Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1920-06-22
MORE ABOUT THE SHORT BALLOT.

In our editorial We remarked:
I'VE disposed to favor it ourselves
whenever it's proposers will be sufficiently
candid with themselves and the public to put
the elasticity into it that must be there for it
to be successful and responsive to the peo-
pies will.
~ "They insist that the governor be given, for
four-year term, sole power to hire and
fire all other state officers, except lieutenant
governor, and with this quite agreed,
If we expect a responsible government.
"But are not the proposers weak kneed at
this point? The people not the governor, are
the real employers. The governor, too Is an
employe His boss, the people need the pow
er to hire and fire just certainly the
governor needs it with his subordinates.'
Let it be observed that committed ourselves
to neither proposal We merely refused to commit
ourselves to the short ballot proposal without at
taching to it the Of recall Of the governor by
the people.
Let it be further observed that reference to
being weak kneed" and lacking in candor' had
reference to the explcitness of the language used
by the committee. but only referred to their being
intellectually timid in not following to its logical
conclusion their argument that to be able to hire
and fire. is essential to responsive and re-
sponsible government. If the governor needs this
power the boss" of his subordnates, SO do the
people as the boss of the governor.
This editorial has drawn two replies. The one
from ex-Gov. H. j. Hagerman, and pub
lished by Monday The other is from the
Hon. Frank w. Clancy and is published in this issue
We succeeded in drawing from Mr.. Hagerman
tables of distribution of our state expenditures which
are anticipated, highly illuminating. His
tice should be carefully read by good citizen
We will comment upon the financial phases of his
contribution at a later time.
Just interested in his comment up
our suggestion of the recall. Here is what he
says
1.-The fact that the association committee,
which proposed the short ballot refrained
from mentioning the recall cannot be charged
to weakness. Its recommendations are,
the contrary, very clear, vigorous and direct.
They quite the contrary of weak and
put in unusually forceful and unequvocal Ian
guage. There is no sde-stepping, lack of
candor in that report Whether not the
recall would add deract from the
strength of the short ballot proposal. is a sub
tect seriously open to question, one which l
member of the Lindsey commit
will fully discuss"
Would you infer that Mr.. lIagerman for,
against adding the recall to the short ballot pro-
posal? Is he not in fact apparently sde-stepping
that question precisely suggested?
Mr. Clancy however. meets the issue squarely
He is emphatically against the recall. This is
actly what we believed the unspoken mental atti-
tude of the committee to be. His explicit statement
clears the atmosphere and opens the question for
b. discussion, pro and
Mr. Clancy's delicious at expense
in his opening paragraph will add to the spice of his
article. OF course, he does not think that think
we have discovered anything new We probably
know much about the ancient lineage OF the re-
call as Mr.. Clancy knows We think know more
than he about its practical operation, the editor of
the Journal having lived under its application for
dozen years
Let assert more that the Journal is ad-
vocating neither the short ballot nor the recall We
are insisting upon the latter only in Mr.. Hager-
man and Mr.. Clancy insist upon the former
Mr. Clancy's insisence upon the weak man in
public office" being "tmid and afraid of public
clamor' and therefore disposed to court the favor
of the unthnking multitude" leaves us cold 1t
strikes no warming impulse in We wish to
avoid anything approaching demagogery in ar
guments, but we cannot avoid pointing out that by
the "unthnking multitude dear readers, he means
you.
Whose favor pray, is the governor to court if
not that of the "unthinking multitude? Is it to be
the favor of the arrogant minority of capitalists or
the arrogant minority of radical labor leaders?
The word recall need strike such chill toI
the heart of Mr. Clancy. 1t is evident from his ar
tice that he distrusts the people He needs to dem
oeratize his thinking if he wishes the peo
pie we'll He must learn to have faith in the com
mon folks. In the mass the American people have
composite than any group among them.
Their expressed will is King in America whether
MIR. Clancy approves their judgment or not
And they are entitled to method by which the
majority can express itself. Our national safety
does not lie In the superior wisdom of governing
class" which so guides matters that the "unthnk-
ing multitude" cannot express itself
A recall should be very difficult 1t should be so
difficult that angry minority easily invoke it,
A recall of a character would not have dis
turbed Governor Coolidge who had $4,000 majority
of his people behind him.
A recall which required fifteen per cent of the
voters Of the state upon petition with not less
than and one-half per cent of the voters in
each county of the state necessary would have
disturbed Governor Allen of Kansas.
The word recall means nothing. 1t may be made !
easy that constant turmoil results. 1t should not
be difficult but that there is way by which a 1
well-scattered majority can make itself arculate. 4
We are poor sports. We are not willing to bet 4
all the welfare of all the people upon the PROPOSE