Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1919-01-30
RETAIN DIRECT NOMINATIONS

Vermont has the simplest direct pri-
mary law inexistence. The only real OBJ
lection is that the system is so simple
any man can vote for any man he pre-
fers to nominated for any Office re-
gardless of party. That quality Is a
strength as we'll as a weakness. You new
err heard much objection to it on that
score until it resulted in the nominal
ton of our present executive. And there
was reason for that.
Financial abuses had confessedly been
allowed to creep into the management of
our State affairs Not a few people re-
CARELESS of party believed Mr.. Clement
would take those evils in hand. Regard
less of party, many of them voted for him
on that score. If you hold that govern
ment is liable to be better where the two
political parties have nearly equal
strength, then the alleged defect in Ver-
mont's primary helps counteract the po-
litital e-sidedness of our State. But
for this safety valve, the election Of a
democratic governor might have been ia
cilitated under the circumstances.
Our own view is that no republican
vice versa. The ideal caucus law would
make provision to that end SO far as pos
ible, without involving unnecessary ex-
pense. We have said that simple
amendment providing for separate bal
lots for each party would meet the stu
alton at this time. Some people hold
that the law should remain as it is
We would not seriously object to this for
the consideration stated. The Essex
County Herald which is one of the Jour-
nails that would leave the law as it stands.
says among other things
a.. zone of the first bills introduced in
the House was to amend the primary
law. 1t was expected, but Vermont
should go slow before she drops the pri-
mary law. 1t took some time to learn
the good points of the Australian bal
lot law, and there were those who want
ed to go back to the old way of voting.
Now the voters have learned the require
ments of the law and how it protects the
independence of the voter, there are none
who want to go back. Some slight
changes will straghten out the present
primary, and we feel it would be mis-
take to go back to the old caucus, al
though they had the good point of bring
Ing the people together,
1--WE believe the Free Press has put up
the primary law wrong. Under our pres
ent primary there can be no such voting
A voter cannot vote for a candidate in
one party and another IN another party
and while the law does not make a voter
a party declarant, voter must con-
fine his voting to one party column or
his ballot or it is defective Sec H. Gen.
eral Laws reads as follows: Each voter
in marking his ballot shall confine his
mark to the column of the party OF
which he is a member. If. when the bal
ballot has been marked In the column o
more than one party. such ballot shall
be thrown out as detective
1--WE know of no more effective wa.
10 make voters vote their party ticke
that this. They can only vote for on
party. and they could do no more II the,
declared their party when calling 70
o ballot. The least the present primar
Is tinkered the better"
Where State tickets are separate fror
other tickets the law quoted by the Tier
ald does not really count.
The Enosbury Standard thinks Vel
mont's direct primary system should nc
only be retained but also strengthened
1t says:
ut would not seem that Vermont hay
ing taken her place with the progress
Bive American commemorative that hav