[35] In addition to the Wright-Stanton bill, Senator Roseberry introduced a measure providing for a postal primary. In the appendix will be found Senator Roseberry"s views on the postal primary plan.
[35a] The writer has been reliably informed that this concession was made to the machine before a member of the Legislature reached Sacramento.
[35b] Senator Caminetti introduced a separate bill providing the Oregon plan for the popular choice of United States Senators. He was requested not to press its pa.s.sage BECAUSE IT MIGHT INJURE THE CHANCES OF Pa.s.sAGE OF THE DIRECT PRIMARY BILL. The machine claquers is never at a loss for an excuse for the defeat of a meritorious measure.
[36] The original Wright-Stanton bill provided two pledges, which the candidate for the Legislature was given opportunity to sign. The first pledge bound him to abide by the choice of the electors of his party for United States Senator. It read as follows:
"I further declare to The People of California and to The People of the .......... (Senatorial or a.s.sembly) District that during my term of office, without regard to my individual preference, I will always vote for that candidate for United States Senator in Congress who shall have received for that office the highest number of votes cast by my party at the September primary election next preceding the election of a Senator in Congress."
If the legislative candidate did not care to sign this pledge, he was given the alternative of signing the following:
"I further declare to The People of California and to The People of the ... (Senatorial or a.s.sembly) District that during my term of office I shall consider the vote of The People at any primary election for United States Senator as nothing more than a recommendation, which I shall be at liberty wholly to disregard, if I see fit."
Chapter IX.
Machine Defeated in the Senate.
Reform Forces, Regardless of Party, Unite to Secure the Pa.s.sage of an Effective Direct Primary Law-Agree on a Compromise Measure and Succeed in Forcing It Through the Senate - Machine Badly Beaten.
Senator Leroy A. Wright of San Diego introduced the Direct Primary bill in the Senate on January 17th, and during the month that it slumbered in the Senate Committee on Election Laws there was no reason to believe that Senator Wright was not in sympathy with the provisions of the measure. On February 1st, however, Senator Wright made the astonishing confession before the Committee on Election Laws that he was not in sympathy with that provision of his bill which gave legislative candidates opportunity to pledge themselves to abide by the choice of the electors of the State for United States Senator. From that moment began Senator Wright"s fight against his own bill, which finally landed him in the camp of Leavitt, Wolfe and the other machine Senators.
At the meeting of the Senate Committee on Election Laws, held February 1st, the solid six on the Committee, Leavitt, Wolfe, Savage, Hartman, Kennedy and Hare, had voted two amendments into the bill which rendered it absolutely useless for practical purposes.
The first amendment provided that a majority instead of a plurality vote should nominate, a provision as unconst.i.tutional as impracticable. The second amendment cut out of the measure all provision for popular vote for United States Senators.
This decided action on the part of the machine had brought consternation upon Estudillo and Stetson who wanted to see an effective measure pa.s.sed. Wright in this crisis took the floor to state his position.
"For my part," said Wright, "I would never sign a pledge to vote for the candidate for United States Senator in Congress who shall have received for that office the highest number of votes cast by my party. I do believe, however, that the people of this State demand a partisan Direct Primary law. But I think that the people of Oregon recognize that they have made a mistake in going so far as they have. Under the pledge required of candidates for the Legislature in the measure before us (the Wright bill) a member of the Legislature might find himself compelled to vote for a candidate whom the voters of his district opposed. I opposed this provision when the bill was drawn, but my objection was overruled.
I now stand for the bill as it has been introduced."
Wolfe, Leavitt and the rest of the machine Senators grinned exultantly as Wright stated that he did not approve the provisions of his own bill.
But the faces of Estudillo and of Stetson, who had been looking upon Wright as their leader in the pro-primary fight, fell. To employ the famous expression of Speaker Stanton of the a.s.sembly, they felt the ground slipping from under their feet. There was a sensation of farther slipping, when Wright, author of the measure, pro-primary leader and Call-heralded reformer, offered an amendment as subst.i.tute for popular State-wide choice for United States Senator, by making the vote for United States Senator advisory only[37].
The grin of satisfaction on the faces of the machine Senators broadened as Wright read his amendment while the faces of Estudillo and Stetson grew blanker. But the machine Senators were in no hurry. Things were coming their way; there was no reason for them to rush matters. So they lazily took twenty-four hours to think it over. Then they bluntly rejected Wright"s compromise, the solid six, Wolfe, Leavitt, Savage, Hartman, Kennedy and Hare voting against its acceptance.
Estudillo and Stetson voted to accept the compromise. They explained their votes. Their explanations showed their earnestness in working for the best Direct Primary measure that could be pa.s.sed - which indicates what might have been done under other leadership - and a loyalty to Wright, the accepted leader in the Direct Primary fight, which, to say the least, was misplaced.
"With this amendment," said Senator Stetson, in explaining his vote, "the bill is not one-half so strong as it was before. I do not like it.
But I must train with one side or with the other, and for that reason shall vote for Senator Wright"s subst.i.tute."
Senator Estudillo stated that he voted for the amendment against his better judgment.
"I don"t believe in your amendment, Senator Wright," said Estudillo, turning to that gentleman. "I don"t think it amounts to anything. I vote with you against my better judgment. I do not believe that this amendment will give The People what they want - an opportunity to vote directly for candidates for the United States Senate. My opinion is that we should pa.s.s a good bill or no bill at all. I shall, however, yield to Senator Wright, who is the recognized leader in this Direct Primary fight, and vote for his amendment."
And then the six machine members rejected the amendment.
There wasn"t much left of the Direct Primary bill. The measure was, on February 16th, two weeks after the application of the committee"s pruning knife, reported back to the Senate with all reference to election of United States Senators stricken from it, and the unconst.i.tutional and impracticable majority vote required for the nomination of candidates for office, instead of the const.i.tutional and practical plurality vote, as originally provided in the bill.
The fact should not be lost sight of that the two Senators on the Committee on Election Laws who led the fight against the Direct Primary bill, Leavitt and Wolfe, in the Committee on Public Morals led the fight against the Anti-Gambling bill. Nor should it be forgotten that two of their most docile followers in the Committee on Election Laws, Kennedy and Hare, are "Democrats." There was no partisanship shown in the ranks of the opponents of the Direct Primary bill; machine Democrats and machine Republicans united for its defeat. But when anti-machine Republican and anti-machine Democrats united for its pa.s.sage, Wolfe and Leavitt were shocked beyond measure.
Machine Senators denounced the anti-machine Republicans as mongrels, enemies of the Republican party, and insisted that if the anti-machine Republicans persisted in continuing with the anti-machine Democrats to secure the pa.s.sage of an effective Direct Primary law, the Republican party in California would go to smash.
The arrogant course of the machine members of the Election Laws Committee, had at least one good effect it drove the anti-machine Republicans and the anti machine Democrats together as a matter of self-defense. The anti-machine Republicans and Democrats saw the machine Democrats and Republicans united to defeat the pa.s.sage of an effective Direct Primary measure. So the anti-machine Republicans and Democrats organized that they might successfully combat the organized machine Democrats and Republicans. For the first time in the history of the California Legislature, so far as the writer knows, the Senate divided on the only practical line of division for the enactment of good measures and the defeat of bad ones - with the anti-machine Senators on one side and the machine Senators on the other.
The "band-wagon" Senators of the Welch variety, and the doubtful Senators, were left for the moment to herd by themselves.
The anti-machine forces held meetings - caucuses if you like - to decide upon the course to be pursued. They numbered at first twenty members, fifteen Republicans and five Democrats. The Republicans were Bell, Birdsall, Black, Boynton, Burnett, Cutten, Estudillo, Hurd, Price, Roseberry, Stetson, Strobridge, Thompson, Walker and Wright; the Democrats, Caminetti, Campbell, Cartwright, Miller and Holohan. George Van Smith, of the San Francisco Call, credited with being an expert on Direct Primary legislation, was admitted to the deliberations of the twenty.
Senator Price, however, became alarmed at the irregularity of anti-machine Republicans meeting with anti machine Democrats, gathered his virtuous partisan skirts about him and fled in dismay.
Senator Caminetti also left the meeting. Caminetti is a strong advocate of the Oregon plan for the election of United States Senators. When Caminetti found Senator Wright, the accepted leader of the pro-primary forces, opposed not only to the Oregon plan, but to any plan that would give electors a State-wide vote for United States Senators, he refused to go to Wright"s a.s.sistance. Later on, however, when Wright went to Caminetti pleading for support, Caminetti agreed to abide by the decisions of the anti-machine caucus. Curiously enough, after the machine had worn the anti-machine forces out, Caminetti was the only Senator who refused to accept the machine"s amendments to the bill which the anti-machine caucus had agreed upon.
With Price and Caminetti out, the anti-machine forces were reduced to eighteen Senators, although it was known that Rush sympathized with the movement but was not present because he had been unavoidably detained.
The eighteen organized by electing Senator Estudillo chairman, and Senator Boynton secretary. Senator Wright made a short address in which he virtually threw up his hands. He told what the Wolfe-Leavitt element had done with the bill in committee, and stated that unless the anti-machine forces got together, the machine would amend the measure into ineffectiveness. Following Wright"s address the anti-machine Senators considered the original Wright-Stanton bill under three heads:
(1) Shall a mere plurality, or a majority, or a high plurality be required to nominate at a primary election?
(2) Shall the partisan features be eliminated from the measure?
(3) Shall the provisions of the measure be extended to the election of United States Senators?
The first question was brought up on Stetson"s motion that a twenty-five per cent plurality be required to nominate. The machine aimed to fix the plurality at forty per cent, but even the twenty-five per cent compromise was denied. The motion received but four votes, in its favor.
Then came discussion of the clause quoted in the previous chapter, which requires of each primary candidate that he make affidavit that he supported his party ticket at the previous election, and proposes to support it at the coming election. It was understood by all who had any thing to do with the Direct Primary bill that the clause made it impossible for a primary candidate to run on two primary tickets.
Cartwright moved that the clause be stricken from the bill. The motion was lost by a vote of 14 to 4. Senators like Black of Santa Clara voted against the motion in the interest of harmony, although personally they favored the elimination of all partisan features.
The question of primary nomination of candidates for the United States Senate was then taken up. Senator Wright moved that the vote for Senators be advisory only, and that it be by a.s.sembly and Senatorial districts instead of State-wide, as the original bill provided. The vote was as follows:
For Wright"s motion - Burnett, Wright - 2.
Against Wright"s motion - Bell, Birdsall, Black, Boynton, Cartwright, Cutten, Holohan, Miller, Roseberry, Stetson, Strobridge, Walker - 12.
Excused from voting - Campbell, Estudillo, Hurd, Thompson.
A scene of great confusion followed. Campbell, who had refused to vote because he insisted upon the Oregon plan of electing United States Senators by direct vote of The People, insisted that the provision be incorporated into the bill. He refused to be bound by any plan that would restrict the election within party lines. So they blocked Campbell in one corner of the room with a table, and reasoned with him.
Twenty-one votes were required to pa.s.s the Direct Primary bill in the Senate. At that time counting Rush, who was not present at the caucus, the anti-machine forces had only nineteen. They could not afford to lose even one of their number.
Above the confusion, Senator Holohan managed to make his voice heard.
"Gentlemen," he said, "I would like to have the Oregon plan incorporated into this bill, But that seems to be impracticable at this time.
Eventually, I am sure California will adopt the Oregon plan of naming the United States Senator, which to my way of thinking is the most common sense, the fairest, the most American plan. But if we are to pa.s.s a Direct Primary measure at the present session, we must reach a basis of compromise. Let us now get together and stand together on a measure upon which we can all agree. Let us pledge ourselves to abide by the decision of this meeting, and stand or fall by the bill which we have agreed upon."
Holohan"s counsel prevailed. The Senators present pledged themselves to abide by the decision of the meeting and to stand or fall by the bill which they had agreed upon. And Senator Leroy A. Wright was among them and was bound in honor as every Senator present was bound in honor to stand by the bill which had been agreed upon.