New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1913-05-01
The Other AZ Unite in Defeat
ina His Direct Primary Bill
After Bitterly DenounC-
ing Governor.
PARTY LINES SWEPT ASIDE
Democrats Flout Threats Of the
Executive, Challenge His
Good Faith and Support
Measure Similar to
One He Vetoed.
lBy Telegraph TO The Tribune.l

Albany, April 30.-With attacks on
Governor Sulzer so bitter and sweeping
that they made his denunciations of
the Legislature and his threats OF
crushing" opponents seem reasonably
mild. the Senate tonight defeated the
Governors direct primary bill by a
vote of to ~. Party lines were swept
aside in the vote. Those who stood
with Sulzer were Senators Duhamel,
independence League; Mcknight,
OKeefe, Seeley. Wende and Wheeler.
Democrats; Palmer Republican and
Progressive, and Whitney, Republican.
Then the Senate again defeated two
the Republican embodiment of direct
primary legislation, by a party vote.
Governor Sulzer attributes the de-
feat Of the bill to the fact that both the
Democrats and Republicans were
bound by caucus action TO vote
against it.
There never has been such a spec
tacle presented to the people Of the
State of New York" said the Gov
ernor. "as that of the Democrats Of
the Senate going into caucus to take
action against the solemn pledge of
their party platform"
Senator Blauvelt. whose direct pri-
mary bill Sulzer vetoed, terming it a
fraud" introduced a new bill, and IT
was advanced at once to the order Of
final passage. This bill is practically
the same as the one the Governor
vetoed. 1t contains a few slight
changes. such as prohibiting the use
Of party funds in primary campaigns
and reducing the number Of signatures
TO independent petitions.
This bill will be passed by both
houses and sent TO the Governor. The
Democrats say that If he vetoes this
after his own bill has been defeated he
will stand revealed before the state as
an intolerant self-seeker, using the
direct primary agitation simply as a
means Of Reimbursement.
Brown Quotes the Law.
Senator Brown, who believes in the
letter of the law. read that section OF
the Penal Code which stipulates that
anybody trying to force a legislator to
vote his way on a bill is liable TO fine
and Imprisonment.
I'D rather go out Of public life than
submit TO such threats" said Senator
Carswell, a Democrat. Of Brooklyn.
My self-respect is not 70 be the OBJ
ject of bargain. My attitude On pub
lie questions is not for sale for jobs,
nor can I be scared into abandoning
my views. Id vote against something
! believed to be right just TO protest
against such treatment of public Off
GERS sworn to do their duty
Senator Brown opened the debate
with a request that Immediately after
the Sulzer bill had been disposed Of
votes be taken on his bill for direct
primary law in connection with a re-
tention the state convention and its
companion bill repeating the Levy
election law Then he ripped the Sui
ger direct primary bill 10 pieces. He
said he was against It because 1t abol-
shed the state convention, and thus
wou, put control of state nominations
into the hands of any fairly efficient
political organization in New York
City. He made a special point Of the
"fndecency" Of compelling candidates
for nomination for the Court of APP
peals TO obtain that nomination by ap-
pealing 10 the voters.
There is a vast improvement in the
Governors bill over existing law" said
Mr.. Brown, but l can't accept il when
| believe 1t would throw executive, adj
ministrative and judicial offices into
the hands Of demagogues unfit for Of
fee"
Senator Murtaugh took much the
same ground. While he was direct
primary man from start TO finish. he
said, he could not stand for the abol-
ishment OF the state convention. This
would throw political conditions into n
state Of chaos and would be unfair and
unjust TO the rural parts Of the state
He questioned the wisdom Of jumping
at the proposition as the Governor mad