w ffm" - rjKmvu&fi' "wje! -sp5w?j3
2
-
I
t
;
n
ft t
M
I 5
:sr
1
It
t
t
oo towards a more popular government. Take
for instance the direct primaries laws adopted
by many of our states and bo ably championed
by that groat lawyer and governor, Charle E.
Hughes of New York. Never has there been
enacted a sot of laws which has done moro for
tho politics of the nation. In these states, at
one blow it has crushed the power of tho
bosses, a most potent influence towards corrup
tion under present conditions. In order to bo
consistent wo must revise tho method of select
ing senators so as to make it conform to our
changed political ideas.
But this last assertion will, no doubt, bring
down a storm of condemnation from those who
are popularly known as the "watch dogs" of tho
constitution, and in fact has been attacked by
tho so-called ultra-conservatlsts as being ex
tremely radical. I will admit, and rejoice in
the admission, that no instrument of its kind
In the history of tho world has ever compared
with tho constitution of tho United States, and
that on it rests tho burden of this great govern
ment; but does not Article V of the instrument
itself give to congress the power of amendment,
and has not this prerogative been exercised time
and again as the exigencies demanded? The set
tled conviction of time and experience that the
constitution as a whole is good and wise has
our heartiest approval, but devotion to tho con
stitution should stimulate us with the desire to
repair the few parts which have not insured to
tho people every reasonable liberty. "Nothing
is well done that can bo made better; and he
who conforms to the idea of well enough has
not only ceased to advance, but has actually
turned tho wheels of progress backward."
In one form or anothor the legislatures of
thirty-one states, more than the full two-thirds
prescribed by tho constitution, have formally
communicated to congress their approval of the
proposed change. Indeed, if the votes in the
house be taken aB a fair criterion of the will of
the people, then only two states have failed to
give their indorsement. Is this not irrebuttable
evidence that the people of the country desire
,a change?
, Previous to the year,.! 872' there had been nine
resolutions befo.ro congress to chauge the pre
valent manner 'of choosing senators' to that of
- Jeflioirby the people and since 1872 up to the
close of tho fiftieth congress this change had
been urged some thirty times. An examination
of the Journals of congress for the years subse
quent to March 4, 1889, shows that the number
of resolutions proposing this change is unpre
cedented. The house of representatives of tho
fifty-second and fifty-third congresses passed by
very pronounced majorities a joint resolution to
submit such an amendment to the states, but the
senate as on previous occasions failed to advance
either of these resolutions to a vote.. True tho
defenders of the present system number among
their ranks senators of ability and men who are
honest and unselfish in their convictions, and it
is to these men who are willing to accept the
' , en(lG' tnat we desIre t0 address ourselves.
?T ? ifrmx the le&islatures the selection of
united States senators and inside of six years
the personnel of the senate will have changed
beyond recognition. The fundamental principle
of republican governments is based upon the
idea that they "derive their just powers from
the consent of the governed." Take from the
legislatures the selection of United States sen
ators and you will destroy tho most potent power
by which corporate influence now holds its sway.
PART II
?lilie, ftrst place the Proposed chang would
end the legislative deadlocks which have clwed
so much difficulty and been a source of so much
SSV?nSCS u lnthe past- Xt would settle once
and for all time the question of equal representa
tion the senate. Under the constitution each
. of the several states is entitled to two senators
but under present conditions scarcely fSon
BtaSRDgirqeSn"fSSeS that Bome one of the sovereign
states is not unrepresented by at least one of
them; an injustice to the people of the state and
a great wrong to the country at large. Of tSe
frpl nlght Se8'll0nB ,only ono ha be entirSy
free of vacancies of this origin and in the fifty
sixth congress there were four such seats un-
w1; n t , ? thre recent cngresses Detawwe
?EU wbUti n? 8 ator whIle frora 1901 to
1903 her voice in tho senate was as mute as
f she had suddenly ceased to exist, all of which
was brought about by tho shameful dead-loWne
' of "or legislature, produced by thHggressivI
deterjninntIon of one pJch man foregg
into the upper house of congress. Brazen nre-
, ,. '"""'' uu e carrieu further Hinn
was Indicate,! 1 the language used I by a poiuf-
The Commoner.
cian the day of tho election of Allee and Ball,
March 2, 1903. "With Mr. Allee in the senate
wo will be able to get rid of all traitors in the
camp, such as postmasters throughout the .state,
and fill their places with our own men. We will
also get rid of all the bolters and two years
from now, in full control of the state I will elect .
a legislature which will send mo to the United
States senate." From 1895 to 1906, there were
but two congresses in which Delaware was
fully represented. During the past eighteen
years in fourteen contests in ten different states
the body charged with the duty of electing sen
ators proved absolutely powerless to perform
Its office and four states have undergone the
cost and inconvenience of a special session of
tho legislature for tho sole purpose of filling
vacancies caused in this way. The legislature
of Illinois was deadlocked for. five months in
an effort to elect a successor to Senator Albert
J. Hopkins. The direct primaries system is in
vogue in this state and by it the people indirectly
choose their senators, but in order to evade the
. third section of Article I of the Constitution of
the United States the legislators actually elect
the senators, supposedly guided in their selec
tion by the voice of the people at the primaries.
Now Hopkins defeated Ex-Governor Yates by a
small plurality at the polls, but many of the
legislature have refused to abide by the will of
the people and consequently no definite conclu
sion could be reached. In the meantime the
great state of Illinois had to be content with
but one representative in the United States
senate.
Space forbids us to delve deeply Into the
shameful regularity with which many of the
states havo been confronted with this great
menace to public policy and for the sake of
brevity I shall diagram the deadlock record from
1891 to 1905 showing the date, number of days
in deadlock, number of ballots taken, and the
name. of the senator (if any) finally elected.
Thousands upon thousands of dollars have been
wasted in this way and many incapable and unfit
men have been chosen as eleventh hour com
promises. If the question were to be asked, "Do we need
state legislatures?" our opponents would in all
probability tell us that we undoubtedly do. And
why do we need them? Experience has shown
us that we need them primarily to elect sena
tors and only secondarily to attend to the affairs
of the respective states. Surely this was not
the intention of our constitutional fathers. In
many of our states It has become a notorious
fact that the legislatures are rendered less fit
instruments for their important law making,
financial and administrative duties by reason
of the fact that In at least two out of every
three of their biennial sessions they must sub
ordinate all their business to the struggle for
the choice of United States senators.
That a candidate should be elected on account
of his national party badge alone and not on
account of his fitness and probity is of course
destructive to the idea that a public office is
a public trust derived from the people and
answerable to the people. Have we not here
the germ of most of our civic corruption? The
very existence of the machine and the boss is
involved in keeping up this viciouB confusion of
things and in hindering the subservient partisan
from voting on the real local (state or munici
pal) issue, or upon the character of the candi
date. The voter's paramount concern is the
success of the national party. So long as this
state of things continues, it seems hopeless to
look for any such purification of our political
life as will tempt men of refinement, honor,
training and public spirit to seek a statesman's
career. The federal senate, which should be
the assured goal of men competent to govern
and a model of legislative dignity, capacity and
behavior, can not be expected to fulfill these
functions while the state legislatures remain
vulgar, petty and sordid; and the state legisla
tures in their turn can not avoid these vices so
long as their excuse for being is primarily to
elect senators and only secondarily to attend
to the affairs of their respective commonwealths.
The two seats in the senate for each state have
come to be the most highly coveted prizes in
American public life, and since legislatures have
to choose the senators, the would-be senators
make it their business to choose the legislatures
To one who is unaware of existing conditions
in the various states this last statement may
seem impossible, but allow me to cite just one
example wliich conclusively proves how easily
this can be done. Take the state of Rhode
Island, where senators are elected by the state
senate and tho state house of representatives
in accordance, with the federal constitution The
VOLUME 9, NUMBER 34
senate is composed of thirty-eight members to
gether with the lieutenant governor, who is
chosen by the entire state. Each of the thirty
eight members represents one town or city in
the senate. Each town and city is entitled to
one state senator regardless of population or
wealth, and as a result of this unjust and moro
or less ridiculous regulation twenty of the pres
ent state senators (a majority of the entire sen
ate) were elected last fall by less than ten per
cent of the total vote cast for state senators.
The town of West Greenwich, with 110 votes,
is entitled to the same representation as the city
of Providence, with over 30,000 votes. In the
house of representatives, while the dispropor
tion is not so great, it is still greater than it
should be. Twenty-five per cent of the voters
of the state elect a majority of the seventy-two
representatives in the lower house. You can
readily see that all a United States senator from
Rhode Island needs to regard is ten per cent
of the voters of the state so far as the state
senate is concerned and twenty-five per cent, so
far as the house of representatives is concerned.
Now do you see the reason why the senators
of Rhode Island do not want popular election
of United States senators and why they can
afford to go on and do as they see fit regardless
of what their constituents or the people of the
country think or feel? And who are their con
stituents? Are they the great mass of people
of Rhode Island? I need only refer you to the
afore-given statistics and you may judge for
yourself. No system should be capable of such
terrible and far-reaching abuses.
And now another strong argument against the
present system is that it leads to the corruption
of legislatures and to the selection of men whose
only claim to office is their great wealth or their
subserviency to corporate interests. On the
other hand it is maintained that the proposed
change would lead to the choice of deserving
men reflecting more truly the' sentiment of the
people.
James Bryce, England's learned ambassa
dor to the United States, writing of the United
States senate in his American commonwealth,
very aptly remarks: I'Soma, are senators be
cause they are rich and others are rich, because
they are senators."
The United States senate -of today has been
likened unto the Roman senate of old. Rome
at the zenith of her power boasted of. the learn
ing of her senators, which has been handed
down to posterity and forms today the master
work of the Latin tongue. But her senate be
came the goal of those who bought their seats
with their gold, thus driving out the men whose
brilliancy shone in brains alone; their laws be
gan to decline; the people lost their virility;
they lost their manhood and they lost Rome.
"Money is forever the same. Its one inherent
quality in the social universe is cohesion. Its
power wherever exercised is proportionate to its
mass. Separated from the individuality of its
owner it becomes a menace to the body politic,
the destroyer of social equality, the creator of
caste. Tyranny flourishes where money rules."
Whatever grounds there may have been for
the criticism of Randolph on the follies of democ
racy, It is certain that many of the evils of the
present day may properly be ascribed to the
reckless selfishness of aggregated wealth.
The immortal Lincoln, with keen Insight, fore
saw the future of the United States senate when
he prophetically admonished his countrymen to
"beware of the money power which seeks to
perpetuate its reign until the wealth of the
country has passed into the hands of the few
and the nation is lost."
Far he it from us to condemn a United States
senator simply because he happens to be worth
millions, if with these millions he can couple true
worth and a degree of fitness in keeping with
his position; but an alarming number of these
senators have, of late gone into the upper house
as men of moderate means and mirabile dictn,
in a suspiciously few years have amassed im
mense fortunes and all on a salary of $7,500 per
annum. How can this be possible? Something
is vitally wrong and the scandals brought to
light during the recent presidential campaign
seem to lend great weight to the logical con
clusion. It is a sad state of affairs when many
of these individuals or groups of individuals
havo come to be familiarly known as the "oil
senators," "steel senators" or the "railroad sen
ators," significant of the different corporations,
trusts and monopolies whose interests they ille
gitimately represent in the halls of congress.
When we recollect that in the senate of the
fifty-eighth congress at least one out of every
ten members, had been put on trial before tho
courts or subjected to legislative investigation
--. .,
.. r,7,,itl.,tJWifc8afc?itMUwii(a.
