The Oroville weekly gazette. [volume] (Oroville, Wash.) 1905-19??, 1915-03-05
WHY THE KICK!

and maker of all'the laws OF the state
a nonresident heading the Grange |
OF Washington, a cheap politician, sem
out a communication to the farmers
relative to bills pending before the
accompanied by false as
sertion-which is not to be wondered
at since Kegley, when engaged in his
pet occupation of guiding legislation.
IS a stranger to the truth-of when
the following is an extract:
There is now pending in the legis-
lature at Olympia measures ana
amendments which, if enacted, will !
destroy the very life and usefulness |
Of the initiative and referendum. The |
amendment to the initiative law pro-
vides that all petitions shall be filed
with the registration officer (Which
officer is provided n another billL |
and ali persons wishing to sign a petit
zion must appear in person before such
registration officer. be identified By
him and sign the petition in his pres
ence.
The amendment further provides
that no person can solicit any person
to sign a petition within 100 feet OF
the office of any registration Office,
making it a misdemeanor to carry or
solicit any person to sign a petition
IN violation of this act
The initiative and referendum as
originally suggested and supported by
honest men were advanced for the
purpose of securing an honest eX-
preston of the electorate upon any
law that might be considered adyan-
tageous to the people as whole, and
when appealed to in a spirit OF fair
SIS and business are admirable pow
az soon as the meaeures were adopt
ed in this state they were seized upon
| by designing men and used for utter
ior purposes. When men of the Keg-
ley ilk see that there is a possibility
of safeguards being thrown around
these laws, SO that they can not be
made club by creatures Of his kind,
| then he uses his Influence to dis
| credit the action and purposes Of those
| who desire TO make the initiative and
referendum direct expression of the
desires and wishes of the voters.
AS the bill was originally drawn a
| mistake was made in fixing the. num-
Der of petitioners required to submit
a law to a vote at general election
at 10 per cent of the total vote cast
a. the last general election. That
number of electors is a meagre min
GRITTY of the total vote cast, and makes
it possible for any scheming clique to
get law before the people without
| regards as to it's cost If a proposed
measure is worthy of public considera-
ton, if it is beneficial to public polity
| 1t 1t is crying need, if the people
| really desire its enactemnt then 20
| hesitate to sign such petition, and
support it at the pol's. When a gen
eral public demand Exists for any law
1t would not be necessary to hawk
petitions around the state, or resort
TO corrupt means TO secure signatures.
The voter would go a long distance
out of his, or her way, and put them
selves to some trouble, in order to
sign such a petition.
No class OF people with any pre-
tense to honesty of purpose would be
disconnected if required TO sign q
petition before a legally qualified Of
fetal with an office at some central
location within precinct, easy Of
reach to every voter Indeed, that is
the only fair method OF securing d
| free and untrammelled expression of
| the wishes of votey, and it prevents
resort to fraud in the securing Of
signatures. If proposed law is con-
sidered necessary NY the citizens of
| the state, if it be one that the eXig-
| encies of the times demands, if It Is
| really wanted by the majority re-
quired and demanded by the people,
| does any one doubt that the required
number of voters and many more, too
would not take the flight trouble nee
essary to go to the official empowered
to certify to the genuineness OF their
| signature and sign such petition?
| They would not have to be urged. and
solicited, and brow beaten into sign
ing. They would do it voluntarily.
| cheerfully, unhesitatingly as a duty.
| How could there be a fairer way of
securing the unbiased expression OF
| the wishes of "a population than
| through voluntary signatures to in
itiative petitions? Under the PROOFS
ed amendment petitions would be in
| the hands Of properly constituted and
responsible officers, who would have
means for knowing the genuineness Of
the signatures. These petitions would
b" of easy access. Ample publicity
and ample time would be given for
the electors to famiiarize themselves
with the measures proposed. and for
the securing OF signatures. There
would be no penalty Cor a person call