Newspaper Page Text
Inconsistencies and Evils in Georgia
Politics, State and Local.
In the May 21st issue of the Jeffersonian is given
some correspondence which passed between Hon. J.
A. Brannen, of Statesboro, and Mr. Thomas E. Wat
son. It consists of a letter from Mr. Brannen asking
for a detailed explanation of Mr. Watson's opposi
tion to the new rule of the State Executive Commit
tee adopting the principle of nominating by a major
ity vote rather than by the county unit plan, and Mr.
\\ atson \s reply thereto.
Mr. Watson is opposed to the new rule and in
setting foith his views gives as a reason that the
county unit plan, which has heretofore prevailed in
this state in making nominations, is but the applica
tion to State government of the same system of
‘‘checks and balannees" which our forefathers
“warned by the fate of the unbridled majorities,
which had brought about despotism and ruin to the
democracies of ancient and medieval times," devised
for the protection of minorities from the tyranny of
majorities in forming our National governmental
system.
Mr. Watson says he favors a mixed system, as
typetied by the full majority representation in ole-t
--ing members to the lower house of Congress, and but
partial majority representation in the electorial ma
chinery by which a President is chosen, while, lie
says, “we do not recognize the majority at all
in the upper House of Congress" (the United States
Senate).
lie thinks the same system should be applied in
tin* States, and says of Georgia: “The lower House
of the Legislature represents numbers; but the upper
House represents county units. Thus the National
system was copied." Mr. Watson endorses this, and
In* favors giving “but partial representation to the
majority" in nominating a Governor, the same as
in the election of a President of tin* Cnited States.
Thus it appeals that Mr. Watson has so little
faith in majority rule, he would hedge the major
ity about with two checks —the Senate and the Gov
ernorship while In* would permit it to exercise its
will only in the election of members to the lower
House of the Legislature. This is strange doctrine
to emanate from a high Populistic authority, and it
is absolutely unreeoncilable with the principle of the
initiative and referendum, which has generally re
ceived the approval of representative assemblages of
Mr. Watson's party.
Furthermore, it appears to be settled by Mr. Wat
son's letter that the demand so frequently and loudly
heard in Populist conventions for the election of
United States Senators by popular vote, was with
out the endorsement or sympathy of the present na
tional leader of that party.
THE REASON
By DAVID P. DYER.
In upholding the county unit system in this
State's primaries. Mr. Watson fails to recognize the
fact that, if it is applied to Congressional contests as
heretofore, the “full representation to majorities’’
which he admits should be awarded with regard to
tin 1 membership in the lower House of Congress, will
not obtain.
The masses of people regardless of party, and
the Populists especially, have noted the f;act that the
pernicious activity of the hired lobbyist is always
most in evidence about the doors of tin* chamber the
membe.ship of which is least accountable to the pop
ular will for its acts. It isn't far short of party
heresy that the Populist candidate for President of
the 1 nited States should give his approval to an in
stitution which his party has always branded as an
insuoerable evil.
“If the new rule of the Hoke Smith Committee
stands." says Mr. Watson, “ 1 predict that ballot box
stlifting such as that which put me out of Congress,
will he resorted to on a scale hitherto unknown in
the South: and that such a huge vote will be manu
factured in the four big cities as will practically dis
franchise the country counties."
To arrive at this conclusion, it was necessary that
Mr. Watson commit himself to the belief that the
people of Atlanta. Savannah, Augusta and Macon
cherish a bitter and enduring hat el toward tin*
people of all the other hundred and forty-odd coun
ties of Georgia, and are intent upon fastening the
yoke of political serfdom upon the necks of their
country cousins, lie neglects, however, to give tin 1
means by which tlrs Herculean task is to lx* accom
plished. and he fails to take into account tin* energy
with which the sturdy ycomanyv is sure to resist the
consumation of any such diabolical purpose on the
part of the denizenns of the four Souoms in Georgia.
Mr. Watson assuredly under-estimates tin* lighting
qualities of the rural Georgian, which individual has
never been whipped by anything like equal numbers.
He was once overpowered. That was nearly half a
century ago. But there is nothing in his history, eith-
I er ancient or modern, upon which to base a predic
tion that he will surrender his rights of citizenship to
INFERIOR numbers, even though these reside in
the cities of his own State and are of his own blood
and sinew.
Besides. Mr. Watson knows perfectly well that
no such prejudice or purpose (exists in the minds of
the citizens of the four cities.
The Reason wonders if Candidate Watson has
read the political history of the State of Rhode Is
land! There, if anywhere on the globe, flourishes
the system of “checks and balances" in State gov-
7