New-York tribune., 1915-03-29
DIRECT LEGISLATION
A Progressive Plank Criticised by a
Republican.
To The Editor Of The Tribune.

To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: As an old Republican and a reader OF
The Tribune | have been interested in the
correspondence which began with Mr. Batess
Progressive platform and Mr.. McCook's com
meT thereon. ! was Immediately struck by
the absence Of such an old line Of Progress
sive defamation as the death OF the Repub-
lican party and the recall Of judicial de-
csions. Next / was impressed by the recital
of large number Of planks on which the
Republican and Progressive parties agree, a.
though they were peculiarly the property Of
the lattet
The letter OF Mr. Pecora seems scarcely in
genuous, for he ignores Mr.. McCook's refer
ence to the liberal laws mentioned BY Mr..
Bates passed by the Democratic Legis-
laturc at the special session of 1913, though.
As Nh McCook pointed out these were forced
hy the Republican state conference at the
Waldorf, and one Of them was the existing
workmen's compensation law. Mr. Pecora
also accuses Mr. McCook by implication Of
being opposed 20 workmen's compensation
legislation, whereas the latter was active in
that conference and has always been one of
the most vigorous friends Of this reform
lie also ignores the fact that the first work
mems compensation law declared urconsti-
tutional in the ives case was the work of
Republican Legislature and Governor before
the Progressive party was born.
Perhaps. by the way, it mas not occurred
10 him that the act thus passed so approved
itself TO the protaconist Progros ssive that he
made the declaring of it unconstitutional by
the Court OF Appeals the ground Of one Of
his tiercest assaults on our judiciary system
and his excuse for proposal to install in
place Of that court a reference of the consti-
tutional questions involved in such decision
TO the general electorate questions which
not one in ten OF that proposed ultimate
court would comprehend.
Mr.. Bates speaks of the Progressive pro
gramme Of direct nominations He must re
call that a Republican Governor initiated and
propounded that idea. and he must since have
noticed that only last week the Republican
state Chairman declared his opposition TO
any abandoning Of the system and 70 any
discar riding of the short ballot idea or the
Massachusetts ballot.
However. one Progressive plank Republ-
cans do oppose direct legislation" as Mr.
Bates phrases il. We all know what it means
Fortunately, We are not without concrete ex-
amples Of 1t. II is no longer confined to the
Helyetlc cantons, small districts permitting
all the citizens to assemble easily and vote
It has been applied in a large American state
Oregon. and the result is noted. Oregon
has no city tenth as popuous as New York
City. and her legislative problems should be
impler than ours. hut the statistics Of the
election Of November 8, 1910, show thirty-two
distinct questions, some Of them very com
pick. submitted TO the voters.
Il j. trite saying that in New York. in an
occasional referendum on constitutional
amendment or other matter, it is impossible
10 get deliberate. intelligent action on even
half a dozen simple questions. How. then.
hall intellig action be had. when, % al
electorate no more intelligent or competent.
thrty-two are submitted?
Examination will demonstrate that the one
ubmission, out OF total Of thirty-two, con
tains as much 20 puzzle and confuse the
voter as all the propositions ever submit
tod Al any New York referendum within
our memory. If one be apprecative OF the
meaning % the submission he will perceive
that among the thrty-two questions are some
that must inevitably puzzle the wIsest publ
cst. But little obstacle of that kind does
not shake the confidence OF such Progressives
as Mr.. Bates in the utility OF the suggestion.
Colonel Roosevelt advocated IT, and why
should not ne follow? Republicans will not
deny 10 Progressives premiership in that en-
terprise. GEORGE r. BISHOP.
New York. March %, 1915.