The Brattleboro daily reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1913-1955, 1916-03-04
E. w. Gibson COmbats the
Claims Set Forth by
Mr.. Melendy
SAYS FIGURES HAVE
A FAMILIAR SOUND
Declares That No Faction in States
Which Have Adopted Primary sys-
tenn Ever Suggested Return to eau
Gus and Convention System.

Editor of The Reformer:-
It has not been my intention to take
part in any public controversy over
the direct primary proposal, coming
before the voters at the March meet
ing, but the continued assaults upon
the proposal by Mr.. Melendy, now and
for many years connected with the
Central Vermont Railway company,
and Mr.. Wardner of New York and
Windsor makes it necessary for some
one to say word.
The present system of selecting
candidates for Office is system
whereby politicians select our candi-
dates for US. They are always safe
men. Messrs. Melendy and Wardner
want to continue that system. There
is reason. The direct primary is a
method whereby the people do their
own selecting of candidates Mr.. Ward
ner says that system is humbug Of
course, to some men, any system
which takes government out of the
hands of self selected guardians and
puts it into the hands of the people
is a humbug. They think so because it
takes from them their power of con-
troll
ton attorney in the state is opposed
to nominations by direct vote There
too, is reason. Their EMPLOYERS.
through them, have controlled our
senate by selecting the candidates
nearly all the time for 40 years past
They want nothing Of a system which
viii permit the people to take a hand
i'll making their own selections and
thereby control their own legislative
agents.
Mr.. Melendy makes claim that the
proposal system does not work salts
factorify. Not so. | have before me
communications from 10 different
states all attesting the fact chat the
method is very satisfactory to the
people. These communications are
from governors, senators and men of
prominence and integrity. They all
further attest the fact that the method
does not discriminate against the
small towns. The fact that no faction
in any one of the 80 odd states which
have adopted the system has even
suggested q return to the caucus and
convention system shows its efficiency
and popularity.
Under the caucus system hardly one
voter in 10 attends the caucus. Those
who do attend are the politicians and
their strikers. The direct vote plan,
where used, regularly brings out from
40 to so per cent of the vote This is
the actual result in states using the
system, as shown by official returns.
1t is urged in opposition that the
small towns will suffer in the way
of not being able to control nomina-
lions of candidates. This argument is
| really amusing as well as of that
elap-trap variety which makes it alb
surd.
In 1908 when in the Senate 1 in
| trodueed direct nominations bill
! which passed. In opposition the claim
was made that the small towns would
suffer. certain set of figures to
| prove this was presented to the
/ Senate. Later the senator who used
them confessed they were handed him
! by a certain corporation attorney. In
1910 the same figures again made their
appearance in the House in opposi-
tion and again in 1912 The figures
heretofore published by Mr. Melendy
are strikingly similar to the figures
used in the Senate of 1908 and com
piled by one of the leading corpora
ton attorneys of the state. Why do
the corporation attorneys oppose the
plane
The fact is the voters in the large
towns do not vote as unit. They are
split into factions more than in the
small towns. The voters of the small
towns do hang together.
In this county, under the conven
ton system, for years and years Brat
tleboro and Rockingham have con
trolled the selection of candidates
Men have repeatedly been traded in
to Office between the delegates OF
these towns. This is notorious fact
At the present time Brattleboro ant
Rockingham have six of the county
officers, and the 81 other towns have
three, namely a senator, an assistan
Judge and the high bailiff. Usually tn