The Brattleboro daily reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1913-1955, 1916-02-26

statement is incorrect. OF the two
the primary system is considerably
less expensive. Most voters win re-
member the campaign of 1902 when
Mccullough, Proctor, Clement and
Webb were candidates for the Repub.
lican nomination for governor. This is
believed to have been the most expen-
sive, in proportion to the number
of voters, ever known in this part of
the country. This contest was under
caucus and convention system. 1t is
not on record that direct primary
campaign anywhere ever cost at the
same proportion. AS a matter of fact
the cost of a campaign has always de-
pended on the wealth of the candidates
and their inclination to spend money
rather than any system of nomination
used. This Vermont primary on which
the voters are to decide March con
talns provision compelling every can
dldate, whether winner or loser to make
pubIlc his expenses and this publicity
Will do more to limit the unfair use of
money than any other one thing. On ac-
count OF this provision alone the law
should be accepted by the voters in
view of the scandals that have on sew
eral occasions attended Vermont cam
paigns.
Under the provisions of the proposed
primary, candidates for town repre-
sentative may or may not be selected
just as the voters prefer. They can
leave the choice of town representative
candidates to caucus to be held later
II tney prefer or to independent fled
nominations such as are now used in
many towns. The primary does not ap-
ply to town, city, village or school
district or. 70 Oh
of the peace.
The proposed law provides for a
convention of each kparty to prepare
a party platform and make nominees
Tor state and county offices members
OF this convention. BY this method
the men who have the platform to
carry out have part in making the
platform and in this way greater par
ty responsibility is secured.
The friends of the direct primary
make no claim that the primary ia a
panacea or cure for all political evils.
but they do feel sure that it will give
voters direct control of making their
own nominations and in this wav n
nrmer hand in the government of their
state.
The statement has been made in
some quarters that direct nominations
"SAo unuuly favorable to the LARGE
towns and give them advantage over
the small towns. This statement Is
absolutely untrue Nominations nv iii.
rect primary are now made in 40 Of the
~ states of the Union and in not one
single case have the primary laws been
found to be of special advantage 10
large towns and cities or of a1y dis.
advantage to the small towns.
So far as my own personal observo.
ton goes | have found the most earnest
opponents of the direct primary 10 he
those who had some selfish reason for
trying to control nominations and cleo.
lions, corporation lawyers, politicians
who work for hire and those who are
not willing to trust the plain people
There are also many good citizens who
hesitate to vote for direct primary
because they are naturally con.
SENTATIVE and fear lest thew make .
mistake, but l feel sure, that if the bill
becomes law it win prove force Is
lettering the governmental affairs OF
Vermont.
Respectfully yours,
FRANK E. HOWE.
Bennington, Feb. 81, 1916.