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

4 eFs OF his own party at pFlnaAry
/ election. II they wers sincere why
] would It not have been as fair to
submit this question in 1911 as It
would be in 1922. This amend
ment was lost by the same identical
vote as was cast on the hrst amend
ment offered by Mr.. Ice.
After refusing to amend the bill
in accordance with the desires OF
those who were advocating a pri-
mary law, the House passed the
French bill on May II. on May 80,
the same date that Speaker Wetzel
killed the Conman primary bill in the
House OF Delegates. the French bill
came before the State Senate
Realizing that the House had re-
fused to consider the CORman BILL
the Republican members OF the Sem
ate prepared TO support the French
! bill If it could be amended, realizing
that it was the only remaining
chance, by which a primary law
could be secured.
Leaving the chair, President Hat
field, from the floor OF the house.
presented the amendments asked by
the Republican members Of the SEN
ate. Each amendment oRered by
the Republicans was rejected by a
strict party vote. The two princi-
pie amendments asked were the
elimination of the referendum ana
Acknowledgement provisions. The
% these
provisions to be stricken out.
The fifteen Democrats IN the Sen
ate voted for the passage of the bill
and the fifteen DepubIicans against.
Accordingly the bill was rejected.
Democrats Defeat Primary
Even at this late hour it was
shown that the only difference which
made the enactment OF primary
law impossible was the referendum
clause and Acknowledgment pro
vision. 1t is a matter OF public rec
ord that the bill could have been
passed with these provisions elimf-
mated. President Hatfield made
open announcement that he would
support the measure with these pro-
visions eliminated. while on Page 30
of the Senate Journal OF May 80
1911, is recorded the following:
Mr.. Smith COZ Cabell): Mr..
President, rise to question OF per-
sonal privilege and would like tor
nv remarks to appear in the journal
of this Senate. In my remarks this
morning upon the floor I stated that
II nv friends on the other side of the
house would cut two points out or
the French bill that would support
that bill: those two points are the
referendum and the disfranchise-
ment Now, Mr.. President, I want
to renew that ofer and state that II
Won will cut those two points out
of the bill, why, gentlemen, I will
support the bill in this Senate I
came here honestly and earnestly
tn trv to get for the people OF this
state a primary law. For more than
six years / have stood for the Fifth
Senatorial district OF the state and
have been telling my people that l
would stand for them, and want TO
stand for them; and am honest
when I tell you that viii stand for
that bill IF you will cut those two
clauses out of IT. Now gentlemen
it is up to you.
Mr.. Grimes: I wish to Join nv
colleague in the statement that he
has made
Mr.. Kidd: wish to say. In the
first place. that have not found any
acknowledgements clause, whatever, in
the bill. and in the second place.
when Senator Bland offered to sub
stitute the bill the other day with
ont the referendum in it, my friends
did not agree to it. I am very FOND
Of my Huntington friend. He and
7 have stood together on many occa-
sfons and I have always believed IN
his sincerity and still believe he viii
do Just as he says; but it is too late
to accomplish anything
Mr.. french: The gentleman says
that If we will strike out the dis
reimbursement clause in that bill and
the referendum that he will vote
for it Now he refused to vote for
If the other day when the referen-
DUN was out. So far as the dis
announcement is concerned, al
+boupb do not doubt the sincerity
- the gentleman from Cabell. he is
absolutely mistaken in his opinion
that there is any ACKNOWLEDGMENT