Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1925-04-01

bled;
/ have the honor to transmit here
with initiative petitions filed in the
office Of the Secretary Of State on
February oath, 1925, proposing to the
LEGISLATURE for its consideration I'M
der the provisions of Article 81 of the
Constitution of Maine the following
bill:
AN Act to repeal sections one to
thirty-six of chapter six of the Re-
vised Statutes, relative to primary
elections.
Be it Enacted by the people of the
State of Maine as follows:
Article 1. Sections one to thirty
six of chapter six of the Revised
Statutes, and Acts ame- datory
thereof and additional thereto. relat-
ing to nominations Of candidates for
Office by primary elections are here
by repealed.
Article 2. All nominations of can
didates for any and all state and
county Offices, including United
States Senator, member of Congress,
member of state legislature. shall
hereafter be made at and by party
caucuses and conventions in the
same manner as nominations were
made prior to the passage of chapter
1919 of the Public Laws of 1911 and
chapter 221 of the Public Laws of
1919
Said petitions purporting to bear
signatures aggregating more than
10000 electors"
Now the regular status of it as we
saw it was this, when you adopted
the direct primary amendment by
initiative vote, the present primary
law. automatically there was repeal
of that part of our nominating ma
chinery applicable to nominations by
conventions and caucuses, and there
was substituted for it the direct
primary. Now then, it was proposed
to repeal the direct primary and in
place thereof it says "all nominations
shall be made in the same manner as
nominations were made prior to -
All Senators here who are familiar
with the enacting of legislation will
say that is a peculiar way to create
a statute. You will find yourself
il that initiative measure becomes a
law, and we are bound to consider
the possibility that it will, where
then is your nominating machinery
The Governor will be obliged to
call a special session of the Legisla-
ture for the purpose of formulating
some sort of a law such as we had
prior to the adoption of the primary
law.
Now what is the function of the
Legislature under this initiative pro-
gram? 1 think the Senator from
Androscoggin, Senator Carter, mad
vertently did not recall the specific
provision which applies, that 1900
signers petition directly for legisla =
tion and submit that legislation to-
gether with the requisite number OF
names. as we view the section, Ar
ticle 81 of the constitution, the di-
rect primary and initiative amend
ment. The function of the legisla :
ture is extremely simple. 1t is. FIRST
to ascertain if there are 1900 sign
ers or voters. That was done in this
case. That being done. then the
legislature can do one of three
things. In the first place. it can pass
the initiated act without the cross
ing of a "t'' or the dotting of an 81"
literally. absolutely as the people
have opposed it. If they do that
then TIE legislature has functioned
it is then a law and statute taking
the place of whatever it was de-
signed to succeed. Should this
legislature see fit not to do that. theI
there is the opposite pole; it must
submit that initiated act to the vot.
ors of the state without the crossing
of ct" or the dotting of an "i'', jus,
as the 12.00C signers demanded it,
Then it can adopt a third course
II must either pass or submit. The
legislature tunctioning as legisla-
ture has not this power. and section
Is of Article 81 says: ANY measure
thus proposed by not less than $4,000
electors, unless enacted without
change by the legislature at the ses-
sion at which it is presented shall be
submitted to the electors together
with any amended form. substitute
on recommendation of the Legislature
and in such manner that the people
can choose between the competing
measures or reject both"
Now the majority of the judiciary
committee. with all due respect to
the chairman. the Senator from
Cumberland, Senator Hinckley, were
wholly convinced that this legisla
ture would be not acting wisely
that it would not be acting fairly to-
ward the people of the state to sub
nit this initiated bill with not act
upon our part when the constitu
ton imposed the duty. or at least
left us free to do a duty If we saw
that the duty was required. And
the majority of the committee, and
l think the committee unanimously
reported that the Cakes -Anthoine
bill ought not to pass" That is the
report of the committee. that this bill
ought not to pass" But inasmucll
as it was the only serious proposal
before the legislature for a substan-
tive. change in the primary law, and
confronted by the actual fact that
there were those 1900 signers de-
handing this change, the ma jority
of the committee felt that the legis
lature might act wisely and properly
without any recommendation to
adopt, without and recommendation
to reject, other than the acceptance
of the majority report on the Cakes
Anthoine bill itself, or Ought not to
pass" and thought that properly and
wisely the Cakes -Anthoine bill might
appear on the same ballot as that
SO that in the campaign that is
bound to ensue from the opponents
OF the direct primary it might not
ever be advanced by any man in a
spirit of captious criticism, no mat
ter what your views may be of the
primary law, YOU cannot vote for
this initiated bill because if you dc
1t does not, give you anything to
take its place; it is not a construc-
tive measure. Whatever mans
view upon the primary itself, he
must remember that there are 10000
slgners demanding q change; and
we felt that it was the function of
the legislature to offer a competing
constructive measure, for two reas
ons-and the first one l have given
The second reason was that when
the votes are counted upon this pro-
position upon which the people must
vote the matter will not be left in
nebulous and uncertain and con-
tentious condition that does not re-