Perth Amboy evening news., 1920-11-26
ru,E DIRECT PRIMARY.

4 affYq on the SuDJtCI vi AhC
while pointing out some OF the objections 10 Tue
direct primary Mr.. Hughes believes tha' It . :"
decided step in advance and ought to be retain
sd and improved rather than be rejected al
together.
In citing the defects which Mr.. Hughes points
~, II must be remembered that it is the direct
primary as 1t exists In New YORK sVate Il ~
,be New Jersey primary that he is discussing
some of the defects mentioned as Tar as II p"
York law is concerned cannot be counted
against the New Jersey statute.
The counts against the New York primary as
made by Mr.. Hughes as as follows;
~ THAT the direct primary overburdens the
election machinery by requiring two campaigns
"2. That It entails heavy expense
.s. That It ignores the necessity Tor cohsui-
,ation and conference In the selection oil cahui-
dates.
"a That IL affords no suitable opportunity
for the formation of party platforms.
"5. That 1t aids the efforts of seif-adVertisefs
and demagogues.
.s. That even in the case of those so char
acterized, 1t leads TO unseemly appeals Tor per-
sonal support. especially in the case of candi-
dates for judicial Office.
~. That frequently men WHIT would be desir-
able candidates will not enter the primary con-
test. -.
IS. That the contest is likely to develop Dit
terness which weakens the party IN the en-
suing campaign for election"
Mr.. Hughes is known as the father OF the al
rect primary law in New York. lie was gov
ernor of that state at the time 1t was enac'eo
and 1t was largely through his efforts that phe
Aill was passed. For the man VINO was spoasor
Tor the law to admit these defects here recited-
FERROUS defects. we should say-would Indicate
that he has excellent reasons for still insisting
that the direct primary is a good thing ana
ought to be retained.
In this connection, however, 1t Is only iair 10
cay that as the direct primary law was nnaiiy
enacfef 1t was not what Governor Hughes had
intended it to be AS Mr.. Hughes said In MS
address in indianapolis, the direct primary mas
never had a fair trial In New York. somewhere
In the bills course through the legislature the
bill establishing a well-planned primary was
changed. AS a result New York has only a
crippled primary, yet even so, those who belieVe
IN the direct primary believe with MIR. Hughes
that the good points over-balance the defects
And. really. the good features in the direct
primary narrow down to practically NO. Mr.
Hughes cites them as follows:
-. 1t places a weapon in the hands of the
rarity voters which they can use with erect In
case of need.
80. The fact of this control gives to the
voters a consciousness of power to which pres
ent primary methods have given rise"
After all. if this is to be a democracy in which
, the people rule government will be exactly what
the people make it. The character of candidates
will be Just as high as the standard of the peo-
pie want. no higher. no lower.
But Mr.. Hughes's ideal primary would not rest
entirely upon the people in the manner the pri-
mary now does. His ideal arrangement for NAM
ing men for Office is a double one. FIRST ne
would have a gathering of representatives who
had been chosen at elections participated In by
members of the party concerned and these only.
This gathering would be a nominating com
mittee. 1t would possess the advantage of con-
ference upon which advocates of the old con-
yention system lay so much stress. If such
a body did its duty WELL" Mr.. Hughes says
sthere would be no necessity for a double cam
paign. It's choice would be ratified on primary
day without contest" If, on the other hand, II
ignored the sentiment of the party voters there
would be opportunity for reputation of the
slate and the making of nominations which real
Iy express the will of the party. AS for draw
Ing up a party platform, the New Jersey law
provides for this in an ideal way, the candi'
date after being nominated meet with the
party leaders ami draw up their own Platform.
In New Jersey this nominating
Idea has developed, In a sense. in the county
committee of the respective political parties
The present New Jersey law forbids the county
committee endorsing any particular candidate
or set OF candidates before the primary election
yet long before the primaries are held it is pretty
generally known who the candidates are thai
are favored by the organization" as the coun'
Is committee is sometimes called, and it i
pretty hard to beat those thus favored-only al
overwhelming public sentiment will do it. ant
that Is exactly what the primaries are for. The!
make it possible for the people to prevent an,
candidates being damned down their throat
If they DO not want them.
The New York Times, In discussing Mr.
iIughes's speech. tries TO argue that this wa
possible under the old convention system. Blu
we all know it was not. Nine-tenths of the dele
gates at a political convention never knew VIVA
was going on. A slate OF those to be nominated
was made up by a small group of leaders as
sembled in a room in some hotel and the dele
gates mel ely adopted the slate thus laid befof
them.
But there Is some merit TO Mr.. Hughess ie
~ having a nominating ccmmlttee made up c