The daily telegram. [volume] (Clarksburg, W. Va.) 1901-1926, 1912-10-24

Co@maH Dtll perfected It IN every de-
tail Later: when the bill came be
fore the Senate for passage. the sole
objection waged by Senator Samuel
v. Woods to the measure was that IL
had been amended 70 times. and
this objection vas made in face OF
the fact that the French Referen-
dunn bill had been amended 1O4
times.
The CoRman bill took It's regular
course through the state Senate. The
Republicans who advocated the
measure offered the amendments
which they thought would perfect
it and make it unobjectionable to
those who favored direct primaries
During the whole time that the bill
was on second reading-the amend
ment stage-not one amendment
was offered from the Democratic
side of the chamber with the excep-
ton of the time when Senator Bland
moved to substitute the French bill
without the referendum, for the
CoRman bill. The Republicans be-
lieved that substitute would have
to be better than the original ana
they voted against the substitution
believing the Coffman bill was bet
ter bill. And several OF the Demo
Gratis, also, voted against the motion
Of Senator Bland.
Debate on CoRman Bill.
On Monday, the 18th day OF May.
the CoRman primary bill came be-
fore the Senate for passage and a
debate lasting several hours en-
sued. Senator Sam ". Woods, OF
Barbour county. needless of the
pledge in the platform adopted by
the Democratic State Convention,
needless OF his own personal prom
ises to the voters Of his district and
regardless of the fact that there was
a plank in the platform OF his own
senatorial district convention di-
recting him to vote for a direct pri-
mary law, opened the argument for
the Watson-ChIlton Democrats Who
were opposed to a primary law.
Senator Woods spoke for an hour
in opposition to the CoHman bill,
but in all that time he did not point
out an imperfection in the bill as It
came before the Senate for passage,
directing his remarks entirely to-
ward the bill before it was amended.
During his speech he was inter-
rupted by his own colleague, Sena-
tor Howard Sutherland, who read
from a newspaper the plank in the
platform adopted by the convention
which nominated MI. Woods for the
State Senate, endorsing such law
and pledging the candidate to its
support. Woods evaded the ques-
ton with the statement that he was
not present when the platform was
written and exclaimed that no man
had the right to challenge his vote
Senator w. c. Grimes made the
direct answer to the statements OF
Senator Woods. He reminded Woods
that he had spent an hour in DIS
cussing the Conman bill, but had
not pointed out a single defect in
the measure and stated that not a
single amendment had been offered
BY the Democratic Senators with the
idea of perfecting the bill. Rela-
tive to the statement that the Dem
ocrats were not ~favoring the ore
gon plan, Senator Grimes said:
There is no oregon plan; there
is no Nfinnesota plan; there is no
Wisconsin plan; there is no New
Jersey plan; there are no such
plans-there is bu one plan, Mt.
President, one fundamental princi-
pie that underlies all these laws
and that is the issue which confronts
us today and the question is wheth-
er you favor that principle-that the
people shall by direct vote make
all their nominations for public Of
fee. When you come to that funda-
mental principle, gentlemen, we will
not have any difficulty in agreeing
uUon a primary election law. We
do not want to stand for any tech
nicalitfes: we do not stand for any
particular bill. We nave presented
to YOU the best bill that we thought
we could present. We are honest
in the presentation OF that bill. We
have made amendments, and tell
me OF a single instance where any
bill Of such tremendous importance
has been presented IN this Senate
that amendments have mo- been
made to it, and yet you have sat
over there and not a single amend