Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1913-06-05

Legislature to take the initiative by indicating in referen
dun the kind of political primaries they favor AS already
stated the matter submitted to the people in the form
of questions be answered at the polls in connection
with the next town meetings.
The first of these questions u.s. "Do you favor prefer
entail primary whereby voters instruct their
delegates political conventions to their preference for
candidates for ofice?"
The second question u.s. you favor direct primary
whereby the voters to vote directly for candidates
rather than the present system of nominating candidates
for State, congressional and county Offices"
Manfestly the voter favorng either of these prop
ostions would vote yes after preferred and after
the other The preferrng the present system of
and conventions would vote both of the ques
tons quoted.
Contrary to the apparent belief Of people, direct
primaries not recent discovery AS long 1860
the republicans of Crawford county, PENN discarded their
county convention of delegates and selected their candidates
for county Offices direct vote of the people, the system
used having been patterned after the general election This
is believed to have been the birth Of the direct political prim
ary used in many different States.
In 1899 the direct primary for parties was tried in the
city Of Minneapolis and the systems marked
in this instance to lead to its application to the entire
State Michigan followed Minnesota did various other
Western States At least fourteen States have made direct
nominations mandatory for practically all Offices while the
great majority of the remaining States have adopted direct
primaries with reference to part of their Offices.
The State Of Idaho the other hand, the pioneer
the of the preferential primary and the idea has been
worked in various States with reference the choice of
ddates for the United States Senate The of Oregon
senatorial election of Mr. Chamberlain, democrat, by
publican Legislature with preferential
by the peope will be recalled
Our readers will also bear mind in this connection that
preferential primaries used States for the cleo
ton of delegates to the national elections in 1912 and that
these instructions disobyed in several instances Mr.
Bryan after voting in the democratic convention for
Speaker Clark number of ballots switched to Mr. Wilson,
while in the republican convention the MASSACHUSETTS, oee
cation large conspicuous illustration of the lgnor
ing of the majority preference expressed in primary.
The fundamental difference between the direct primary
the preferential primary that in the former the people,
the indicates, nominate candidates dHecty IN the
primaries whereas in the preferential primary the voters
indicate preference which expected to be carried out by
delegates in conventions
Each of these systems has it's advantages as well as It's
disadvantages will subsequently appear AT the present
time the direct primary preferred over the preferential
primary in majority the States that have discarded their
former caucus systems and the indications that the
the half dozen States that cling to the old
system will also adopt direct primaries.
The preferential primary has gained vogue in some in
remedy for the peril of control of nominations
by small mnortes result of splitting up the voters into
groups in direct primary.
In the preferential ballot is arranged to
permit each voter to his first choice and also to add
second and sometimes third choice the candidates
for given office If the canvass of the first choice shows
majority for any candidate the lowest date is
dropped and the second choice votes of his ballot added
to the first choice of his rivals, and
Another to guard against the nomination of cand
date by minority vote restrict the election to
the highest candidates voted upon for each office
primary, which, of course, election by majority
1t is manfesy possible in this put several
daes in the field to split up another candidates strength
but that is possibility that has yet been able to
guard against
The attention of the people of Vermont first serious
y directed toward direct primaries by the campaign made by
Governor Hughes in New York Like Governor Suzer Gov
ernor Hughes was opposed by his party organization.
Strangely enough of the chief grounds of criticism the
Hughes primary plan that It empowered party
mtees to designate the candidates whose should
halo nlou 0ha1I
strengthen the party machine by giving it absolute
of the ballots forcing voters IN favor of other candidates
write in the of voters which IS serious handicap
This objection has been in States by
curing the printing the ballet Of the of every
didate whose petition signed 10y certain number per-
centage of the voters.
In States the form of ballot used has nterered
with the of the form of political primaries.
Other problems involved in addition to nominations by plural
ty minority vote The participation of members of
party the primaries of another party force the choice
of weak Objectionable candidate the dominance of the
larger cities in nomination by popular vote the increased
pense necessarily involved and the question whether the