub
fishes on this page today the Tampa
Tribune's remarkable defense of the
action of the state executive commit
tee in eliminating certain offices from
the provisions of it's primary call.
The Tribune's discussion is in
answer to The Journals inquiry as to
what authority the state committee
had for taking the positions of circuit
Judge and state attorney out Of the
primary. The Tribune answers that
the state primary law gives it such
authority.
The Journal further commended thar
4 the committee had authority to
eliminate those offices from the pri-
mary, It had authority to eliminate all
of the other offices and consequently
to abolish the primary itself. The Tri-
bune answers that the committee does
have the authority to abolish the pri-
mary If 1t so desires.
Most remarkable statements ana
sustained by most remarkable logic is
all this. Let us analyze it. There are
two points around which the Tribune's
argument hangs and two only. The
first is the law itself What does the
primary law provide?
It provides a method OF PRO
CEDURE under which a political
party shall act when that party desires
to take advantage Of the primary cleo
ton for the nomination of its candi-
dates. The law is state law and II
applies to all pohtcal parties alike.
1t does not compel a political party to
take advantage Of its provisions, but
It simply defines course Of action
which must be pursued by such politi-
cal parties as desire to take advantage
of 1t. What candidates shall be NOM
mated, and whether all or none shall
be nominated by primary election. the
state law does not pretend to say. The
officers. to be nominated are left en-
tirely to the party itself and the
PARTY LAW must govern that .ques-
ton. Now what IS the party law in
e this particular case?
On June 20, 1900, the Florida demo
cratic state committee then in session
in Jacksonville, adopted the following
section as a part of the party law:
"22. We believe that true Demo
cratic principles require that the peo'
pie be consulted in all matters where
practicable, and that they, as directly
as possible, be permitted to make
known their wishes. We, therefore,
favor the nomination of all candidates
for office, both state and county, and
of United States senators, by a ma.
jority vote in white Democratic pri
mary elections. held under the provis
ions of law, which shall provide al
possible protection against fraud, brib
cry, intimidation and other vicious IN.
tluences, said primaries to be uniform
and held throughout the state on the
same day, and We pledge the Democ
" tuc poSSaSC VI GIL i1"S W liza
end and Instruct the Democratic state
committee to provide for and supertn
tend the holding of and declare and
certify the results OF such primary
elections whenever 1t shall become
necessary by end Of term, death, resig
nation or otherwise, to elect or appoint
any such officer"
In accordance with that party law
We have, every two years, been nomf
mating "all candidates for ONCE, botr
state and county," including also a
United States senator" when there
was one to nominate. Every call is
sued by a state executive committee
since that time has included the of
fees of circuit Judge and state attor
ney until the present committee struck
those offices out. We therefore have
not only party law but party precedent
for including these Offices in the pri
mary, and II will be noted that the
party law even 'instructs" the demo
cratic state committee to provide fol
such primary. So much for the law
on the subject.
The second point in the TribuEe's