Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1921-12-13
A SUPPLEMENT, NOT A SUBSTITUTE.

Our friend, Judge b. S. Rodey, takes the Journal
to task for what he regards belittling of the
direct primary the initiative, the referendum and
the recall, in recent editorial in which we said
alert and conscientious ctzenry was more need
ed than additional governmental machinery
The Journal stands its ground However, we
were not arguing against these expedents. We
were appealing merely for rejuvenated public
conscience and a deep and wide spread solictude
for the public well-being.
The Journal is in favor of direct primary law,
We do not share the apprehension of those who
profess to believe that its will be dangerous in
New Mexico We trust the people The expense
of primary is drawback. but are the expenses
Of all elections drawback to republican form OF
government, However, this expense hardly invites
TO return to a monarchca form of government
where election unknown. If primary will
help the people make the government respon-
sve and representative, 1t should be adopted, The
present system certainly lends itself to thwarting
the will Of the people
The direct primary in way changes his
toric form of government. It merely aids the peo-
pie in doing what they wish to do in selecting their
representatives.
The initiative, the referendum and the recall re-
quire more thought The tendency of these devices
shear system of government of its republic
character and to make 1t democracy Judge
Rodey has objection to this tendency. He be-
leves in democracy instead Of republic and re-
CARDS the introduction of the republican form of
government unavoidable evil.
The Journal believes in a republic. It believes
that democracy is too volatile for nation made
up of people gathered from all the countries of thu
world and still in process Of amalgamation. 1t is
better to bear ills for a time because the
chnery of government delays their correction than
that act upon impulse and in the heat of passion
In an attempt to correct them instantly.
We not wholly hostile to the inative, the
referendum and the recall We are opposed to their
being made easy of They may be made so
handy a weapon for the dissatisfied that constant
turmoil results. They may be made so difficult
that they useless and their enactment super
fluous. Between these points 1t may be possible to
find a happy medium, neither too easy too
difficult of use. where they be fitted into our
scheme of government so as to put a moderate re-
straint upon unresponslve officials. N
The point of the previous editorial was in effect
that none of these insrumentalities could prove an
effective substitute for an alert, militant and
scientous electorate II the time and energy spent
in attempting to find some sort of machinery which
will prove a substitute for an ignorant ndiffer-
ent public were devoted to arousing the people to
the duty and privilege of citizenship. more would
be accomplished toward good government
With the people awake and militant, public
opinion will initiate necessary laws. No represen"
attive will ignore the earnest camoring Of his
sttuency. The fr0Wn or an angry PUBIC Is quite
sufficient as a referendum. The recall of popular
favor will sraighten out the average representative
1t Is popular indifference which makes officials
brave enough to ignore the general welfare.
The moderate Of these three agencies as
supplement to public opinion, for use in extraor-
binary emergencies, may be wise. But when men
conclude that these be successful substitute
for an intelligent and awakened public opinion, the
result is disastrous
nd atas NJ isrns will
aid in awakening public opinion the people will
clean house without any additional machinery to
help them Yet some reasonable form of these In |!
struments might prove helpful