Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1920-03-05
DR.. ASHBY JONES
ASSERTS HIS RIGHT
TOVOTE FOR HOOVER.

In an eloquent card to The Journal;
Dr.. M. Ashby Jones, pastor of the
Ponce de Leon Avenue Baptist
church, and one of the most distin-
guished ministers in the south, dis
cusses the question, rs the Demo-
cratic Party Democratic?"
DR.. Jones is not writing in the
interest of the candidacy of Herbert
Hoover or any one else, for he has
not yet determined for himself for
whom he will cast his ballot, but he
strongly protests against any COM
mittee undertaking to determine that
question for him. His card, In which
he makes his position clear, follows:
Editor The Journal: l never was
very much interested in the discus
sion of the question, is Hoover
Democrat? But 1 am intensely in
terested in the question which fronts
us now. is the Democratic party
democratic? The first question is
purely academic, 1t is one which
Mr.. Hoover alone can answer. And
he doesn't seem in any hurry to do
1t. But the one about the Demo-.
cratic party in Georgia is: of first
rate interest to me, because it mas
been ordained that only through that
party can l function politically at
all. So, to be perfectly frank, l am
not inclined to get excited over Mr..
Hoover's right to be a candidate in
Georgia, but I am tempted to get
choose. the man for whom I will vote.
In Georgia. |''
Years ago, when nominations were
to be made, a,few gentlemen got to-
gether around table, and quietly r.
ranged a Slate" This "slate" was.
with equally quiet decorum, passed
on down to other groups, then, on
the appointed day, with carefully pre-
pared noisy enthusiasm, this "slate"
was declared to be the choice Of the
"unterrified democracy" of the state.
In a word, we had our democracy
carefully cooked and placed upon the
table for US, and we were told to
''eat what is set before you and ask
no questions.
After many years a long suffer-
ing people rebelled. The primary"
heralded as the emancipation of de-
mocracy from political oligarchy
was substituted for the Convention"
Now the only possible advantage of
the primary over the convention"
mode for making nominations is that
by the convention method the poll
ticians nominated our officials,
whereas in the primary" the people
make their own nominations. So it
will be readily seen that if any group
Of men is given the power to
say whom they will allow the peo-
pie of the party to vote for, de-
mocracy S once again delivered into
the hands of oligarchy.
Democracy, in it's essence, is the
unhampered expression of the will
of the people. Any hesitancy what
soever to trust the people with the
full and free expression of their own
will is the Democratic heresy. The
very well-spring of freedom itself is
the right Of the individual to choose
and initiate his own political i'm
pulses. To limit or coerce this in
dividual right is to poison democ-
racy at its fountain source.
The Principle Involved
The name of Mr.. Hoover in the
presidential primary is a mere in
cident 1t might be the name of Mr..
Anybody else. and the principle in
volved would be the same. The
State. Democratic committee has at
tempted to cloud the issue by raising
the question whether Mr.. Hoover has
a right to be a candidate at Dem
ocratic primary. The right of Mr..
Hoover to be a candidate is not, and
never has been the issue. Neither
Mr.. Hoover nor the people of Geor-
gia have ever laised that question.
The issue is not the right of any
candidate; but far more sacred and
fundamental right is in controversy,
and that is, the right of the indi-
vidual Democrat to vote for whom
he pleases. If we concede the au-
thority to the state committee to
say that no one but Democrat can
be voted for at the coming primary,
then we give the power to this same,
group Of men to define who are DEM
ocrats. Who cannot see that such
power would be limitless in Geor-
gia, for they would be enabled to
absolutely limit and control the
Georgia electorate.
The principle is so much bigger
than any mans candidacy, or any
mans personality. 1t is fundamen-
tally a fight for political freedom.
am perfectly willing to concede,
for the sake of the argument, that
if Mr.. Hoover wishes to be candi-
date for the Democratic nomination
in the state of Georgia he ought to
declare himself a Democrat. But
am not willing to concede, until the
day when 1 am willing to concede
nv political freedom, my own right
to vote for Mr.. Hoover in pol1tl-
cal primary, whether he has declared
his party affiliations or not.
who Gave This Authorityp
It has been suggested as horrible
possibility that Georgia Democrats
might commit themselves to the NOM
ination of Mr.. Hoover and then aft
erwards the Republican convention
at Chicago might name him as it's
candidate. Suppose that should
happen? If Georgia Democrats want
to do this, who has the right to say
them, nay? Suppose the Georgia
Democratic party desires for this
particular presidential year to vote
for the formation of a, bipartisan or
coalition form of administration. Who
gave the state committee the author
ity to say that it cannot be done?
Do these gentlemen imagine that
they have been chosen as nurses for
little children to keep them from
running into political danger?
Let me declare again with all the
emphasis and clearness of which
am capable, that I am not writing
in the interest of the campaign of
Mr.. Hoover, or any one else. I have
not yet determined for myself for
whom I shall vote, and l strongly