Full text of Statements and Speeches of Robert L. Owen : People's Rule Versus Boss Rule : Remarks in the Senate of the United States

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

PEOPLE’S RULE VERSUS BOSS RULE
This Republic was not founded on any so-called “ representative
principle.”
The Representative is merely a convenience, a servant, an
agency subject of right to the direct control of the people.
This Republic was founded on the principle that the people were
sovereign and had a right, if they pleased, to manage their business
directly, a God-given right, vested in them, inalienable and indefeasible,
and directly to alter, amend, or abolish any law. Every State constitu­
tion declares and exemplifies this fundamental principle. Every State
constitution, except one, was established by the direct law-making power
of the people.
The option to use the initiative and referendum is not in conflict
with the present convenient system of legislating through representa­
tives, but is in harmony with that system and makes it more repre­
sentative, not less representative.




REMARKS
OF

OF

OKLAHOM A
IN THE

SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH

3 , 1913

W A SH IN G T O N
GO VER N M EN T PR IN TIN G O FFICE
1913




REMARKS
OP

HON.

EOBEET

L.

OWEN.

On Senate resolution 413. declaring that such a system of direct legis­
lation as the initiative and referendum would establish is in conflict
with the representative principle upon which this Republic was estab­
lished.

Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, the greatest duty o f government
is to make effective the primary principle of the Declaration
o f Independence; to secure to the people, and to all the people,
the inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
This inalienable right with which the people were “ endowed
by the Creator ” has been purloined from millions to the benefit
of the few through a series o f political, commercial, and finan­
cial monopolies slowly built up during the last 75 years.
This system has diverted the proceeds o f the labor of millions
to the coffers o f the few, until in spite of the wonderful modern
inventions of this age, which pours out a stupendous flood of
material things which men desire, we see a thousand millions
o f dollars of wealth in the hands o f a single man and millions
of human beings, willing and anxious to do honest labor, with­
out the certainty of food and shelter to-morrow.
The unrestricted right to enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit
of happiness is thus denied millions, and the duty o f the Govern­
ment to make effective the fundamental doctrine of the Republic
as yet remains unperformed.
I deem it my duty to call the attention of the United States
Senate and the attention of the country to the cause and the
remedy of this serious condition. I make no complaint of a
class, emphatically no complaint of a rich class, nor do I com­
plain o f the past. I am exclusively concerned with the imme­
diate future welfare of men," women, and children.
THE

CAU SE.

The cause is this: Hie people's-rule party Government under
Jefferson has been in past years (from 1844 to 1908) steadily,
if not stealthily undermined and replaced by the machine-rule
party government. In place of the people’s rule the machine
rule," financed and engineered by special interests, has placed in
power on a vast scale in legislative, administrative, and judicial
positions machine-rule representatives—in municipalities. States,
and Nation. The rule of the few was thus established. The
people have .voted, but they have not really ruled.
The rule o f the few, consciously or unconsciously, has been
too largely for the benefit of the few at the expense of the
many.
The few have established all-pervading commercial and finan­
cial monopolies; destroyed all competitive markets in selling
and buying; limited production on a giant scale, and deliberately
9

84132— 11872

3
ns n policy, thus limitin'; the employment of labor; manufac­
tured watered stocks and bonds by billions of value, on which
the people have been compelled to pay interest; squeezed and
expanded the credit market, damaging millions, that a few
might absorb values; and have compelled the laboring millions
to compete under harsh conditions with each other, until mil­
lions of women and children have been driven from the Amer­
ican home into the labor market, and millions of children as
well as women and men have been denied the reasonable oppor­
tunities of “ life, liberty, and the pursuit o f happiness.”
Machine-made representatives in legislative, executive, and
judicial position have granted and protected privilege to the few
at the expense of the many until we are face to face with the
most tremendous extremes of wealth and poverty the world has
ever known.
The cause has been machine-rule party government in collu­
sion with corrupt commercial and financial allies governing for
the benefit of the few at the expense of the many, at the expense
of all of the people, at the expense of the real producers of
wealth.
There are two very different kinds of “ representatives ” in
the governing business. The machine-rule party government
representatives who take the point o f view favorable to privi­
lege and to the few, and the people’s-rule party government
representatives who take the point of view favorable to equal
rights to all, favorable to the great mass of men who labor as
artisans, workers in shop, field, forest, and mine, as professional
men or in transportation or in other human activities.
I do not trouble myself to question the motives of men; I am
concerned with the effect of the actions of men.




TH E

EEM ED T.

The remedy is to restore people’s-rule party government and,
provide a mechanism by which the intelligence and patriotism
of the mass of men can control party government and can con­
trol the actual direct government by people’s-rule representa­
tives in the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of the
government.
The statutes necessary to this end are—
First. A thoroughgoing honest registration act.
Second. A thoroughgoing direct mandatory primary act.
Third. Honest election laws and machinery.
Fourth. A thoroughgoing corrupt-practices prevention act.
Fifth. The initiative, referendum, and recall; and the most
important of all these acts is the initiative and referendum,
which is the oi>en door to all other reforms.
Above all the initiative and referendum offers the line of least
resistance in obtaining reform for the reason that no candidate
before the people dares refuse the people the right of the initia­
tive and referendum where the demand is vigorously insisted on.
In its entire history the Senate has never had a more impor­
tant question before it. It is the duty of the Senate to throw
the weight of its influence on the right side.
And I feel entirely justified in calling the attention of the
Senate and of the country to the urgent, vital importance of this
issue and to defend it against the unjust assaults of its enemies.
Whatever I may say in regard to the matter must be re­
garded as entirely impersonal, as I fully concede the right of
841 3 2 — 1 1 8 7 -




others to differ with me and shall carefully abstain from at­
tributing: to other Senators any unpatriotic motive in promoting
their political philosophy, however mischievous and disastrous
I may think the effects of such doctrines would be if they should
be adopted.
Mr. President, on January 2, 1912, a then Senator from Texas
[Mr. Bailey] delivered an address of three hours in the Senate
in an attempt to show th a t,“ such a system o f direct legisla­
tion ” as “ the initiative and referendum ” would establish would
be in conllict with “ the representative principle ” on which he
alleged “ this Republic was founded.”
This speech, on February 4, 1913 (C ongressional R ecord,
p. 25G9), was offered to be printed as a Senate document.
In order to make this deliberate assault on the principles of
popular government the then Senator raised a moot question
by submitting and speaking to the following resolution:
Senate resolution 413.
Resolved, That such a system of direct legislation as the initiative
and referendum would establish is in conflict with the representative
principle on which this Republic was founded and would, if adopted,
inevitably work a radical change in the character and structure of our
Government.

No action was requested on this resolution. It is obvious
that this speech, offered to be printed as a Senate document,
was intended to be used as a campaign document by those who
oppose popular governmeut and the initiative and referendum,
which is the open door to real popular government. This op­
position to popular government has recently prepared numerous
speeches which have been printed as Senate documents for the
campaign against the people’s rule, some of which I shall men­
tion. For example:
1. An address delivered by Mr. Lodge (Senator from Massa­
chusetts) at Raleigh, N. C., November 28, 1911, on “ The Con­
stitution and its makers,” and presented to the United States
Senate by a Senator from North Carolina [Mr. O verman ], with
the request that it be printed as a Senate document. (S. Doc.
No. 122.)
2. An address delivered by Hon. E lihu R oot at the annual
meeting of the New York Bar Association in New York City
on January 19, 1912, entitled “ Judicial decisions and public
feeling,” presented by a Senator from Utah [Mr. Sutherland],
with the request that it be printed as a Senate document, Janu­
ary 2, 1912. (S. Doc. No. 271.)
3. An address delivered by Mr. Nicholas Murray Butler, presi­
dent of the Columbia University, late Republican vice presi­
dential candidate before electoral college, before the Commercial
Club of St. Louis, November 27, 1911, entitled “ Why should we
change our form of government,” presented by a Senator from
Utah [Mr. Sutherland] on January 3, 1912, with the request
that it be printed as a Senate document. (S. Doc. No. 238.)
4. An address delivered by Hon. Samuel W. McCall, a Mem­
ber o f Congress from Massachusetts, before the Ohio State Bar
Association, on July 12,1911, entitled “ Representative as against
direct government,” presented by a Senator from Michigan [Mr.
S m ith ] to the United States Senate, with the request that it be
printed as a Senate document, January 23, 1912. (S. Doc. No.
273.)

5.
An address delivered by Hon. Emmett O'Neal, governor of
Alabama, at the one hundred and forty-third annual banquet of
the Chamber of Commerce of the State of New York at the
Waldorf, November 16, 1911, entitled “ Representative govern­
ment and the common law—A study of the initiative and refer­
endum,” presented to the Senate by a Senator from Texas [Mr.
Bailey], with the request that it be printed as a Senate docu­
ment, January 3, 1912. (S. Doc. No. 246.)
G. An address by President Taft to the general court of the
Legislature of Massachusetts, at Boston. Mass.. March IS, 1912.
against giving the people direct power, presented to the United
States Senate by a Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Gal linger] with a request that it be printed as a Senate document,
March 22. 3912. (S. Doc. No. 451.)
7.
An address by Mr. Wendell Phillips Stafford (an Associate
Justice o f the Supreme Court o f the District of Columbia),
before the New York County Lawyers’ Association, February 17,
1912, entitled “ The new despotism,” referring to the despotism
of a majority of the citizens in the several States and in the
United States over the minority, presented by a Senator from
Utah [Mr. Sutherland] to the United States Senate, with the
request that it be printed as a Senate document. (S. Doc.
No. 344.)
S. An address delivered in the United States Senate by a
Senator from Utah [Mr. Sutherland]. July 11. 1911. entitled
“ Government by ballot,” denouncing the initiative, referendum,
and recall (the principles of the constitution of Utah). (Senate
document room.)
9. An address by lion. William H. Taft (President o f the
United States) at Toledo, Ohio, on March S, 1912. entitled
“ The judiciary and progress,” opposing the recall and the ex­
tension of popular government, presented to the United States
Senate by a Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. Oliver], with the
request that it be printed as a Senate document, March 13, 1912.
(S. Doc. No. 40S.)
10. An address by Hon. H enry Cabot Lodge fa United States
Senator from Massachusetts), delivered at Princeton Univer­
sity, March S, 1912, entitled “ The compulsory initiative and
referendum and the recall of judges,” presented to the United
States Senate by a Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Gallinger], with the request that it be printed as a Senate docu­
ment. (S. Doc. No. 406.)
11. An address by a Senator from Texas [Mr. Bailey] op­
posing the initiative and referendum and the recall, delivered
January 2, 1913.
The glaring error of these various arguments against the
principles of popular government I caused to be answered by
one of the clearest thinkers and most patriotic men in the
United States, C. F. Taylor, Esq., editor of Equity, Philadel­
phia. (S. Doc. No. 651, May S. 1912.)
But these speeches against the principles of popular govern­
ment are not the only ones printed as Senate documents and
in the Congressional R ecord. The Congressional R ecord,
Sixty-second Congress, first session, volume 47, page 3738, con­
tains an argument against the initiative, referendum, and re­
call, by Clinton W. Howard, introduced into the R ecord by a
Senator from Washington [Mr. Jones].




84132— 11872




6
Hon. H enry C abot L odge, a Senator from Massachusetts,
delivered a speech before the Central Labor Union o f Boston,
opposing the right of the people of Massachusetts to express
their opinion on any public policy, which was such a valuable
contribution to political literature that it was printed as a
Senate document. (S. Doc. No. 114, Sixtieth Congress, first ses­
sion. )
Hon. James A. Tawney delivered a speech before the Minnesota
Bankers’ Association, June 21, 1911, opposing the initiative,
referendum, and recall, which was so highly approved by Hon.
J oseph G. Cannon, formerly Speaker of the House of Repre­
sentatives, that he had it put in the Congressional R ecord
the first session of this Congress. (C ongressional R ecord, vol.
47, p. 4231.)
And the Hon. George W. Wickersham, Attorney General of
the United States, delivered a speech at Syracuse,* N. Y., re­
peated it at Cleveland, and repeated it again at Princeton. N. J.,
and which was also printed in this Congress as a Senate
document. (S. Doc. No. 20.)
Hon. George W. Wickersham, Attorney General o f the United
States, delivered another argument against the initiative, refer­
endum, and recall before the law school of Yale, which was
printed in this Congress as a Senate document. (S. Doc. No.
0 2 .)
They are, with only two exceptions, the arguments of leading
standpat Republicans o f the most reactionary type. It is the
point o f view of the federalist as opposed to the democratic
point o f view. (See Federalist Letter No. 10.)
I need not mention other speeches in opposition. These are
sufficient to show who opposes, and to make it easy to ascer­
tain what their point of view is. However worded, the argu­
ment of all these gentlemen proceeds from a common basis—a
distrust of the people, a lack o f confidence in the capacity o f the
people for self-government.
The then Senator from Texas complained in the beginning of
his remarks o f the “ unparalleled zea l” of those who favor the
initiative and referendum, and suggested that “.the men who
are opposed to the initiative and referendum have made no spe­
cial effort to combat them.” The various speeches above re­
ferred to against popular government shows an extensive propa­
ganda against popular government being carried on by the
leaders of the Republican Party of the extreme type.
President Taft six years ago traveled 1,G00 miles to make a
set speech against the initiative and referendum at Oklahoma
City, advising the people of Oklahoma against this “ cumber­
some and illogical legislative method ” contained in their pro­
posed constitution, pointing out the dangers that would ensue
from such “ hasty, irrational, and immoderate ” legislation, and
so forth.
The people o f Oklahoma having considered well the views of
Mr. Taft voted in favor o f the initiative and referendum by
307,000 majority, substantially only the Republican officeholders
and the voters they could influence being against it.
It is an interesting matter to observe that the then Senator
from Texas,' in his crusade against the initiative and refer­
endum, is found in close working sympathy with the Republican
statesmen above referred to, the followers of Alexander Ilarnil81132— 11872

7
ton and bis theory of the wisdom of the rule of the few and
of the folly of the rule of the common people (Senator L odge,
Senator L oot, Senator S u t h e r l a n d , President Taft, James A.
Tawney, J o seph G. C a n n o n , Representative M cC a l l , Nicholas
Murray Butler, W. P. Stafford, C. W. Howard, Attorney General
Wickersham, Senator O liver , Senator G allinger , Senator
J ones , Senator S m it h of Michigan). The then Senator ex­
plained that he had been called a “ reactionary.” It is his argu­
ments, his public utterances, and his company in the assault
on the initiative and referendum and on popular government
that have doubtless contributed to fix this public estimate of the
Senator.
THE

W E IG H T

OF POPU LAR O PIN IO N FAVORS T H E IN IT IA T IV E
ENDUM W H E REVER IT H A S BEEN D ISC U SSE D .

AND

REFER­

I call attention to the fact that the State lately represented
by the then Senator—Texas—has just returned his successor—
Mr. M orris S heppard — who was overwhelmingly elected by the
people of Texas over the opposition of the recent Senator after
Mr. S heppard had made a campaign defending popular govern­
ment and the initiative, the referendum, and the recall. So that
the people o f Texas have thus approved the principles of the
initiative and referendum, advocated by their present Senator,
and have not been persuaded to the contrary by the eloquence of
his predecessor.
Not only have the people of Texas thus approved the advo­
cate of the initiative and referendum [Mr. S h e p p ar d ], but the
great adjacent Commonwealths of Oklahoma. Arkansas, and Mis­
souri have placed the initiative and referendum in their consti­
tutions. The vote in Mississippi in 1912 was two to one in favor
of the initiative and referendum, but failed o f adoption because
of the antiquated provision requiring a majority o f all votes
cast in the election; and the advisory vote in Illinois was over
three to one, but a machine jack-pot legislature trampled upon
the direct mandate of the people. The States of Washington,
Oregon, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Montana, South
Dakota, Colorado, Nebraska, and even the far eastern State of
Maine, Arkansas, Missouri, and Idaho and the central State of
Ohio, have adopted the initiative and referendum in their consti­
tutions, and many other States are on the point of adopting the
initiative and referendum, so that we may speedily expect the
adoption in at least 14 additional States of the initiative and
referendum which President Taft denounced six years ago when
Oklahoma was beginning this great fight for restoring popular
government. When I entered the Senate only Oregon had the
initiative and referendum in good working order, two other
States—Montana and South Dakota—then having adopted it in
a weak form. It has become a nation-wide issue among the
States, and we find ourselves even in the United States Senate
face to face with numerous Senate documents containing many
addresses delivered against the principles of direct popular gov­
ernment by various Republican leaders— Senator L odge, at
Raleigh; Senator R o o t ; Nicholas Murray Butler; Congressman
M c C a l l ; Senator S u t h e r l a n d ; President Taft before the Mas­
sachusetts Legislature; President Taft at Toledo: Justice Staf­
ford, of the District of Columbia, in New York City; Attorney
General Wickersham; James A. Tawney; Senator L odge at
Princeton.




84132— 11872




8
This great progressive movement for perfecting popular gov­
ernment has seized upon the heart of the natioual Democracy
which has chosen as the next President a man who thoroughly
understands this issue and has thrown himself with enthusiasm
into the leadership of it.
Ninety per cent o f the Democratic Tarty membership is
thoroughly progressive. Ten per cent of the members, perhaps,
may not clearly understand the issue, or some may be still
blinded or misled by private interests, and some may be in­
fluenced unconsciously by their attachment to the old game of
machine polities, which is now staggering to its final fall on
American soil. Shallow epithet or thoughtless denunciation
will no longer serve to meet the grave issues presented in this
country for the complete reestablishment o f popular self-gov­
ernment.
W H Y T H U P EO PL E NEED T H E

IN IT IA T IV E AND T H E

REFERENDU M .

The people need the initiative to pass the laws they do want
and need and which the legislature (especially a machinecontrolled legislature) for any reason fails to pass, and they
need the referendum so as to have the power o f veto over
crooked and corrupt or undesired laws which might be passed by
the legislature (especially a machine-controlled legislature).
Why is it that they do not get the laws they want, and why
is it that they get the laws they do not want?
M A C H IN E

P O L IT IC S

OR R O SS

RU LE .

*

The answer to this is known to every student of our public
law'. It is due to the evil results of machine politics, which,
in its worst form, begins with a crooked precinct organization,
controls nominations and ballot boxes and election machinery,
and has contrived to bring about a gross and corrupt miscarriage
o f our “ representative democracy,” w'herein nominations are
fraudulently extracted from prearranged conventions, wherein
State officers are nominated by State conventions composed of
machine politicians thrice refined through the State convention,
the county convention, and the precinct convention or caucus.
Machine party rule is organization, once honorable and legiti­
mate, which has fallen into the hands o f machine men, where
the principle of good government is not the controlling force
but where selfish private ambition or private gain controls.
Under this system, if a governor is to be nominated by one
or the other o f the two lending parties (the process has largely
been the same in either party when the corrupt machine is once
established), the following method is pursued: The State chair­
man calls for delegates to a State convention, assigning each
county so many delegates. Thereupon the county chairman calls
for a county convention, consisting of delegates, assigning to
each precinct one or more delegates, whereupon, the precinct
committeeman (who when the machine actually exists is a petty
precinct boss, a cog in the machine) calls a precinct convention
or caucus to select the delegate or delegates to the county con­
vention. Such a precinct boss will call the precinct caucus on
short notice, obscure advertisement, at an inconvenient time
and place, possibly over a saloon, and will pack this little
precinct caucus with his own henchmen and friends by ex­
traordinary diligence. He will have prepared on a slip of
paper the delegates he wants elected. lie will call the meetiug
to order perhaps 1 0 minutes before the time set, his watch being
81132— 11872

9
a little fast, lie will ask if there are any nominations, and one
of liis henchmen will nominate the boss himself, perhaps, or
some equally trusted gentleman of the machine, and they will
vote instantly. It will be carried by acclamation and the meet­
ing will adjourn sine die, and ilicn and there the governing
power departs from the “ dear people,” never to return. The
oOO votes in the precinct have then and there had their govern­
ing power purloined and stolen by the machine. The American
eagle has fallen into the trap of the machine and is safely
tied down. The county convention—when under machine man­
agement— consists of such high-minded patriots, self-selected,
who will nominate the most select of their own class to represent
the citizenship of that county in the State convention, and the
State convention, consisting of these self-selected rulers by this
highly refining process, will dispose o f the nominations of all
important State offices, governors, attorneys general, supreme
court judges, legislators, and so forth and nominate “ hand
picked ” delegates to nominate a presidential candidate in
national convention.
In this State convention these self-selected rulers write the
party platform which binds the State legislature and the State
officials o f all classes, from the governor down. The govern­
ing business has thus been transferred through the machineorganized precinct from the body of the good citizens, who are
unorganized and unobservant, and who possibly may not sus­
pect fraud, into the hands of a band o f organized mercenaries.
A national convention based on fraud at the precinct is one
degree worse than a State convention. These self-selected
rulers who have thus by the crafty process o f machine politics
succeeded in framing State conventions, county conventions, dis­
trict conventions, etc., and national conventions, and in nomi­
nating the officials of the State and Nation and in laying down
the party platform, which means the rule of government, hav­
ing nominated their chosen friends for various positions, pro­
ceed to elect them by processes even more criminal. To start
with, they stuff the registration lists with dead men and ghosts.
They put down the names of men who do not exist and have
their henchmen arrange strikers to represent these artificial
voters. In Oklahoma City recently there were large numbers
of such false registrations reported. In New York City at one
time they discovered over 30,000 of such false registrations.
In Philadelphia, I am advised, there were disclosed over 70,000
at one time, and only the Lord o f Truth knows how many they
really have had in this Nation. These organized scamps get
charge of the election machinery, they name the State election
board, and the county election boards, the city and county
precinct election officials; they have control o f the ballot boxes
and of the ballots; they bribe or coerce weak voters; some­
times they stuff the boxes; and sometimes, where public opin­
ion will not stand for this, they content themselves by voting
thousands of falsely registered names; they arrange that a
machine tool may vote five times in a precinct under five dif­
ferent names, and then repeat his vote as many times under
other names in each o f 10 other precincts. Such a useful
voter—called a repeater—deserves to be rewarded with public
employment and usually is rewarded by being given some
political preferment in a small way, sometimes merely by being
paid so much money for his services and by an occasional job.




84132— 11872




The machine may control the police, and at the ballot boxes
they can see to it that no interference with their plans is per­
mitted. They also control sometimes the judges of the courts,
who will accord “ a fair hearing” to any scamp that belongs
to the machine and shield him from lawful pudishment. There
are found sufficient technical reasons why these scoundrels
never get inside of the jails. It is not enough to stuff the
ballot boxes in this w a y ; these officers of election can also
deface and count out the ballots of citizens who are “ against
the machine.” They can, under their rules o f management,
throw out a precinct or a whole county where the better ele­
ment prevails for fictitious reasons, deliberately devised by
this system o f organized rascality. So that, even where an
honest majority might, in spite of all pitfalls, be found, the
machine, through the process of thus fraudulently nominating
and fraudulently electing candidates, can overthrow the ma­
jority and retain possession of the governing business. Patri­
otic men have discovered these evil elements to be in control
of the governing powers of the States in greater or lesser degree,
and that the machine and its agents and representatives have
become the allies and the agents o f organized greed and cor­
rupt selfishness, until in some States and cities the whole sys­
tem of government has become so despicable that the best citi­
zens of the State, in despair, absent themselves from the polls
and take little or no interest in public affairs, on the ground
that politics is a “ dirty business.” Honest citizens justly com­
plain of the corrupt alliance between the political party ma­
chine— often bipartisan, as in New York, Illinois, and Pennsyl­
vania—and the corrupt corporations, which deliberately en­
gaged in swindling the people out of vast property rights by
granting privileges and properties that belong to the people
without fair consideration. What is even worse, this evil sys­
tem has not only given the people no relief against the organ­
ized monopoly that has slowly absorbed nearly all of the oppor­
tunities of life and are oppressing the people beyond reason in
a mad race for wealth accumulation, but has tremendously con­
tributed to the establishment of monopoly by legislative favor
and by executive immunity. Congress itself has exemplified
this system and until recently had not given relief which the
people had a right to ask, although the political parties had
been promising the people relief for years.
Those who have opposed enlarging the direct power of the
people, led by President Taft, loudly proclaimed in the cam­
paign of 1908, in answer to the Democratic demand for the
“ people’s rule,” that the people did rule through the Republican
Party, and that those who claimed that the people were not rul­
ing were merely agitators and demagogues.
The great progressive party o f the country, the Democratic
Party, raised this issue of direct legislation and declared in
favor of it in the national platform o f 1900. They demanded
the direct election of Senators: they demanded the publicity of
campaign contributions: they demanded an end to corrupt prac­
tices; and they demanded "th e i>eople's ru le” in terms most
emphatic in the platform o f 1908, denouncing the graft and po­
litical corruption traced to the representatives of predatory
wealth, the debauchery of elections, and declaring “ the rule of
the people” to be “ the overwhelming issue.”
84132— 11872

11
The people realized in 1900, when the Republican Party lead­
ers passed the Payne-Aldrich Tariff Act, that the Republican
leaders did not represent the people but represented privilege
and private interests. It was obvious from their conduct that
the people did not really rule the country, but that organized
plutocracy was in control. In an address to the Senate before
the campaign of 1910 on the 28th day of May, 1910, I called the
attention of the country to the fact that the people did not really
rule in Congress; that the people had been promised many
things for years by the party in power and had been continually
disappointed. I pointed out then many things which the people
justly desired and had prayed for in vain.
That they had urgently desired—
The control o f monopoly.
Lower prices on the necessaries of life and on manufactured
goods.
Lower railroad rates. Lower passenger rates.
Physical valuation of railroads and of telegraph and tele­
phone and industrial corporations.
Reciprocity with other nations.
An act preventing corrupt practices in governmental proc­
esses.
A sweeping control of improper campaign contributions.
An end o f gambling in agricultural products, cotton, and
foodstuffs.
The abatement of the gigantic stock and bond gambling estab­
lishment in Wall Street.
An end to overcapitalization o f stocks and bonds.
An end to unfair railway discriminations.
The development of good roads.
The legitimate development of national waterways.
An income tax.
A progressive inheritance tax.
An employers’ liability act.
An act providing adequate workmen's compensation.
A minimum wage for women.
An eight-hour labor day.
Fair treatment for child labor.
Fair prices for their crude products.
The right both to buy and to sell on a competitive market.
All these things the people had sought and had not received
because they did not really rule through the Republican Party.
B E L IE F

IS

ABOUT TO COME T H R O U n il T H E
PARTY.

PRO G R ESSIVE DEM O CRATIC

The demand for the people's rule became the battle cry of the
Democracy in 190S, and in 1910 the people captured the House
of Representatives through the Democratic Party and immedi­
ately undertook the fulfillment o f these promises for a better
government by overthrowing Cannonism and by passing numer­
ous acts reducing the tariff, all vetoed by Mr. Taft.
The Democratic Party made good in 1911 and 1912, and in the
campaign of 1912 they took further advanced ground toward
purifying the processes of government and establishing the rule
of the people in the following magnificent declaration:
Wo direct attention to the fa ct that the Dem ocratic T arty’s demand
fo r a return t o t h e r u l e o f t h e p e o p l e , e x p r e s s e d in t h e n a t i o n a l p l a t ­
form four p e a r s a y o , has now become the accepted doctrine o f a large




84132—11872




m ajority o f the electors. We again remind the country that only by a
larger exercise of the reserved power of the people can they protect
themselves from the misuse o f delegated power and the usurpation of
governmental instrum entality by special interests. For this reason
the national convention insisted on the overthrow o f Cannonism and the
inauguration o f a sys:em by which United States Senators could be
elected by direct vote. The Democratic Party offers itself to the country
as an agency through which the complete overthrow and extirpation of
corruption, fraud, and machine rule in American politics can be effected.

They went further: they provided for a preferential ballot for
presidential candidates in 1916 by a primary and for election
likewise o f members of the Democratic national committee, who
should immediately take their places and put an end to the
machine management o f the Democratic national committee in
the following language:
We direct that the national committee incorporate in the call fo r the
next nom inating convention a requirement that all expressions of prefer­
ence fo r presidential candidates shall be given and the selection o f
delegates and alternates made through a primary election conducted by
the party organization in each State where such expression and election
arc not provided for by State law. Committeemen who are hereafter
to constitute the membership o f the Dem ocratic national committee and
whose election is not provided for by law shall be chosen in each State
at such primary elections, and the service and authority o f the com ­
mitteemen, however chosen, shall begin immediately upon the receipt
o f their credentials, respectively.

They did more. They pledged an end to abuse of money in
elections by publicity and by limiting individual contributions in
the following plank :
We pledge the Dem ocratic P arty to the enactment o f a law prohibit­

ing any corporation from contributing to a campaign fund and any
individual from contributing any amount above a reasonable maximum.

They went further to break up machine rule by proposing to
put an end to the abuse of patronage by a President in renomi­
nating himself in the following plank:
We favor a single presidential term, and to that end urge the adoption
o f an amendment to the Constitution making the President o f the
United States ineligible for rceiection, and we pledge the candidate
o f this convention to this principle.

They declared for the control by the people of the United
States Senate by the direct election o f Senators.
The Democratic Congress of 11*10 and 1912 was a Congress of
magnificent accomplishment, overthrowing Cannonism. passing
acts to lower taxes, providing the direct election of Senators,
admitting progressive Arizona and giving New Mexico an
amendable constitution, limiting the election expenses o f Sen­
ators and Representatives, passing a hill to prevent the abuse of
injunction, passing a bill giving an eight-hour day for workmen,
and so forth.
The Democratic Party in its platform of 1912 promised the
people the relief which they have all these years hoped for—
tariff reform, control o f the trusts, lowering the cost of living,
physical valuation of railroads, express companies, telegraph
and telephone lines, proper banking legislation, development of
waterways and roads, declaring in favor o f conserving the propery of the people, the protection o f the rights o f labor, to estab­
lish a Department o f Labor, to establish an independent public
health service, to establish the parcel post (now the law ), and
to reform the administration o f the civil and criminal law.
The tremendous effect of the souud, honest, wise Democratic
doctrine has been felt in the Senate itself, whose character and
84132—11872

13
point of view on next week—March 4, 1913—will be far removed
from the point of view of the Aldrich regime of six years ago.
Mr. President, the people are going to rule through the pro­
gressive Democratic Party, which has pledged itself as an
agency through which they can really enforce the matured
public opinion of the country.
The progressive policies of the Democratic Party mean the
absolute overthrow of the political machine, and I rejoice in
the declaration of the noble platform that—•
The Dem ocratic P arty offers itself to the country as an agency
through which the complete overthrow and extirpation o f corruption,
fraud, and machine rule in American politics can be effected.

And 1 remind my fellow Senators that the initiative and the
referendum and the recall comprise the quickest, most direct,
adequate available means by which to put an end to corrupt
machine politics in the Nation and to overthrow the baleful in­
fluence o f the machine.
The ideals of the machine are low. The notion of the ma­
chine politician is to get a job at governmental expense for him­
self and his cronies; perhaps to make money out of the govern­
ing business by selling privileges to those who wish to buy at
the expense of the people—it may be the selling o f municipal
contracts; it may be selling franchises; it may be selling im­
munity from the law intended to control vice and criminal
conduct; it may be the blackmailing o f legitimate business
through a jack-pot legislature, or the withholding, until paid
for, the statutes required by the people. There are numerous
degrees of the machine, from the comparatively harmless to that
which is utterly corrupt and criminal.
There are many perfectly honest men, however, who stand by
a party organization as a matter o f party loyalty, not realizing
when legitimate organization becomes illegitimate organization;
when honest party organization becomes a dishonest organiza­
tion unworthy the support o f good men, when their party man­
agement falls into the hands of a selfish or corrupt machine.
This mischief-breeding system has grown from the convention
system, as established in 1832, which developed into the danger­
ous machine-rule system in 1844, against which Benton and Cal­
houn made their great protests. They forecasted what has hap­
pened, and we are now trying to undo the harm which was then
begun, and which in recent years has reached such an evil emi­
nence. It is against the bad practices and evil results of ma­
chine government that thoughtful citizens have determined to
promote the initiative and referendum. In 1902, by the vigorous
questioning of candidates by nonpartisan organizations, a wedge
was forced into the iron-clad panoply o f the two great political
parties, in both of which the machine existed in greater or
less degree, and in this way an opening was made for the
establishment of the greatest of all of the agencies for enforcing
“ representative democracy.” We had the form of a repre­
sentative democracy—we did not have its substance for the
reason that in many cases the representatives in State legis­
latures and in Congress and in executive and judicial offices,
owing their elections to the machine, and the political machine
having a good working agreement with the corrupt commercial
and financial interests, prevented the representatives of the
people really representing the people and had them in fact




84132— 11872




14
representing the special interests as against the general in­
terest.
The people need the initiative and referendum as the quickest
means by which they can conveniently overthrow the corrupt
political machines in the United States. By the initiative the
people can pass any law they do want, and by the referendum
they can veto any law they do not want, and this is a deadly
peril to the machine and to the “ representative ” who is really
a representative of corrupt special interests, while it is a shield
and buckler to the "representative” who really at heart repre­
sents the people. A good representative is glad to have any bill
which he passes referred to the people, and he is glad to have
the people initiate any bill which they really desire.
W hat is

the

I nitiative
T IIE

and

R efeuendum?

IN IT IA T IV E .

In its ordinary meaning it is this: The initiative means the
right of the people, under forms prescribed by law. to initiate
any law they want and to whch they can get a sufficient num­
ber of thousands of citizens to attach their signatures on peti­
tions, to be submitted by the secretary of state at the next regu­
lar election to the voters of the State for their adoption or re­
jection. It is very troublesome to get up an initiated petition.
It is expensive. It is only done by those who are moved by a
powerful interest and who believe that their proposal would
meet the approval of the majority of the citizens of the State.
The initiative permits a certain number of thousands of voters
to make a motion before all o f the citizens of the State, which
shall be voted on, just as one man in a mass meeting can make a
motion and have it voted on. or as one member of a legislative
assembly can make a motion that a certain bill which he drafts
shall be voted on. But the initiative by the people before it
can be moved must have thousands of people say that they want
it voted on by signing a petition to that effect. It takes over
18,000 voters in Oklahoma to initiate a bill. It gives the peo­
ple an opportunity to pass any law they do want in this way
when their legislature for any reason—particularly for the
reason that the legislature is controlled by a crooked bipartisan
political machine— refuses to pass laws which are of funda­
mental importance, such as a tliorougbgoiug corrupt practices
prevention act. Oregon could never get a corrupt practices
prevention act that was efficient until Oregon had the initiative
and referendum, because the organized rascality of that State
was iu control o f the legislature and would not permit it to
be done. They could not get a proper direct primary nor other
needed statutes.
T IIE

REFEREND U M .

It is merely this: That the people, within 00 days after an
objectionable act is passed, may in like manner sign a petition
by a certain number of thousands of voters requesting that the
particular objectionable act passed by the legislature which the
petitioners believe injurious to the people shall be suspended in
its operation until the next regular election, at which time the
people shall have the right either to contirm or reject such
statute so passed by the legislature. Usually S per cent of the
voters can initiate a bill they want, and 5 per cent of the voters
can have a referendum. A better system would be to require a
tixed number o f qualified voters, as 10,000. or 15,000, or 20.000,
841:52— 11872

15
as in Maine. This fixes a definite standard and more clearly
visualizes to the public the size and dignity of the demand for
a proposed measure before it can be submitted to the whole
people.
T H E I N IT IA T IV E AND T H E REFERENDU M AND T H E M A C H IN E .

The initiative and referendum, as I have said, is a deadly
enemy to the machine. The machine can only retain its power
power by preventing the passage of a corrupt practices prevention act, by preventing honest election laws, and preventing the
establishing of honest election machinery. The organized ras­
cality of the machine will always be found in the way of a
thorough-going corrupt practices prevention act and will always
be found opposed to perfecting the election machinery.
This is why in New York the bipartisan machine, led by ma­
chine politicians on the Democratic side, and by machine poli­
ticians on the Republican side, defeated a primary law. This
is why proper laws controlling corrupt practices and perfecting
the election machinery so as to make it absolutely honest have
not been passed in New York, in Pennsylvania, and in numerous
other States, and this is why the people of California adopted
the initiative and referendum and the recall; this is why Oregon
adopted i t ; this is why Oklahoma adopted it, and this is why so
large a number of States have adopted the initiative and refer­
endum, and why so many others are about to adopt it, and this
is the reason why it is going to be adopted in every single one
of the 48 States of this Union.
And no amount of political sophistry is going to stop the
American people from adopting the means by progressive meas­
ures for putting an end to organized misconduct in the govern­
ing business in the United States.
The American people know what the trouble is, and the great
English ambassador, James Bryce, in the American Common­
wealth, photographed it for their information under the head­
ings “ The machine,” “ Rings and bosses,” “ Spoils, etc.,” in
1888. (American Commonwealth, Vol. II, pp. 51-141, ed. 18S8.)
Public opinion has not been hasty, but has moved slowly, very
slowly, too slowly.
Why, Mr. President, even the control of corrupt practices in
the nomination and election of the President of the United States
and in electing Senators and Members o f Congress has never
been properly passed. The law on the publicity of campaign
contributions, the law which we have passed, is grossly defec­
tive, requiring no publicity of certain individual contributions, no
publicity of any committee spending money wholesale on national
elections, except where that committee is confessedly in charge
of two or more States, and there is no machinery for making
effective publicity of campaign contributions. The reason is
that the power of the machine has been so great in the House
and in the Senate that the perfecting of this law has appeared
to be impossible. The American people are going to end it by
putting their hands on the governing business with power and
with direct authority through the initiative, the referendum, and
the recall. These statutes open the door for the passage ol
corrupt practices prevention acts and for the recalling o f un­
fa ithful representat i ves.
By the initiative and referendum we can pass the Australian
ballot, which being a secret ballot prevents the financial ana




84132-—11872




commercial bullies of tbe country coercing the suffrage o f the
poor citizens whose bread and butter these bullies control.
By the initiative and referendum we can pass a mandatory
primary law in spite of the legislature controlled by the ma­
chine, and in this way can permit the citizens to nominate their
proposed representatives and take the nomination of public
officials out of the hands of the convention system, out of the
machine, out of the hands of organized rascality.
By the initiative and referendum we can pass a thorough­
going corrupt practices prevention act that will destroy machine
politics and corrupt practices in this Republic, and will drive
out of public life machine-picked candidates, who are the allies
and often the agents of monopoly and of the corrupt commercial
and financial interests, who have not hesitated to use money on
a gigantic scale. We have had in recent years overwhelming
evidence of this.
By the initiative and referendum a new era o f pure and up­
right government will be introduced into the United States
and into the States o f the Union in which the welfare of men,
of women, and poor children will be the great motive force of
law making and o f law executing, and an end will be put to
the use of legislative and executive power for the purpose of
promoting merely the financial and commercial power of organ­
ized greed.
By the initiative and referendum we can promote organized
righteousness in government and overthrow organized corruption.
By the initiative and referendum we can overthrow the cor­
rupt convention system and establish the rule of the intelligence
and conscience of the majority of our citizens.
By the initiative and referendum we can overthrow organized
selfishness and establish organized altruism.
By the initiative and referendum we can overthrow the liquor
traffic in the United States and establish sobriety and temper­
ance and providence in this Republic.
By the initiative and referendum we can overthrow the Patent
Medicine Trust and establish a department o f health that will
save hundreds of thousands of citizens annually from prevent­
able diseases and death.
By the initiative and referendum we can establish the riehts
of the weak, o f poor feeble men, o f women, and of children
who can not stand up against the grinding conditions established
in this Republic and brought about by the combination of
machine politics and organized corrupt selfishness.
It is no wonder that 4,000,000 voters broke away from all
party ties and followed Theodore Roosevelt when he threw him­
self at the head of this vital demand for righteousness and effi­
ciency in government. It is no wonder that Woodrow Wilson,
having for years questioned the practicability o f the initiative
and referendum, changed his mind about it and threw himself
on the right side of this vital question and is now a great ex­
ponent o f this doctrine and the head of a party which thoroughly
believes in it.
This noble doctrine of the democracy has won over millions
of good citizens heretofore affiliated with other parties and led
directly to the organization of the Progressive Party, so called.
The Democratic Party has long been the more progressive
party of the Nation, even if it has had its efficiency impaired by
84132— 11872

IT
corrupt machine politics in some of the States. It has been
demanding the direct election of Senators for many years. It
lias violently opposed the corrupt use o f money and the coercion
of voters by commercial and financial interests, and has been
opposing the trusts for many, many years. The Democratic
Party declared itself boldly and strongly in favor of “ d irec t
leg isla tio n ” in its platform of 1900 in the following language:
W e favor direct legislation wherever practicable.
This means the initiative and referendum. And in its great
platform of 1908 was the following noble declaration of pro­
gressive principles:
We rejoice at the increasing signs of an awakening throughout the
country.
The various investigations have traced graft and political
corruption to the representatives of predatorg wealth, and laid bare
the unscrupulous methods by which they have debauched elections and
preyed upon a defenseless public through the subservient officials whom
they have raised to place and power.
The conscience of the Nation is note aroused and w ill free the Govern­
ment from the grip of those who have made it a business asset of the
favor-seeking corporations. It must become again a people’s Govern­
ment, and be administered in all departments according to the Jeffer­
sonian maxim— “ equal rights to a l l ; special privileges to none.”
“ (Shall the people rule? ” is the overwhelming issue which manifests
itself in all the questions now under discussion.

The people can only rule by having the right o f direct legis­
lation which they may exercise at their option. They do not
wish to exercise this right except in important cases. They
prefer their representatives to make, judge, and execute the
law. It is only when their representatives fail to represent
the people that the people would care to exercise direct power.
By arranging that the people may exercise direct power at their
option, the representatives would make it unnecessary for the
people to exercise this power, because the big stick of public
opinion, being available through the initiative and referendum
and recall, the legislator, the judge, the administrative officer
will represent matured public opinion to the best o f his lim­
ited understanding, and generally in a satisfactory manner.
Our President elect, Woodrow Wilson, although at one time
regarding the initiative and referendum as unnecessary and
unsuitable, came to change his mind substantially about it for
the same reason that other thoughtful men changed their
minds, and are daily changing their minds, on this great ques­
tion; and that is, for the reason that you can not get the eco­
nomic and humane reforms desired for the welfare of the race
until you overthrow the machine and establish righteous and
responsive government by giving the people a mechanism
through which the public conscience and public intelligence can
act. On August 26,1911, in the Outlook, Gov. Wilson said:
For 15 years I taught my classes that the initiative and referendum
wouldn’t work. I car. prove it n o w ; but the trouble is they do. * * *
Back of all other reform s lies the means of getting it.
Back of the
question, W hat do we W ant? is the question. How are we going to get
it ? The immediate thing we have got to do is to resume popular gov­
ernment.
* *
* We are cleaning house, and in order to clean house
the one thing we need is a good broom. The initiative and referendum
are good brooms.

And Theodore Roosevelt, before the Ohio constitutional con­
vention on April 21, 1912, said:
I believe in the initiative and referendum, which should he used not
to destroy representative government, but to correct it whenever it
becomes misrepresentative.




84132— 11S72-------2

United States Senator
has said:

R obert M . L a F o l l e t t e ,

of Wisconsin,

In my judgment the public interests would be promoted if a majority
of the voters possessed the option of directing bv ballot the action of
their representatives on any important issue, under proper regulations,
insuring full discussion and mature consideration upon such issue by
the voters prior to balloting thereon.

United States Senator

J o n a t h a n B o u r n e , o f Oregon, has said:
The initiative and referendum is the keystone of the arch of popular
government, for by means of this the people may accomplish suen other
reforms as they desire. The initiative develops the electorate, because
it encourages study of principles and policies of government and affords
the originator of new ideas in government an opportunity to secure
popular judgment upon his measures. The referendum prevents misuse
of the power temporarily centralized in the legislature.

United States Senator
1911, said:

HI

i

!

I




M o ses E . C l a p p ,

in San Francisco in

The initiative and referendum I regard as more than monitorial. If
the American people are going to make a success of free government,
they have got to take an interest in government. These measures are
a thousand times more valuable as an educational and inspirational
force, great as their monitorial value may be. They open an avenue to
the voter, so that he does not have to ask any political boss permission
to air his views.

Gov. John F. Sliafroth, about to enter the Senate as the Sen­
ator from Colorado, said:
The initiative and referendum places the Government nearer to the
people, and that has always been the aim of the framers of all repub­
lican forms of government.

Gov. Hiram W. Johnson, of California, the recent candidate
for Vice President of the United States, and who received over
4,000,000 votes, said in his inaugural address before the Cali­
fornia Legislature:
I commend to you the proposition that after all the initiative and
referendum depend upon our confidence in the people and their ability
to govern. The opponents o f direct legislation and the reeall, however
they may phrase their opposition, in reality believe the people can not
he trusted. * * * W e who espouse these measures do so because of
our deep-rooted belief * * * not only in the right o f the people to
govern hut in their ability to govern.

Judge Beu B. Lindsay, of Denver, recently said in the Toledo
News-Bee:
It is hard for me to understand how anyone familiar with the
methods of the great privileged interests of the country in controlling
courts and legislatures could fail to he an enthusiastic supporter of
the initiative and referendum.

Frof. Franklin IT. Giddings. of Columbia University, in an
address before the City Club of Philadelphia on March 23, 1912,
said:
I believe that the people of the United States are changing their form
of government somewhat by introducing such new measures as the
referendum, the initiative, the recall, and the direct primary, in part
because their interests have become largely new, in part because o f
real restiveness under existing conditions, but in part also because, to
au extent never before seen in our history, the people are now thinking
about things, whereas during a great part of our political history they
have thought not about things but only about candidates.

And Dr. Chariot A. Beard, associate professor of politics in
Columbia University, said:
*
*
* anxiety for the preservation of representative institutions
need not lead anyone into the extreme view that the initiative and
referendum are incompatible with them.
They do not destroy repre­
sentative government, neither is there any indication, nor anything in
the nature of things, showing that they can destroy such government.

84132— 11872




Switzerland has this system in excellent working order, an<3
many of our American States have adopted it for the reasons
which I have brielly suggested.
AN

A N S W E R TO T H E

ARGUM ENT

IN

FAVOR OF

S E N A T E R E S O L U T I O N 41 3 .

Mr. President, I shall now directly answer the proposals of
Senate resolution 413, that the initiative and referendum as
established or proposed in the American States is in conflict with
the representative principle on which this Republic was founded
and would work a radical change in the character of our Gov­
ernment.
The argument made by the then Senator from Texas on this
point is that the language used by certain “ representative ”
citizens in the Constitutional Convention of 17S7 would argue
that they thought the Government of the United States was
intended to be “ a representative democracy ” and not a mon­
archy, an aristocracy, or a “ pure democracy.”
Conceding that these gentlemen made the illuminating remarks
attributed to them, after all, what they said is immaterial and
irrelevant.
The remarks of Charles Pinckney, or Madison, or Hamilton,
or o f Fisher Ames, or of Ellsworth, or of Pendleton, in secret
convention or elsewhere, are unimportant in the presence of
the actual history and constitutions of the 4S States, even if any
accidental phrase or opinion emanating from any of these excel­
lent gentlemen had relevancy, which they have not.
Some of these men suggested the importance of people in
thickly settled communities delegating to representatives their
governing powers as a matter of necessary convenience, and the
wisdom of this observation novman disputes. Some of them
pointed out that a “ pure democracy ” was not practicable or
wise in a country such as ours, and to this proposal no advo­
cate of the optional initiative and referendum, which is the
only form proposed in America, takes issue.
Mr. L odge has the precaution upon further study of this
question to discuss the “ computsorp initiative and referendum ”
(at Princton, March 8. 1912), which is not an issue in the Uuited
States, and he thereby practically concedes that he has no
adequate argument against the optional “ initiative and refer­
endum,” the only form suggested in this country.
The compulsory initiative and referendum would mean that
the people would be compelled to pass on every law, which is
not suggested by anyone as suitable in a Republic of 90,000.000
people. Mr. L o dge ’ s escape through the "compulsory d o o r” is
ludicrous and a humorous side light on his estimate of the igno­
rance of his Princeton audience.
Even if Madison and Pinckney and Hamilton had known
what the modern initiative and referendum is and had opposed
it in specific terms, their opinions would be of no importance.
We might as well go back to 1787, a hundred and twenty-five
years, and have them tell us how to devise a telegraph system,
or to invent a telephone system, or to send messages 3.000 miles
through the air without wires, or to run railway trains at 00
miles the hour, or to construct a Mauretania for the high seas.
These innocent old gentlemen would fall dead with astonish­
ment if they could see the conditions of modern life. They are
not qualified to instruct us in statecraft.
81132— 11872




The then Senator from Texas makes a crafty appeal to the
sense of reverence which all men have for their ancestors, and
then tries to argue that our ancestors were opposed to the
initiative and referendum. The answer to all this is that our
ancestors did not have the slightest idea what the modern op­
tional initiative and referendum is; in the second place, our
ancestors expressed no opposition to the modern optional initia­
tive and referendum; and, in the third place, our ancestors had
no conception of how a representative democracy could fall into
the control o f organized greed through the use of a political
machine. They never considered the possibility o f such a thing,
and if they were to have the present facts before them they
would probably support unanimously the initiative and referen­
dum in order to perfect the representative system.
These ancestral statesmen, who met together in the seclusion
o f closed doors to discuss the framing of a Federal Constitution,
were men as a rule of strongly reactionary sentiment. Twothirds of them were quite thoroughly undemocratic; such lead­
ing Democrats as Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Patrick
Henry, et al., were conspicuous by their absence. The debates
were behind closed doors, in secret conclave, no member allowed
to report or copy any of its proceedings, which were kept pro­
foundly a secret for 00 years, until all the actors were dead.
No wonder this profound secrecy was demanded and observed,
for the GO members of this convention were not authorized to
draft a constitution, but merely to propose amendments to the
Articles o f Confederation, and in drafting the Constitution they
were guilty o f usurpation of political power.
The undemocratic character o f the men who got into this
constitutional convention is demonstrated by numerous secret
speeches made by them when in that convention, and which they
believed would never be known by the people.
Elbridge Gerry, for example, declared—
that democracy was the worst of all political evils.
vol. 5, p. 537.)

(E lliott's Debates,

Edmund Randolph observed, in tracing the political evils of
this country to their origin, “ that every man (in convention)
had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy.”
Hamilton urged a permanent Senate “ to check the impru­
dence of democracy.”
Madison thought the Constitution “ ought to secure the per­
manent interests of the country against innovation.” (Elliott's
Debates, vol. 1, p. 450.)
And Madison, in the Federalist, warned the people against
“ the superior force o f an interested and overbearing majority.”
And these distinguished gentlemen from whom the then Sen­
ator from Texas quotes with such gusto made a Constitution
practically tinamendable by the people. and failed to put into
the Constitution a bill of rights and the fundamental principles
of liberty contained in the Declaration o f Independence.
James Allen Smith, professor of political science, University
of Washington, well says:
From all evidence that we have, the conclusion Is irresistible that
they sought to establish a form of government which would effectually
curb and restrain democracy. They engrafted upon the Constitution so
much of the features of popular government as was, in their opinion,
sufficient to insure its adoption.
S4132— 11872

j ip —

And James Bryce makes a similar comment on their work.
In speaking of checks and balances devised in the Federal
Constitution Mr. Bryce says:
Those who invented this machinery of checks and balances were
anxious not so much to develop public opinion as to resist and build
up brick walls against it.
* *
* " The prevalent conception of pop­
ular opinion was that it was aggressive, revolutionary, unreasoning,
passionate, futile, and a breeder of mob violence.”
(American Com­
monwealth, Morris ed., 1906, p. 260.)

The convention of July 4. 1770, and the Declaration of Inde­
pendence was thoroughly democratic. The Constitution of the
United States, drawn by the reactionaries 11 years afterwards,
was thoroughly undemocratic in numerous particulars, to some
of which I shall call attention.
There were only 65 members of this secret convention; only
55 members attended and only 39 members signed it, and they
were nearly all reactionaries.
The Constitution they submitted was undemocratic in the fol­
lowing particulars:
First. The Constitution permitted a life President.
Second. The Constitution did not provide for the nomination
or election of the President by the people, but by electors far
removed from the people.
Third. The Constitution did not provide for the nomination
or election of Senators by the people.
Fourth. The Constitution provided for an uncontrolled judi­
ciary (by possible interpretation), in striking contrast to the
laws of every State in the Union, including Utah.
Fifth. A minority of the House (34 per cent) can prevent the
majority proposing an amendment to the Constitution. A
minority of the Senate (34 per cent) can prevent the majority
proposing an amendment to the Constitution. A President can
prevent a majority of both Houses proposing an amendment to
the Constitution. A small minority of the States (20 per cent)’
can prevent the amendment of the Constitution.
Sixth. No provision for the adoption of the Constitution was
arranged by popular vote.
And some of the delegates who approved the Constitution from
Virginia at least disobeyed the instructions of the people.
Seventh. The Constitutional Convention usurped the power in
framing the Constitution.
They were only authorized to prepare amendments to the
Articles of Confederation, not frame a new Constitution.
Eighth. The Constitution did not protect the right of free
speech.
Ninth. The Constitution did not protect the right of free
religion.
Tenth. It did not protect the freedom of the press.
Eleventh. It did not protect the right of the people to peace­
ably assemble.
Twelfth. It did not protect the right of the people to petition
the Government for the righting of grievances.
Thirteenth. It did not protect the right of the States to have
troops.
Fourteenth. It did not protect the right of the people to keep
and bear arms.
Fifteenth. It did not protect the people against the quartering
of soldiers upon them without their consent.




84132— 11872




22

Sixteenth. It did not protect the right of the people to be
secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against un­
reasonable searches and seizures nor against warrants, except
upon suitable safeguards.
Seventeenth. It did not protect the people against being held
for crime, except on indictment.
Eighteenth. It did not protect the people against a second
trial for the same offense.
Nineteenth. It did not protect an accused against being com­
pelled to be a witness against himself.
Twentieth. It did not protect the citizen against being de­
prived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
Twenty-first. It did not protect private property being taken
for public use without just compensation.
Twenty-second. It did not secure, in criminal prosecutions,
the right of a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury in
the place where the crime was committed.
Twenty-third. It did not protect the accused in the right to
be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, of the
right to be confronted with the witnesses against him, of the
right to have compulsory processes in obtaining witnesses in his
favor, and to have the assistance of counsel in his defense.
Twenty-fourth. It did not protect the right o f the citizen in
common-law suits to a trial by jury.
Twenty-fifth. It did not protect the citizen against excessive
bail, against excessive fines, nor against cruel and unusual
punishments.
Twenty-sixth. It did not safeguard the rights reserved by the
people against invasion by the Federal Government.
Twenty-seventh. The Constitution is undemocratic in making
no provision for its subsequent amendment by direct popular
vote, although this was the method of the various States.
The ratification o f this undemocratic Constitution was only
obtained with the greatest difficulty, and in ho States was it
submitted to the people themselves for a direct vote.
Massachusetts, South Carolina, New Hampshire, Virginia,
and New York demanded amendments; North Carolina and
Ithode Island at first rejected the Constitution, and except for
the agreement to adopt the first 10 amendments and make it
more democratic, it would have assuredly failed.
George Washington, as president o f the convention, was de­
barred from sharing in the debates. The Constitution had one
very great merit, it established the Union; it had one very
great demerit, it was grossly undemocratic. But it was not as
undemocratic as some modern statesmen would make it appear.
For instance, it did not formally prevent the recall of judges,
but provided that judges should hold office “ during good be­
havior,” and placed the entire executive power in the hands of
a President, and the legislative power in the hands o f Congress,
both o f whom, in my judgment, have the power o f removing any
Federal judge upon the ground o f a high crime and misde­
meanor or for any bad behavior and without impeachment.
It was not so undemocratic as to deny the right of direct
taxation of private citizens by an income tax, although the
Supreme Court o f the United States so misinterpreted the Con­
stitution.
84132— 11872




23
The Constitution says:
No capitation ay other direct tax shall be laid, unless in proportion
to the census or enumeration hereinbefore directed to be taken.

The enumeration referred to is as follow s:
Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the
several States which may be included within this Union according to
their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the
whole number free persons, including those bound to service for a term
of years, and excluding Indians, not taxed, three-fifths of all persons.
The actual enumeration shall be made within three years after the
first meeting of the Congress of the United States, and then every sub­
sequent term of 10 vears in such manner as they shall by law direct.

The inhibition of a direct tax by the clause above referred to
relates alone to a direct tax on a sovereign &tatc.
I have heretofore fully shown this by its history, by the Con­
stitutional Convention debates, and by the other parts of the
Constitution and its interpretation by all departments ef Gov­
ernment.
I f this clause of the Constitution were written out in full, it
would read:
No capitation tax against a sovereign State or other direct tax against
a sovereign State shall be laid unless in proportion to the census or
enumeration of the population of such States hereinbefore directed to
be taken.

The Supreme Court of the United States, misled by fallacious
arguments, interpreted this clause so as to make it read:
No capitation tax against a sovereign State or other direct tax
against a private citizen shall be laid unless in proportion to the census
or enumeration of the population of the States hereinbefore directed to
be taken.

And on this interpretation held that an income tax, being a
direct tax on a citizen, was inhibited by this clause of the'Con­
stitution.
Such an interpretation of above clause o f the Constitution is
incongruous and absurd. It is incongruous to interpret the
clause to jump from a State to the citizen as its subject. It is
absurd to say the clause intended to forbid a direct tax on a
private citizen unless in proportion to the census. The United
States has always directly taxed its citizens and does so now,
so that this interpretation by the Supreme Court is in direct
conflict with the historical and as yet unbroken interpretation
of the Constitution. The Constitution of the United States,
while undemocratic, was not as undemocratic as this.
We do not need to be advised by the undemocratic Alexander
Hamilton, nor by the undemocratic members in this secret con­
clave of 1787, as to the true principles of democracy. These
principles are abundantly set forth in the Declaration of Inde­
pendence and in the constitutions of the 48 States, and show
beyond the peradventure of a doubt that the people of the vari­
ous States intended to preserve their liberties by retaining in
their own hands the sovereign powers of government, and this
is abundantly shown by the plain words of the Declaration of
Independence and of the constitutions of the 48 States.
The then Senator from Texas lays great stress upon the
opinions o f several of the reactionaries in the secret conclave
of 1787, in which 39 “ unauthorized ” delegates, selected by the
legislatures before a constitutional convention was suggested,
framed a constitution that still ties the hands and interferes
84132— 11872




w ith the liberty o f 90,000,000 o f human beings to freely govern
themselves.
Tn point o f fact there were about 3,000,000 people in America
at that time outside o f the secret conclave at Philadelphia,
where certain “ representatives” were embezzling power “ for
the good o f the people.”
These 3,000,000 people outside o f the little Constitutional Con­
vention at Philadelphia had some very sound opinions on human
liberty and on freedom. These w ere the people who fought the
w ar with Great Britain and established their independence and
w ho proposed to keep it by not setting up any rulers over them­
selves or any laws over themselves which they could not at any
time amend, alter, or abolish. The people o f the United Colo­
nies were all right and were believers in popular government
and practiced it, and w rote it in their constitutions. Alexander
Ham ilton and some other reactionaries sympathizing with him
were fundamental Tories and at heart opposed to popular
government.
The principle on icliich this Republic teas founded was not the
representative principle (an incident o f the people's basic
pow er), but was the principle o f popular sovereignty, the prin­
ciple that all power was vested in the people by an inalienable
right, indefeasible, and that the people had the right at any
time to exercise this sovereign power.
The Unanimous Declaration o f the Thirteen United States
o f America, issued July 4, 1776, sa id:
W e hold these truths to he self-evident; that all men are created
e q u a l; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable
r ig h ts; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit o f happiness.
That to secure these rights governments are instituted among men,
deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that when­
ever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends it is the
right of the people to alter or abolish it and to institute new govern­
m ent, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers
in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and
happiness.

This declaration is a declaration in effect that all powers o f
government emanate directly from the people. And this right
is reiterated in the constitution o f almost every State in the
Union, declaring in various form s that all powers o f govern­
ment spring directly from the people. For exam ple:
A L ABA M A.

1819: “All political potcer is inherent in the people, and all
free governments are founded on their authority and instituted
for their benefit, and therefore they have at all times an inalien­
able and indefeasible right to alter, reform, or abolish their form
of government in such manner as they may deem expedient.”
ARKAN SAS.

1836: “ That all power is inherent in the people, and all free
governments are founded on their authority and instituted for
their peace, safety, and happiness. For the advancement o f
these ends they have, at all times, an unqualified right to alter,
reform, or abolish their government in such manner as they may
think proper.”
CALIFORNIA.

18.'f9: “All political poicer is inherent in the people.

Gov­
ernment is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit o f
the people, and they have the right to alter or reform the same

whenever the public good may require it."

84132— 11872

L

25
COLORADO.

1876: “ That all political poicer if! vested in and derived from
the p eop le; that all government o f right originates from the
people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely
for the good o f the whole.”
CO N N ECT ICU T.

1818: “ That all political pow er is inherent in the people, and
all free governments are founded on their authority and insti­
tuted for their benefit, and they have at all times an undeniable
and indefeasible right to alter their form o f governm ent in such
a manner as they may think expedient.”
D ELAW ARE.

1192: “ All ju st authority in the institutions o f political so­
ciety is derived from the people and established with their con­
sent to advance their happiness, and they may for this end as
circumstances require, from time to time, alter their constitu­
tion o f governm ent.”
FLO RID A.

183S: “ That all political poicer is inherent in the people, and
free governments are founded on their authority and estab­
lished for their benefit, and therefore they have at all times an
inalienable and indefeasible right to alter or abolish their form
o f governm ent in such manner as they may deem expedient.”
GEORGIA.

1117: “ We, therefore, the representatives o f the people, from
whom all pow er originates and fo r w hose benefit all governm ent
is intended, by virtue o f the power delegated to us, do ordain
and declare, and it is hereby ordained and declared, that the
follow ing rules and regulations be adopted for the future gov­
ernment o f this State.”
IDAHO.

1889: “ All political poicer is inherent in the people. Govern­
ment is instituted for their equal protection and benefit, and
they have the right to alter, reform , or abolish the same ichencver they may deem it necessary, and no special privileges or
immunities shall ever be granted that may not be altered,
revoked, or repealed by the legislature.”
I L L IN O IS .

1818: “ That all pow er is inherent in the people, and all free
governments are founded on their authority and instituted fo r
their peace, safety, and happiness.”
INDIANA.

1816: “ That all pow er is inherent in the people, and all free
governments are founded on their authority and instituted fo r
their peace, safety, and well being. F or the advancemnt o f these
ends the people have at all times an unalienable and indefeasible
right to alter and reform their governm ent in such manner as
they may think proper.”
IO W A .

18'i6: “ That all political power is inherent in the people.
Government is instituted for the protection, security, and bene­
fit o f the people, and they have the right at all times to alter
or reform the same whenever the public good may require it.”
K ANSAS.

1855: “ All political power is inherent in the people. Govern­
ment is instituted for their equal protection and benefit, and
84132— 11872







2G
they have the right to alter, reform, or abolish the same when­
ever they may deem it necessary, and no special privileges or
immunities shall ever he granted that may not be altered, re­
voked, or repealed by the general assembly.”
KENTUCKY.

1192: “ That all power is inherent in the people, and all free
governments are founded on their authority and instituted for
their pence, safety, and happiness. For the advancement o f
these ends they have at all times an unalienable and indefeasible
right to alter, reform , or abolish their governm ent in such man­
ner as they may think proper.”
L O U IS IA N A .

1868: “ A ll men are created free and equal and have certain
inalienable rights; among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit
o f happiness. To secure these rights governments are instituted
among men, deriving their ju st powers from the consent o f the
governed."
M A IN E .

1819: “ All power is inherent in the people; all free govern­
ments are founded in their authority and instituted for their
benefit; they have, therefore, an unalienable and indefeasible
right to institute governm ent and to alter, reform or totally
change the same, when their safety and happiness require it.”
M A RYLAN D.

1776: “ That all governm ent o f right originates from the peo­
ple, is founded in compact only and instituted solely fo r the good
o f the whole.”
M ASSACH U SETTS.

The first constitution submitted in Massachusetts was rejected
by the people by direct vote at town meetings in the spring o f
1779, because it contained no bill o f rights, and for other rea­
sons. The next constitution submitted, that o f 17S0, the people
adopted by direct vote at town meetings and by more than twothirds o f all who voted. The bill o f rights d eclares:
B IL L OF E IG H T S .

1780: “ A rticle I. All men are born free and equal, and have
certain natural, essential, and inalienable rig h ts; among which
may be reckoned the right o f enjoying and defending their lives
and liberties; that o f acquiring, possessing, and protecting prop­
erty ; in fine, that o f seeking and obtaining their safety and
happiness.
“ A rt. IT. The people o f this Commonwealth have the sole and
exclu sive tigh t o f governing them selves as a free, sovereign, and
independent State, and do, and forever shall, exercise and enjoy
every power, jurisdiction, and right which is not, or may not
hereafter be, by them expressly delegated to the United States
o f Am erica in Congress assembled.
“ A rt. V. All power residing originally in the people, and being
derived from them, the several magistrates and officers o f gov­
ernment vested with authority, whether legislative, executive,
or judicial, are their substitutes and agents and arc at all times
accountable to them ."
M IC H IG A N .

1835: “ All political power is inherent in the people.
“ Government is instituted for the protection, security, and
benefit o f the people; and they have the right at all times to
84132— 11S72

27
alter or reform the same and to abolish one form o f governm ent
and establish another whenever the public good requires it.”
M IN N E S O T A .

1857: “ Government is instituted for the security, benefit, and
protection o f the people, in whom all political power is inherent,
together with the right to alter, m odify, or reform such gov­
ernment whenever the public good may require it.”
M IS S IS S IP P I.

1817: “ That all political power is inherent in the people, and
all free governments are founded on their authority and insti­
tuted for their benefit, and therefore they have at all times an
unalienable and indefeasible right to alter or abolish their form
o f government in such manner as they may think expedient.”
M IS S O U R I.

1820: “ That all political pow er is vested in and derived from
the people.”
M O N TANA.

1880:
peop le;
founded
good o f

“ All political pow er is vested in and derived from the
all government o f right originates w ith the people, is
upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the
the whole.”
N E B R A SK A .

1866-67: “ All men are born equally free and independent and
have certain inherent rights; among these are life, liberty, and
the pursuit o f happiness. To secure these rights governments
are instituted among men, deriving their ju st powers from the
consent o f the governed.”
NEVADA.

1861i: “ All political power is inherent in the people. Govern­
ment is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit o f the
people, and they have the right to alter or reform the same
w henever the public good may require it.”
N E W H A M P S H IR E .

In New Hampshire fou r constitutions were submitted to the
people, who voted directly upon them at town meetings. The
first three w ere rejected (Am erican Political Science Review,
Vol. II, p. 549) largely because there were no express lim ita­
tions upon the power o f the legislature— no bill o f rights. The
bill o f rights o f the fourth one, that o f 1784, declares:
176V/; “ V II. The people o f this State have the sole and e x ­
clusive right o f governing them selves as a free, sovereign, and
independent State, and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise
and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right pertaining
thereto which is not or may not hereafter be by them expressly
delegated to the United States o f Am erica in Congress assem­
bled.”
NEW

JER SE T.

The New Jersey constitution o f 177G declares:
1776: “ W hereas all the constitutional authority ever possessed
by the Kings o f Great Britain over these Colonies or their other
dominions was, by compact, derived from the people and held o f
them for the common interest o f the whole society, allegiance and
protection are, in the nature o f things reciprocal ties, each equally
depending upon the other and liable to be dissolved by the others
being refused or withdrawn. And whereas George III, K ing o f
Great Britain, has refused protection to the good people o f these




84132— 11872




Colonies, and, by assenting to sundry acts o f the British Parlia­
ment. attempted to subject them to the absolute dominion o f
that body, and has also made w ar upon them in the most cruel
and unnatural manner for no other cause than asserting their
•just rights, all civil authority under him is necessarily at an end
and a dissolution o f government in each Colony has consequently
taken place.”
N EW

YO RK .

The New York bill o f rights o f 1777 declares:
1777: “ I. This convention, therefore, in the name and by the
authority o f the good people o f this State, doth ordain, deter­
mine, and declare that no authority shall, on any pretense w hat­
ever, be exercised over the people or members o f this State but
such as shall be derived from and granted by them.”
N O R T H CAR OLIN A .

1776: “ That all political poiccr is vested in and derived from
the people only."
N O RTH D AKOTA.

1889: “ All political power is inherent in the people. Govern­
ment is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit o f the
people, and they have a right to alter or reform the same when
the public good may require.”
O H IO .

1802: “ That all men are born equally free and independent,
and have certain natural, inherent, and inalienable rights
* * * and every free republican government being founded
on their sole authority, and organized for the great purpose o f
protecting their rights and liberties and securing their inde­
pendence; to effect these ends, they have at all times a com plete
pow er to alter, reform , or abolish their government whenever
they may deem it necessary.”
OKLAH OM A.

1907: “ All political power is inherent in the people; and gov­
ernment is instituted for their protection, security, and benefit,
and to promote their general w elfare; and they have the light
to alter or rfiform the same whenever the public good may
require it.”
OREGON.

1857: “ That all power is inherent in the people, and all free
governments are founded on their authority and instituted for
their peace, safety, and happiness, and they have at all times a
right to alter, reform , or abolish the government in such manner
as they may think proper.”
P E N N S Y L V A N IA .

1776: “ That the people o f this State have the sole, exclusive,
and inherent right o f governing and regulating the internal
police o f the same.
“ That all pow er being originally inherent in, and conse­
quently derived from , the people; therefore all officers o f goverment, whether legislative or executive, are their trustees and
servants, and at all times accountable to them.”
RHODE ISL A N D .

18Ji2: “ The basis o f our political system s is the right o f the
ffeoplc to m ake and alter their constitutions o f governm ent.”
84132— 11872

29
SO U T H CAROLINA.

1790: “ All power is originally vested in the peop le; and all
free governments are founded on tlieir authority and are insti­
tuted fo r their peace, safety, and happiness.”
SO U T H D AK O TA.

/

.

1889: “ All men are born equally free and independent and
have certain inherent rights, among which are those o f enjoying
and defending life and liberty, o f acquiring and protecting
property, and a pursuit o f happiness. T o secure these rights
governments are instituted among men, deriving their ju st pow ­
ers from the consent o f the governed.”
T E N N E SSE E .

1796: “ That all power is inherent in the people, and all free
governments are founded on their authority and instituted for
tlieir peace, safety, and happiness; fo r the advancement o f those
ends they have at all times a<n unalienable and indefeasible
right to alter, reform , or abolish the governm ent in such manner
as they may think proper.”
T E XA S

(R E P U B L I C ).

1836: “ All political power is inherent in the people, and all free
governments are founded on their authority and instituted for
their benefit; and they hare at all times an unalienable right to
alter their governm ent in such manner as they may think
p r o p er ”
TEXAS

(

state

).

IS'/o : “ A ll political power is inherent in the people, and all
free governments are founded on their authority and instituted
for their benefit; and they have at all times the unalienable right
to alter, reform , or abolish tlieir form o f governm ent in such
manner as they may think expedient.
UTAH.

1895: “ All political power is inherent in the people, and free
governments are founded on their authority for all their pro­
tection and benefit; and they have the right to alter or reform
their governm ent as the public toeifarc may req u ire”

•

VE R M O N T .

1777: “ That all power being originally inherent in, and conse­
quently derived from , the people; therefore, all officers o f gov­
ernment, whether legislative or executive, are their trustees and
servants, and at all times accountable to them.
♦

#

*

*

*

*

*

“ * * * and that the community hath an indubitable, un­
alienable, and indefeasible right to reform , after, or abolish
governm ent in such manner as shall be. by that community,
judged most conducive to the public weal.”
VIRGINIA.

1776: “ That all pow er is vested in, and consequently derived
from , the people.”
W A S H IN G T O N .

1889: “ All political pow er is inherent in the people, and gov­
ernments derive their just powers from the consent o f the gov­
erned, and are established to protect and maintain individual
rights.”
84132— 11872




•




W E ST V IR G IN IA .

1861-18G3: “ The pow ers o f governm ent reside in all the citi­
zens o f the State, and can be rightfully exercised only in ac­
cordance with their w ill and appointment.”
W IS C O N S IN .

18'/S: “ All men are born equally free and independent and
have certain inherent rig h ts; among these are life, liberty, and
the pursuit o f happiness; to secure these rights governm ents are
instituted among men. deriving their ju st powers from the con­
sent o f the governed.”
W Y O M IN G .

1889: “ All power is inherent in the people, and all free gov­
ernments are founded on their authority and instituted fo r
their peace, safety, and happiness; for the advancement o f
these ends, they have at all times an inalienable and inde­
feasible right to alter, reform , or abolish the governm ent in such
manner as they may think proper.”
T IIE

T E O rL E

BETTER

A U T H O R IT Y

THAN

H A M IL T O N

OR

P IN C K N E Y .

Mr. President, here it w ill be observed that the people in
the States declare all political power vested in aud derived
from the people, and that they have an inalienable aud inde­
feasible right to alter, amend, or abolish, their form o f gov­
ernment in such mauuer as they may deem expedient. So
that we do not need the quotations from a few reactionary
citizens who were disobeying their representative instructions
in the secret conclave o f 17S7 to tell us what the Constitution
and the law is.
It is rather astonishing to hear from various men o f learn­
ing that the right o f the people to legislate directly is un­
constitutional; that it is “ in conflict with the representative
principle on which this Republic is founded.”
This is the same old federalist argument that was answered
in the Supreme Court o f Oregon in the Pacific Telephone case,
where it was urged that the Federal guarantee to the State o f a
republican form o f governm ent would forbid the initiative and
referendum as in conflict with a republican form o f government
or with the so-called representative principle.
(E xhibit R
answers this argument.)
The adoption o f the constitution o f Texas w as an act o f direct
legislation by the people o f Texas by the referendum on the
initiative o f the constitutional convention.
And all o f the State constitutions, almost without exception,
have been adopted by the act o f the people who directly legis­
lated in establishing these various State constitutions by the
referendum.
A n d they amend all the constitutions in the same fashion—
by direct legislation, almost without exception.
James Bryce, in his Am erican Commonwealth (M orris Edi­
tion. 1906. p. 258), very properly sa ys:
The people frequently legislate directly by enacting or altering a con­
stitution.
The principle of popular sovereignty could hardly be ex­
pressed more unmistakably. Allowing for the differences to which the
vast size of the country gives rise, the mass o f citizens may be deemed
as directly the supreme power in the United States as the assembly was
at Athens or Syracuse.

Indeed, from the beginning o f the history o f the American
people they exorcised the right o f direct legislation, and exer84132— 11872

31
cised it in the old town meetings o f New England and county
meetings in the South. The Massachusetts towns still govern
themselves by exercising the right o f direct legislation in their
town meetings, both the initiative and the referendum.
And all the States o f the Union from time to time have pro­
vided for the exercise o f the right o f direct legislation by va­
rious form s o f local option.
To deny the right o f the people to legislate directly is to deny
the fundamental principles o f every one o f the 48 State con­
stitutions. The “ representative principle,” so called, is merely
an incident o f the delegation o f legislative and ministerial
power to “ representatives ” as a m atter o f convenience. This
grant o f power to public servants does not, as some statesmen
believe, establish public rulers w hose right to rule can not
be questioned. The grant o f legislative power by the people
to a State legislature in no w ise prevents the people from
exercising their inalienable and indefeasible right o f direct
legislation. The initiative and referendum is perfectly har­
monious with the representative principle. In one case the
people legislate through their agents; in the other case they
legislate directly without agents.
It does not overthrow the representative system o f govern­
ment ; it perfects the representative system o f government.
Those who favor the initiative and referendum do not intend
to impair the representative system. They are determined
on the contrary to perfect the representative system, which is
and always has been a mixture o f the exercise by the people o f
direct power, direct legislation, add o f indirect legislation
through representatives.
RECALL NO N O V E L T Y .

Even the right o f recall is no novelty under the American
system o f government. Every one o f the 13 Colonies— the State
o f New Hampshire, the State o f Massachusetts Bay, the State
o f Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, the State o f New
Jersey, the State o f New York, the State o f Connecticut, the
State o f Pennsylvania, the State o f Delaware, the State o f
Maryland, the State o f Virginia, the State o f North Carolina,
the State o f South Carolina, the State o f Georgia, on the 24th
day o f July, 1778, solemnly agreed to the A rticles o f Confedera­
tion o f 1777, in Article V, to the right o f recall, in w hich it w as
expressly agreed that the various States should appoint delegates
to meet in Congress on the first Monday in November o f every
year—
W ith a power reserved to each State to recall its delegates, or any
of them, at any time within the year, and to send others in their stead
for the remainder of the year.
DEM O CR ATIC

C O N ST IT U T IO N S

E A S IL Y

AM END ABLE.

Our State governments, while establishing the representative
principle as a matter o f convenience, have nevertheless incor­
porated in every instance the declared principle that all power
is vested in the people, and that they retain the right at any
time to alter, amend, or abolish.
All democratic constitutions are flexible and easy to amend. This
follows from the fact that in a government which the people really
control the constitution is merely the means of securing the supremacy
of public opinion and not an instrument for thwarting it.
* *
* A
government is democratic just in proportion as it responds to the will

84132— 11872







of thp people; since one way to defeat the will of the people is to make
it difficult to alter the form of Government, it necessarily follows that
any constitution which is democratic in spirit must yield readily to
changes in public opinion.
(Spirit of American Government: Smith.)

The fact is that with the initiative and referendum the peo­
ple merely propose to amend the laic establishing the legisla­
tures so as to give to the people the option to exercise the right
o f direct legislation where they may find it expedient and proper
to do so. A ll that is necessary is to enlarge the ordinary State
constitution so as to provide fo r the people the method o f di­
rectly legislating by passing an initiated bill or vetoing a re­
ferred bill. The legislature got its pow er to legislate from
the people and the people violate no principle by exercising
directly the legislative power they possess, and which is inalien­
able and indefeasible.
In amending the State constitution so as to reserve to the
people the power to initiate and pass a bill by direct vote, or
by the referendum to veto or affirm, as the case may be, an act
passed by the legislature, the people merely exercise their sov­
ereign power in a moderate and restricted way, which they
have found necessary after a hundred years o f experience with
representatives in the legislature who have, particularly in this
generation, too frequently failed to pass the laws the people
want, and who have too frequently passed the laws which the
people do not want.
It is absurd to say that this Republic was founded on the
“ representative principle.” T h is Republic w\as not founded on
the representative principle. I t teas founded on the sovereign
right o f the people to manage their oicn business (and not be
managed by their servants), and it was fo r this reason that
every State constitution declared this fundamental principle
that all political powar was inherent in the people, and that as
sovereign they could at their pleasure alter, amend, or abolish
even the constitutions themselves. This was the great founda­
tion stone, and this is the principle now being asserted by the
initiative and the referendum, to w it: The right o f the people
to rule. This is the very meaning o f the word “ dem ocratic.”
Demos kratein means “ the people have the right to rule.” It
is the origin o f the w'ord “ democrat.” A democrat is a man
who believes in the right o f the people to rule.
Aristocracy means the rule o f the few, who consider them­
selves the best.
A utocracy means the rule o f a single person.
Plutocracy means the rule o f money.
D em ocracy means the rule o f the people.
Delegating power to public servants was not new. It was a
convenience and a mode o f exercising popular sovereignty, not
a means o f destroying or o f impairing it.
W e established the system o f delegating the legislative power
to representatives in our State constitutions, who should meet
in legislative assembly and debate and discuss ^and fram e wise
and virtuous laws drawn to promote the general*welfare. When
they are candidates they pledge their honor to the people to be
guided by the general welfare. They go to the assembly and
lift their hands to Almighty God and solemnly swear to be faith ­
fu l to the people, and then special interests come and bring
malign influences to bear upon the weakness o f human nature
84132— 11872

33
that lead the legislator away from the paths o f public virtue
into passing laws against the general welfare, or in refusing to
pass laws required by the general welfare. Representative gov­
ernment is a convenience for the people. No progressive wants
to interfere with it or to change it where it is faithful and per­
form s its proper du ty ; but when these representatives fail to
pass law s o f vital importance, when they pass laws doing a
gross wrong to the public interest, the time has come when the
people shall directly exercise so much o f their legislative power
as they may find it necessary to exercise at their option in
passing the laws they do want and vetoing the laws they do not
want.
THE

ATHENS

AND ROME ARG U M EN T.

Oh, but say these opponents o f popular government, remember
the overthrow o f the direct democracy o f Athens and Rome.
It is difficult to argue with entire patience with men o f learn­
ing and intelligence who w ill offer as a reason against popular
government the so-called direct dem ocracy o f Athens and o f
Rome. We might as well go to Athens and to Rom e to get our
instruction in the management o f modern railways and in
handling the telegraph and telephone.
Only one person in 400 could read in Athens and in Rome.
The people were divided into the very few intelligent and cul­
tured and into the very, very many who were ignorant o f letters
and o f the art o f government, five-sixths o f whom were slaves
and the vast m ajority in hopeless poverty. They lacked the
spirit o f liberty, and the father controlled by law the son and his
fam ily as long as the father lived, with power o f life and death
and property.
It avails nothing to say that the populace o f Athens had an
appreciation o f the beautiful form s o f marble which their sculp­
tors developed with great cleverness. The vital fact is that
they had no knowledge o f governm ent; that they had no means
o f public communication except by word o f m outh; no knowl­
edge o f liberty as we know it; and were actually ruled by an
intellectual, financial, and m ilitary aristocracy under the form s
o f a direct democracy.
To-day the great body o f our citizens can read and write.
To-day we have millions o f books available and libraries every­
where. To-day the most distant citizen can by the parcel post
receive for a trilling expense the last word upon organized gov­
ernment and the art o f government. To-day we have the tele­
graph and the telephone binding the ends o f the w orld together
and putting inform ation with regard to government all over the
world, its weakness and its strength, in the-hands o f every citi­
zen who cares to know. To-day we have millions o f men who
do care to know, and who are interested in good government,
and who are determined to have good government and to over­
throw the rule o f the self-seeking few and to terminate the
commercial and financial piracy which has been dealing un­
justly with the many for the benefit o f the organized few. T o­
day we have modern newspapers, a m iracle in art and in de­
sign, filled with news brought instantly by telegraph and tele­
phone from the ends o f the earth : filled with knowledge, litera­
ture, and a r t; tilled with finance and com m erce; filled with
sport and humor and fu n ; filled with ten thousand times ten




84132

11872--------3




thousand wants and opportunities, which the poorest citizen
can buy fo r one-hundredth part o f his daily wage. Compare
Athens and Home o f 2,000 years ago with Washington, Chicago,
or New Y o r k !
Oh, no, Mr. President, the comparison can not be ju stly m ade;
and that the opponents o f popular government should go so far
to find their argument against the rule o f the jieople shows how
poverty stricken and howr poor and how mean are the fallacies
and pretexts upon which they rely.
I N IT IA T IV E AND REFERENDU M J O K E R S .

Mr. President, there are six dangerous jokers which I wish
to call attention to and which the friends o f popular govern­
ment should beware of.
Joker 1. Lim iting the initiative to statute laws and pro­
hibiting the voters from proposing and adopting amendments to
the State constitutions.
The constitutional initiative is the most vital part o f any
amendment. For in the State constitutions are many jokers
restraining popular government that need correction by constitu­
tional amendment.
Joker 2. T o require an improbable or impossible m ajority
necessary to enact or reject measures submitted to the voters.
Every measure voted on should be decided by the m ajority
o f the votes cast thereon.
Joker 3. To require large petitions to render it difficult to se­
cure them, no matter what per cent is required.
This is done by increasing the percentages beyond reason or
to require a certain per cent o f the legal voters o f certain
counties.
The signature o f any voter in the State should count regard­
less o f residence.
Joker 4. To so fram e the emergency clause that the legisla­
ture may annul the referendum whenever it chooses. The
emergency should only be declared upon a two-thirds m ajority
o f ail members on a recorded vote, setting forth the reasons for
the em ergency.
Joker 5. To put an arbitrary lim it upon the number o f meas­
ures w hich may be submitted to the people at any one election,
because the special interests can thus preclude submission o f
public measures by offering trivial measures in advance o f the
public measure.
Joker G. Failure to provide an adequate and efficient method
o f inform ing the voters concerning the measures submitted to
them. The only safety for the political machine is to keep the
people in ignorance.' The Oregon publicity pamphlet inform s
the people. Insist on the publicity pamphlet.
I submit herewith a model constitutional amendment for the
initiative and referendum, free from jokers, and self-executin g:
PRO PO SED

C O N ST IT U T IO N A L A M E N D M E N T FOR T H E
EN DU M .

IN IT IA T IV E

AND REFER­

The legislative authority of this State shall be vested In a legisla­
tive assembly consisting of a senate and house of representatives, hut
the people reserve to themselves the power to propose legislative meas­
ures, resolutions, lairs, and amendments to the constitution, and to
enact or reject the same at the polls, independent o f the legislative
assembly, and also reserve power, at their own option, to approve or
reject at the polls any act, item, section, or any part of any resolution,
act, or measure passed by the legislative assembly.

S4132— 11S72

35
The first power reserved by the people is the initiative, and not
more than 8 per cent, nor in any case more than 50.000. of the legal
voters shall be required to propose any measure by initiative petition,
and every such petition shall include the full text of the measure so
proposed.
Initiative petitions, except for municipal and wholly local
legislation, shall be filed with the secretary of state not less than four
months before tho election at which they are to be voted upon.
If
conflicting measures submitted to the people shall be approved by a
majority of the votes severally cast for and against the same, the one
receiving the highest number of affirmative votes shall thereby become
law as to ail conflicting provisions.
Proposed amendments to the
constitution shall in all cases be submitted to the people for approval
or rejection.
The initiative is also reserved as follo w s: If at any time, not less
than 10 days prior to the convening of the general assembly, there shall
he filed with the secretary of state an initiative petition for any meas­
ure signed by 1 per cent, nor in any case more than 5,000 legal voters,
the secretary of state shall transmit certified copies thereof to the house
of representatives and to tho senate immediately upon organization. If
said measure shall be enacted, either as petitioned for or in an amended
form, it shall be subject to referendum petition as other measures. If
it shall be enacted in an amended form, or if no action is taken thereon
within four months from the convening of the general assembly, it shall
be submitted by the secretary of state to the people at the next regular
general elect ion, provided such submission shall be demanded by sup­
plementary initiative petition signed by 4 per cent, nor in any case
more than 30,000, legal voters and filed not less than four months be­
fore such election. Such proposed measure shall be ‘■abmitted either as
introduced or with the amendments, or in any amended form which may
have been proposed in the general assembly, as may be demanded in
such supplemental petition. If such measure so submitted be approved
by the electors, it shall be law and go into effect, and any amended
form of such measure which may have been passed by the general as­
sembly shall thereby stand repealed.
The second power is the referendum, and it may be ordered either
by petition signed by the required percentage of the legal voters or by
the legislative assembly as other bills are enacted.
Not more than 5
per cent, nor in any case more than 30,000 legal voters, shall be re­
quired to sign and make a valid referendum petition. Only signatures
of legal voters whose names are on the registration books and records
shall be counted on initiative and on referendum petitions.
If it shall be necessary for the immediate preservation of the public
peace, health, or safety that a measure shall become effective without
delay, such necessity shall be stated in one section, and if. by separate
vote of yeas and nays, three-fourths of all the members shall vote on
a separate roll call in favor of the measure going into instant opera­
tion. because it is necessary for the immediate preservation of the
public peace, health, or safety, such measure shall become operative
upon being filed in the office of the secretary of state or city clerk as
the case may he: Provided, That an emergency shall not be declared on
any measure creating or abolishing any office or to change the salary,
term, or duties of any officer or granting any franchise or act alienating
any property of the State. If a referendum petition shall be filed against
an emergency measure such measure shall become a law until it is voted
upon by the people and if it is then rejected by a majority of those vot­
ing upon the question such measure shall be thereby repealed.
No
statute, ordinance, or resolution approved by vote of the people shall be
amended or repealed by the legislative assembly or any city council
except by throe-fourths vote of all the members taken by yeas iind nays.
The provisions of this section apply to city councils.
The initiative and referendum powers of the people are hereby fur­
ther reserved to the legal voters of each municipality and district as to
nil local, special, and municipal legislation of every character in and
for their respective municipalities and districts.
Every extension, en­
largement, purchase, grant, or conveyance of a franchise or of any
rights, property, casement, lease, or occupation of or in any road, street,
alley, or park, or any part thereof, or in any real property, or interest
in any real property owned by a municipal corporation, whether the
same be made by statute, ordinance, resolution, or otherwise, shall be
subject to referendum by petition. In the case of laws chiefly of local
interest, whether submitted by initiative or referendum petition cr by
the legislative assembly, shall be voted upon and approved or rejected
only by the people of the locality chiefly interested, except when the
legislative assembly shall order the measure submitted to the people of
the State. Cities and towns may provide for the manner of exercising
841 3 2 —-1 1 8 7 2







36
initiative and referendum powers as to their municipal legislation sub­
ject to the general laws o f the State. Not more than 10 per cent of
the legal voters may be required to order the referendum nor more than
15 per cent to propose any measure by the initiative in any city, town,
t ' local subdivision of the State.
The filing of a referendum petition against one or more items, seedons, or parts of any act, legislative measure, resolution, or ordinance
shall not delay the remainder of the measure from becoming operative.
Referendum petitions against measures passed by the legislative assem­
bly shall be filed with the secretary o f state not later than 90 days
after the final adjournment of the session of the legislative assembly
at which the measure on which the referendum is demanded was passed,
except when the legislative assembly shall adjourn at any time tem­
porarily for a period longer than 90 days, in which case such refer­
endum petitions shall be filed not later than 90 days after such tem­
porary adjournment. The veto power of the governor or the mayor shall
not extend to measures initiated by or referred to the people.
A ll
elections on general, local, and special measures referred to the people
of the State or of any locality shall be had at the regular general elec­
tions, occurring not less than four months after the petition is filed,
except when the legislative assembly or the governor shall order a
special election, but counties, cities, and towns may provide for special
elections on local matters.
Any measure initiated by the people, or
referred to the people as herein provided, shall take effect and become
law if it is approved by a majority of the votes cast thereon and not
otherwise.
Every such measure shall take effect 30 days after the
election at which it is approved. The style of all bills shall b e : “ Be it
enacted by the people of (name of State, municipality, or co u n ty).”
This section shall not be construed to deprive any member of the legis­
lative assembly or of a city council of the right to introduce any meas­
ure. The whole number of electors who voted for governor at the regu­
lar election last preceding the filing o f anv petition for the initiative or
for the referendum shall be the basis on which the number of resistered
voters necessary to sign such petition shall be computed. Petitions and
orders for the Initiative and for the referendum shall he filed with the
secretary of state or in municipal or local elections with the countv or
city clerk or such other officer as may be provided by law.
In sub­
mitting the same to the people he and all other officers shall be guided
by the general laws until additional legislation shall be especially pro­
vided therefor. This amendment shall be self-executing, but the legis­
lature may enact laws facilitating its operation. A ll proposed measures
submitted to the people shall be printed in pamphlet form, together
with arguments for and against, as may be provided for bv law, and
mailed by the secretary o f state to the electors at least 50 days before
the election at which they are to be voted.
O B J E C T IO N S TO T H E

I N IT IA T IV E AND BEFER EN D U M .

Mr. President, what are the objections to the initiative and
referendum ?
First, it has been objected that it was contrary to the socalled “ representative” principle o f the Constitution. This
objection I have abundantly answered. (E xhibit B .)
Second, that the people are not capable o f direct legislation.
The contrary has been abundantly shown by the experiences
in all o f the States and countries which have put it iuto effect.
Third, that representative dem ocracy is better than direct
democracy. The answer to this is that there is no such issue,
since the optional initiative and referendum in nowise inter­
feres w ith representative democracy.
Fourth, that the initiative and referendum would destroy de­
liberation, debate, and result in hasty legislation. The fact is
an initiated bill is usually drawn by a group o f patriotic citi­
zens, w ho prepare the bill with infinite pains, consulting the best
experts in the State, and only present it to the State aftc-r it
has been thoroughly considered.
It appears In the public
prints; it is discussed by the citizens from one end o f the State
to the oth er; it is presented to each citizen o f the State in a
84132— 11872

37
publicity pamphlet, giving the arguments for and against it,
and a sufficient length o f time before the election, that each
citizen can thoroughly understand it ; and then each citizen in
the State, in the quiet and seclusion o f the ballot box. expresses
his opinion with regard to it, w ithout excitement and without
passion and w ith the utmost deliberation.
In Congress w e pass volumes o f bills. Is it incredible that
the citizens who have the intelligence to select Senators and
Presidents should also have the intelligence to pass one bill, or
even two or three bills?
I have heard o f hasty legislation by representatives, without
much debate in legislatures, and sometimes in a conference
committee important legislation has been put on a tariff bill
by misrepresentatives at the instance o f private interests and
against the general w elfare in great haste and without debate.
Such hasty law s under a referendum could be vetoed by the
people and ought to be vetoed.
T H E T E O rL E W I L L NOT VOTE— F A L LA C Y .

The crowning charge against the initiative and referendum
by the form er Senator from Texas is that only a small per cent
o f the people w ill vote, and his data is based on the cases o f
compulsory referendum. In Oklahoma the percentages have
run from 54 to 100 per cent o f the citizens voting. In Maine it
has run from 50 to 100 per cent. In Missouri, from 71 per cent
to 05 per cen t; in Arkansas, from 75 per cent to 90 per cent;
in Montana, from 72 per cent to 80 per cent; in Oregon it has
run from 01 per cent up to 90 per cent; in South Dakota, from
57 per cent to 92 per cent.
Those who do not vote on these questions o f public policy
submitted by the initiative and referendum are those citizens
w ho are ignorant or indifferent to such questions o f public
policy, and who voluntarily disfranchise themselves, leaving the
more intelligent and more interested citizens to decide these
questions. This voluntary disfranchisement o f the unfit is o f
public benefit.
But, Mr. President, out o f 187 yea-and-nay votes in the Senate
previous to the retirement o f the Senator he himself appears
only to have voted IS times, or less than 10 per cent. The
people appear to be from 500 to 900 per cent better than this
record, and are otherwise not justly subject to his criticism.
I submit an Exhibit A to my remarks upon this question
giving iu detail the percentages o f votes in various States and
the principles governing the initiative and referendum and ask
that it be printed as a Senate document.
Mr. President, the restoration o f popular government is ab­
solutely essential to tlie w elfare and happiness o f the Am eri­
can people. The time has come when we must terminate the
gross abuses o f machine politics, when we must purify our
governmental processes and establish the best form o f govern­
ment o f which the Am erican intelligence and conscience is
capable. The people’ s rule system o f government is not, or
should not be. a partisan question. This issue o f the people's
rule goes to the root o f all oilier questions because all modern
questions practically com prise some form iu which the rights,
the interests, the health, and the happiness o f the people is
S 4132— 11S72







33
interfered with by the special interests seeking profit or promo­
tion through the machine method o f government. It is abso­
lutely essential for the people to announce a new Declaration o f
Independence, freedom from the rule o f the few, freedom from
the rule o f the special interests, freedom from the machine poli­
ticians who are in alliance with the special interests which have
perverted the great Republic from its noblest ideals to sordid
and selfish ends. In the w ords o f the immortal L in coln :
It is for us, the living, to highly resolve that this Nation, under God.
shall have a new birth cf freedom, and that government of the people,
by the people, and for the people shall not perish from the earth.
T H E R E A SO X S I X B R IE F J U S T I F T I X G D IRECT L E G IS L A T IO X .

The reasons in brief which ju stify direct legislation have been
perhaps best stated by Prof. Frank Parsons in 1900, since de­
ceased. Prof. Parsons was a great publicist, with no ax to
grind, no political ambition, and no other purpose than to serve
God and mankind “ in spirit and in truth.”
Direct legislation— that is, direct legislation by the optional
initiative and referendum.
1. Is essential to self-government.
2. D estroys the private monopoly o f lawmakers.
3. Is a common-sense application o f the established principles
o f agency.
4. W ill perfect the representative system.
5. Is immediately and easily practicable.
0. Makes fo r political purity.
7. K ills the lobby.
8 . Makes it useless to bribe legislators because they can not
deliver the goods.
9. Attracts better men to political life.
10. Simplifies elections.
11. Simplifies the law.
12. Lessens the pow er o f partisanship.
13. Elevates the press and the people.
14. Stops class legislation.
15. Opens the door o f progress.
1G. Is wisely conservative.
17. W orks an autom atic disfranchisem ent o f the unfit.
18. Tends to stability.
19. 7s a safety valve for discontent.
20. Is in line with the general trend o f modern political his­
tory throughout the world.
I might add to these reasons—
21. Causes public servants to do their utmost to serve the
public interest, knowing that the power o f the people is over
them directly.
22. It thus enthrones righteousness and the general w elfare
by giving sovereign power to the intelligence and conscience
o f the Nation.
23. It tends pow erfully to educate the people on questions o f
public policy and increases the general intelligence.
24. t* w ill enable the people to pass a thoroughgoing corruptpractices act, a mandatory direct primary, and other progres­
sive statutes necessary to establish the i>eople’s rule, which r.
machine-controlled legislature otherwise can and will prevent.
84132-11872

T II F O B JE C T IO N S TO T H E I N IT IA T IV E AND REFERENDUM

Are imaginary or based on erroneous information. Under
the initiative and referendum only a fe w ( not many, a sob jected )
important laws would be referred to the people or initiated by
the people.
The initiative and referendum is not hasty, without delibera­
tion or by impulse, as objected, but the most deliberate o f all leg­
islative processes, usually taking about two years.
It is objected that from 20 to HO per cent o f the people do
not vote on initiated measures. This only means that the ig­
norant or indifferent voter voluntarily disfranchises himself,
leaving the questions o f public policy to be decided by more in­
telligent and interested voters.
It is objected that the voters can not pass on complicated
laws. The answer to this is that, com plicated or not, the people
well know the difference between honest and dishonest laws,
between ju st and unjust laws, and when they have the power
to kill the latter no more o f them are apt to be made. Moreover,
it is easier to pass upon a law in black and white, even if com ­
plicated, than to pass upon a complicated man and what he w ill
do under the influence o f the lobby.
I t is objected that it is impracticable. This objection is
based upon unadulterated ignorance.
It is objected w e should “ elect better men.” W e have tried
this game long enough. It has failed. The system under which
the “ big stick ” hangs over the “ representative man ” w ill
make him better. It makes an unfaithful servant powerless,
and this is the man w e are after.
It is objected that direct legislation w ill destroy representa­
tive government. This is purely imaginary. It w ill perfect
representative government and make the representative per­
form his duty or enable the people to correct his sins o f om is­
sion or his sins o f commission.
To accomplish integrity o f government and perfect the sys­
tem o f popular government, w e need—
First. An adequate registration system to register all entitled
to vote, so that no person not entitled shall be registered, and
open at all times to public examination.
Second. A secret ballot— Australian system— under which the
financial and commercial bullies can not coerce or bribe the
weak citizen whose bread and butter they control.
Third. A direct mandatory primary, by which the voters can
select their candidates regardless o f the political machine.
Fourth. A statute preventing corrupt practices, directly lim ­
iting the use o f money, preventing bribery, coercion, and fraud,
requiring publicity o f campaign contributions, and giving the
voter peace and absolute security from pressure on election day.
Fifth. A constitutional amendment fo r the initiative and r e f­
erendum fo r every State, and statutes vitalizing the same so
that the people can amend their State constitution when they
like and can enact any laws they do want or veto any laws they
do not want, in spite o f the machine or the Influence o f political
mercenaries.
Sixth. A statute providing publicity pamphlets, giving each
citizen before election time full inform ation and arguments for
and against all public measures and fo r and against all public
candidates.







Seventh. A statute providing fo r the recall, by which the
people can nominate a successor to an incompetent, unfaithful,
or obnoxious public servant.
Eighth. Local self-governm ent fo r cities and towns by com­
mission, with the initiative, referendum, and recall.
Ninth. The short ballot, with preferential provisions, by which
the votes o f unorganized citizens may be autom atically cohered.
Tenth. The direct election o f United States Senators.
Eleventh. The direct nomination o f presidential candidates.
These are the chief agencies by which we shall restore the
integrity and the efficiency o f our Government, and o f these
agencies “ the initiative and the referendum ” arc first, because
they open the door to all the others.
Mr. President, in my judgment the Senate o f the United
States should throw the weight o f its influence in favor o f the
initiative and referendum and not against it. I therefore offer
a substitute for Senate resolution 413. Strike out all after the
resolving clause in Senate resolution 413 and insert the follow ­
ing :
That the system of direct legislation, such as the optional initiative
and referendum adopted by Oklahoma. Oregon, California. Washington,
Arizona, Utah, Colorado, Montana. North Dakota. South Dakota, Mis­
souri, Arkansas, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Maine, is in harmony
with and makes more effective the representative system and the prin­
ciple of the sovereignty of the people upon which this Republic was
founded, and is not in conflict with the republican form of government
guaranteed by the Constitution.

84132— 11872