St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1912-05-22

EleCBIOn Oh oGnAlOES.
Congress having passed the reso-
luton to amend the United States
Constitution to allow the direct cleo
ton of senator's, the matter will now
be referred to the state Legislatures.
1t is probable that three-fourths Of
the states will ratify the proposed
change and it will become the law.
Notwithstanding the fact we are
likely to be in the minority we can
not approve of the proposed change.
1t will destroy. some of the delib-
erative power of the, legislative
branch of the government. At pres
ent we have three distinct tests that
a proposed law must pass before it
is adopted. 1t must pass the house
which is composed of the direct rep
resentatives of the people elected for
a term of two years. Then it must
pass the senate which is composed
of two members from each state
elected by the state legislatures for
a term of six years. Finally it must
be approved by the head of the ex-
ecutive department of the govern
ment. In being submitted to three
different authorities a law is sure to
be thoroughly considered and to
have all the different sides of the
question presented. The house rep
resents the will of the people what
ever it may be. The senate repre-
Of
tions of the country, it defends the
rights of each section. Being cleo
ted for a longer term it is not so
much Influenced by the temporary
will of the public as the house. 1t
is able to assume more of judicial
attitude and decide a bill upon it's
merits and protect the rights of the
minority more fully than a body
elected for a shorter term by the di-
rect voice of the people. The pres
ident to is answerable to the people
although he is not forced to appeal
to public sentiment quite so fire.
quentIy as the members of the house.
So we have now two bodies answer
able directly to the people and one
answerable to the various states.
This last body is the one to which
the minority must look for its pro-
lection. AS constituted at present
it is able to consider deliberately the
rights of all the people under pro-
posed law and is really the best
equipped to deal justly in all mat
ters Of legislation. If the method of
election is changed it will take away
some of the independence and USE
fulness of that body.
That presents the theory upon
which the powers of the senate were
granted by the constitution and the
method of the election of senators
determined. In actual practice there
have been elected several members
of the senate who evidently believed
that the rights of the minority were
the only rights they should protect
and these members have caused the
present dissatisfaction with the
method of election. We 1deplore as
much as any one some of the cleo
lions that have been made under the
present system and would heartily
support any plan that we were con-
WINGED would give us more honest
and efficient senator's, but can we
reasonably expect better results
from the proposed method. The the
DRY upon which popular election of
senators is based is that the people
are more honest than the represen-
tatives they elect to the various
state legislatures and are less sus-
ceptible to the use of money in poll
tics than their chosen representa-
tives. 1t is not pleasant to say so
but history proves to the contrary
Take the case of Sen. Stephenson,
a man who secured his place in the
United States senate by the most
brazen use Of money He did not
spend his money on the state legis-
lature which elected him but in the
primary where he appealed directly
to the people. There Is unmistak-
able evidence that he spent over
100000 in securing the support of
the people but none that he bribed
or unduly influenced the Iegisla-
ture. Take 1t right at home and
where has the money been spent?
There has never been an election OF