The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1911-06-16
The Direct Primary
Judge Perry's Vigorous Appeal The People Wantit-Thirty -Four Out of Forty-Six States Already Have it-None Re- verse Choice

up for action in the General Assem-
 bly, and venture to ask for the use fc your columns for A statement of it: l scope and purposes.
 | I do this, because, as chairman o1 | that body it becomes my duty in com mon with my associates, first to make 1 myself familiar with the subject, and next to share that familiarity with my fellow citizens.
 The members of the commission were charged by the state with a task l not of their own seeking, and the study of a subject unfamiliar to them l When we concluded our labors, we ! were to a man enthusiastic advocates | of the principles. I venture to believe l that every voter in the state would feel as we do. did he understand 1t as well.
 The direct primary method of mak- ing nominations is neither new nor eXperim ental. It has been pracus- ed in different portions of the coun- try since 1860, and with a greater or ty-four out of forty-six states. Whom once tried it has never been given up, with the single exception of county law in Montana. As a rule the laws after enactment have been changed only to be made more comprehenslve and more thorough. Or the New England states Massachusetts. New Hampshire and Maine are converts to the method and pleased with it.
 A direct primary law gives to each voter precisely the same voice In the selection of nominees as he now mas in the election of officers after some enc else has nominated them. It lets him in on the ground floor of the political edifice where hitherto he has been confined to the attic or the roof. while his political machine ran the house. For the first time in our
 Iii O. ter, and makes it easy for him to ex- ercise precisely the same influence as any other voter in choosing those who are to rule over him. In snort, it perfects democratic government Tn that it is literally the only method choice ofethe greatest number TOT the incumbency of an office. The pres ent caucus and convention methods of nomination are peculiarly suscep- tible to abuse, are notoriously unsat- isfactory and already back numbers. principally because they best serve the personal interests of those who manipulate her politics.
 The history of direct primary legls- Iation in this country can be easily learned from the two reports of the commission above referred to, which may be obtained at the comptroller office. It has interested the commis- sion to find that these reports are valued in all the states of the Un- ion, except Connecticut, and that the suggestions therein contained have been adopted in many of the recent primary laws.
 The law proposed by them and now pending in the General Assem- ply applies to the governor, lleuten- : ant-governor, congressmen, state sen- sen ators state representatives, sher1ns and judges of probate; also to dele gates to the state convention and to all municipal elective officers. The lieutenant-governor and judges or probate might perhaps be omitted at first.
 The procedure under the law would be substantially as follows:-
 A petition signed by small per centage of the voters asking that some person of their choice be p'st upon the primary ballot for nomina- filed a certain number of days before the primary election. Sometimes there would be several candidates for the same office and sometimes only one. A primary ballot for each party is then made up by public officials and contains the names of those for whom such petitions have been filed arranged under the proper office heads These ballots are voted int a special box on town meeting day, since that IS the IlI1G W16u LIo ter can be most easily attended to. Party lists of the electors are made and no one may receive or vote q primary ballot of other than his own party. The elector indicates his choice for each office by a. cross opposite the name preferred by him. A plu- rality nominates as it elects The popular choice for United States Sen ator is also to be indicated in the same way for the information Of the Legislature.
 It will be readily seen that in some such way as this the voters may cas- fly and efficiently resume the respon- abilities now most satisfactorily in trusted to so-called, delegates and themselves make at first hand such nominations as they desire. No won der that this privilege once secured is tenaciously held on to.
 Those who object to the method are principally the few who make a more or less profitable profession of politics and value the opportunity to appoint or influence delegates. Nat urally their opposition is made effec- tive with as little publicity as that which attends their other efforts.
 We are told that where they deem it useful they suggest one or more of the following four objections:
 First-That the method would give newspapers an undesirable influence over nominations.
 Second-That it would end party organization and efficiency.
 Third-That it would necessitate an expense prohibitive to ordinary can didates.
 Fourth-That would impair right of the country towns.
 A full reply to these objections would not be possible within the space permitted to this communica ton. They are all decrepit from over exercise and, so far as applica ble, have always been made in the same interest whenever and wherev- CT direct primary laws were propos- ed. That thirty-four states have them is sufficient answer to these and all other criticisms, but 8 few sug gestions may not be out of place.
 Newspapers influence nominations now and always will influence them. We would not have it otherwise if we could. It is not the public state ments of the press, but the private calumnies of the convention corridors which are objectionable.
 Again the responsiveness of candi- dacy did mt originate with primary elections. It is the crying curse of politics as they are administered in Connecticut to-day. If a candidates fitness for the desired position is such go without it, it will of course cost more to purchase the entire electorate than it will to corral a convention. IL is extremely easy to limit pre- election expenses if we really wish to do so but if that is not desired then it is far more public spirited to divide our largeSSeS among the many electors