| Show I 1 1 I 1 I 1 pa I 1 I 1 codol 0 1 A rr E 9 M 1 6 I 1 1 I 1 oos AV luval M aft F ell governor hughes hughely the legislature and primary reform I 1 I 1 reprinted from in article by theodore roosevelt evelt in the outlook by br arrangement arr arran 1 gement Kement with the tri he outlook of which theodore theodora roosevelt to li edi editor tor copyright 1110 1910 tor by the outlook Cora company party all rights reserved Reier ved aw BELIEVE that governor has been epport ed by the bulk of the wisest and most disinterested public opinion as regards most of his measures and positions and I 1 think that this has baa been markedly the case as regards regarda direct primary nominations I 1 know that many honest and sincere men lire are on principle opposed to governor hughes on this point and I 1 know also that the proposed reform will very possibly accomplish less than its extreme advocates expect while I 1 am well aware as of course all thinking men must be that the worth ot of any such measure in the last resort depends upon the character ot of the voters ers and that no patent device will ever secure good government unless the people themselves devote sufficient energy time and judgment to make the device work finally I 1 reely freely admit that here and there where tho the principle of direct nominations has been applied in too crude shape or it has while abolishing certain evils produced or accentuated others in certain cases for instance putting a premium upon the lavish expenditure ot of money dut but while I 1 freely admit all this I 1 nevertheless feel in the first place that on the fundamental issue of direct primary nominations the governor Is right and in the second place that as the measure finally came up tor for action in the state legislature it was well nigh free from all objections save those of the men who object to it because they are fundamentally opposed to any change whatever in the desired direction the bill provided only for direct popular action in the primaries in relatively small geographical and political communities thereby making the experiment first where there was least liability to serious objection and avoiding or deterring the task of dealing with those big communities where the difficulties and dangers to be overcome would be greatest Alore moreover over while guaranteeing full liberty of individual action it also provided for the easy amainte of party organization and thereby avoided some very real dan geis among them that ot of encouraging the use of masses of the minority party in any given district to dictate the actions of the majority party in other dither words the proposed bill while it marked a very real step in advance was tentatively and cautiously framed and provided nil possible safeguards against abuses it if in practice it had tailed failed to work in any particular there would have been no possible difficulty in making whatever amendments or changes were necessary the republican party was in the majority in both houses ot of the legislature which refused to cay carry out the tha republican governors recommendations and although it was waa only ft minority of the republican members which brought about this refusal the tha party cannot escape a measure of responsibility for the failure but it la Is only just to remember that a clear majority of the republican members of each house bouse supported the bill whereas three fourths or over of the democrats opposed it this is one of the cases where it Is easier to apportion individual than party responsibility those who believe that by their action they have definitely chocked checked the movement for direct popular primaries are in my judgment mistaken in its essence this Is a morenie movement nt to make the government more democratic more responsive to the wishes and needs of the people as a whole with our political machinery it Is cs sentiel to have an eff efficient lelent party but the machinery ought to be suited to democratic and not oligarchic customs and habits the question whether in a self governing republic we shall have self governing gover ning parties Is larger than the particular bill we hold that the right of popular self government la is incomplete unless it includes the right of the voters not merely to choose between candidates when they have been nominated but also the right to determine who these candidates shall be under our system of party government ern ment therefore the voters should be guaranteed the right to determine within the ranks ot of their respective organizations who the candidates of the parties will be no less than the he t right to choose between the cand dates when the candidates are presented them there Is no desire to break awn the responsibility oi 0 party organization under duly constituted party leadership but there Is a desire to make this responsibility real and to give the members of the party the right to say whom they desire to execute this leadership in new york state no small part of the strength of the movement haa ban come from the popular conviction that many of the men most prominent in party leadership tend at times to forget than in a democracy the function of 0 a political leader must normally be to lead not to drive we the men who compose the great bulk of the community wish to govern ourselves we welcome leadership but we wish our leaders to understand that they derive their strength from Us ua and that although we look to them for guidance we expect this guidance to be in accordance with our interests and our ideals THEODORE ROOSEVELT |
