The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1910-01-14
DIRECT PRIMARIES
z. w. Gibson Esq., Writes Letter To
ST. Johnsbury CALIFORNIAN


Your excellent editorial relative TO :
the views Of DR.. Charles ". Eliot,
president emeritus of Harvard Uni !
versity on the primary election idea
has been called 10 my attention.
Either DR. Eliot has been misquot-
ed by the press. or he IS not fully IN
formed as to the history Of primary ,
elections in Massachusetts. The
criticisms of his attributed testimony
by Massachusetts papers bears out
the above statement. II is probable
that DR.. Eliot has been misquoted-
The Massachusetts law is manda-
/ tory as 10 certain localities and OH
ces. The state has not now and
never has had, a general law for the
nomination of candidates by direct
vote. All candidates for state OIL
GERS are, and have for a long time
been. nominated by the convention
system. A reading of DR.. Eliots tes-
timony before the already discredited |
New York legislative committee |
leaves the inference that Massachu- |
sets has been under mandatory |
/ general primary election law, when
such is not the fact. 1t has law ap-
plicable to certain offices In certain
localities.
The only real change in the pri-
mary system in Massachusetts has
been in the city of Boston which goes
step in advance, as it is claimed, of
even nomination Of candidates by
vote either through caucus or direct
vote. Candidates for city offices are
now nominated by petition only. But
4 there is no disposition in any local
4 ity to return to the caucus system.
That system has been discarded for
n ever Massachusetts is moving away
q from the caucus system, not back to
q it.
DR. Elots statement that the pri-
a mary election system affords in Mas
81 sachusetts no means for resisting
N the bosses and fails to prevent ac-
= tivity on the part of the machine
must be very amusing to anyone
having a knowledge of political con-
y ditions, and the system of party gov
| ernmnet in that state. 1t is motor
ious fact that both the republican
and democratic machines have for
J years maintained their supremacy
through the control of conventions
by machine-made delegates.
In your editorial you state that the
| most serious trouble with our caucus
system is the Indifference of the gen
eral public That is one of the trou
bles. The general experience is tina
the direct vote system stimulates
an active and intelligent interest il
the choice of candidates for office
The direct vote system has been il
: actual practice in Crawford County
} Pa, for the past thirty-one years, ant
the average vote at the primarie
has been 73 per cent of the part
strength.
In Minnesota in 1902 the vote i
the Republican primaries Throughout
. the state was rs per cent, of the r.
q publican vote at the election whic
Il followed In Minneapolis, Mimi, tn
primary vote has averaged above 6
per cent of the party strength. A
the last New Jersey primary electio
nearly so per cent of the republica
vote was cast. In Kansas nearly
per cent. of the republican strengt
was polled at the last primary
These figures are instructive. In OF
state under the caucus less than te
per cent of the votes select our ca
'--S didate at caucus time and we rat
that selection at election time
- Another trouble with the cauc
X system is that It is most cumbt
some. 1t is complex. Let us lo'
at the way it works out In pre-
- Dental year. First there is a CO
- Gus in each town and city for t
election Of delegates to a convent
for the selection OF delegates to [
national convention Second the
! is a district convention for the ell
j ton of delegates to the national c.
= vention. Third, there is a state c.
| vention for the selection Of delega
al large TO the national convent
Delegates travel long distances,
an expense aggregating not less ii
$15,00000. Result, selection of dc
gates by means OF one caucus
each town and three conventio
Fourth, there are caucuses in e;
town for the selection of delega
to the congressional convent
Fifth, there are caucuses in ei
town for the selection of delega
to the state convention. Sometir
these two caucuses are combined
one Sixth, have two congressio
conventions for the selection or n
nation of congressman. Sever
the state convention to nomir
ST state officers. The result up to
time being at least two caucuses
each town and six conventions at
expense of some $S500O00 to
delegates to say nothing Of the
pense to the candidates Fig
caucuses in each town for the Sc
ton of delegates to the county
vention. Ninth, fourteen COZ
conventions throughout the state
the nomination of county bffiC
Result to this time at least Il
caucuses in each town and tw
conventions at cost of some
100000 to the delegates and the
didates. Tenth, two hundred
forty-six caucuses throughout
state for the nomination of town
-S resentatives and justices of
. peace Result at least four cal
,wzuw. es in every town, at least nine
bred and eighty four cauc
A throughout the state, and twenty
Vi 4 ferent conventions all for the sil