The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1912-10-25


date for State Senator.
Dear Mr.. Barber:-I have before me
your interview in last nights state
Journal and eleven other articles or
similar import published in Shawnee
/ county papers. In all of these you
misinterpret the law governing the
election of United States senators, mis-
represent my attitude, and assume an
| absolutely indefensible position your
/ self
/ You say the vote at the primary
| should be conclusive. Here is the vote
in the state:
CuItlS - 81
Stubs ......-.-....-...---- -04'5o5
Farrelly ..-..--.-...-.....- SOL
/ Thompson ---..--.....-.--.. - - 'oo- 90,
Allen .lu,o1o
Bond Observation-Disclosures 1905
The vote in Shawnee county was:
Curtis NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.. 7,29S
StubbS .----.......-...... --'-.--'. -'oIo
! Thompson OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES. S97
Other candidates northumberland ,213
Under your theory that the primary
vote in the district should control, Cui-
It's should be your first choice, Stubbs,
second, and Thompson third. You are
supporting Judge Thompson. who was
fourth in the state and third in your
own district. Thompson received less
than one vote in seven ir the state,
and less than one in ten in Shawnee
county. You say that you will be gov
erned by the vote at the primary in
Shawnee county, regardless of the rest
of the state. Curtis beat Thompson
five to one in this district, and Stubbs
beat him three to one. Therefore,
Thompson should be your third choice.
If you regard the expressed preference
of the state, at large, he should be
your fourth choice.
Again. you say Stubbs was put Oh
the ticket through the 'iniquitous''
fpat t11ra nf
Thompson. Both were beaten by the
popular vote and both owe their nom
nations to a technical and unjust pro-
vision of the primary election law
This ''iniquitous' feature of the law
should arouse your Indignation just as
much in one case as the other.
Since you manifest such poignant
grief at the defeat of Mr.. Curtis, let
me ask, Did you vote for Curtis, Mr.
Barber? I supported Mr.. Curtis, on
the stump. in the papers and voted
for him at the primary. Isn't it a
fact that you never, for one moment, |
contemplated voting for Curtis at the
primary, the election. or in the leg
islature? Has it not been your set
tied purpose. at all times, to vote for |
Thompson, regardless of the law or the
popular vote in the county or state, or
whether Curtis was the nominee or |
not2
The fact is Mr. Barber, as you
know perfectly well, the law of 1911 |
has no application TO primary elections |
1t relates exclusively to the general |
election, and is a method of instruct |
ing legislators how to vote on United |
States senator. 1 have an old-fashioned |
notion that even state senator should |
have some respect for the law, some /
regard for his official OATH and be /
guided by the peoples wishes.
Upon one of my campaign cards |
have explained the law and defined my |
position as follows:
The Federal Constitution requires
state legislatures to elect United States
The Kansas la y (Chapter 1872
laws of 191D provides 4 method by
which the voters instruct members of |
tire legislature. The names Of the cam
didates at the August primary (Gover-
nor Stubbs and Judge ThOmpson) viii;
appear upon the ba %; at the Novem-
her election, tc be voted upon the same
as governo4. or any other officer. The
\ ote on senator will be canvassed by
the state board. and the result officially
certified and published. Tile winner at
the November election, tbs law saws
shall receive from the secretary Of
srate Ger .iicate which shall recitc
such fact, and show the total number
of Totes cast for United STATES selia-
:or''
The purpose of the law is to have the
people elect, in reality and the legisla-
ture formally to ratify their choice Il
is up TO the individual voters. and not
the members of the legislature to say
whether they want Stubbs or Thomp- /
son. If am elected and Stubbs receives
a certificate from the secretary of state
that he is the peoples choice, he viii
get my vote in the legislature If
Thompson is the certified choice of the
people, [ shall vote for him. If a ma
iority of the people want Stubbs they
ought to have him; if a majority want
Thompson they ought to have him
That is what Statement No. L. means
That is the law. That is simply the
of the fundamental prin-
ciple of our government, that the ma
iCrity shall rule If you believe L will
make successful member of the state
senate, vote for me, and I viii follow
whatever they may be. on
united States senator If I am elected
shall not disregard my official oath,
1isobey the law, or defy the will of the
majority.
What, if anything, is wrong about
hat Mr. Barber.
By the way, did you notice the dis
patch in this mornings paper, confirm
ng Judge Thompson's PaoIa speech,
"a ying that he advised all legislative
candidates to sign statement No. L? SO
Tour candidate for United States sena- :
or. properly construed the law, and IS .
low advising Democrats to vote against
Ill candidates who refuse to be bound
~ popular vote.
Another suggestion: You say in yes