REFERENCES.

H31 hist

COMMONS, JOHN R. Address before the National Conference on Practical Reform of Primary Elections, held in New York City, Jan. 20-21, 1898, Proceedings, Chicago, 1898, p. 18-23.

Advises the use of the blanket ballot at primary elections and advocates dispensing with all declarations or oaths of party affiliation, p. 22.

CRAFTS, CLAYTON E. Primary laws should be improved. Public Policy, July 5, 1902, vol.7, no. 1, p. 14–16.

Advocates the use of the Australian ballot at primary elections, but provides that the voter may vote only for names on one party list.

DEMING, HORACE E. Municipal nomination reform. Publications of the National Municipal League, 1905, pam. no. 14. (Also in Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Mar. 1905, vol. 25, p. 203–17.)

Argument against the closed primary.

FREUND, ERNST. The police power: public policy and constitutional rights. Chicago, 1904.

Considers fundamental questions involved in the right to vote at primary elections. sec. 483.

MECHEM, FLOYD R. Constitutional limitations on primary election legislation. Publications of the Michigan Political Science Association, Mar. 1905, vol. 6, no. 1, p. 125-49. Parts 6, 7, and 8 deal particularly with the test of party affiliation. MERRIAM, CHARLES E. Some disputed points in primary election legislation. American Political Science Association, Proceedings, 1907, Baltimore, 1908, p. 179–88.

A critical discussion of provisions relating to the test of party allegiance.

METCALF, RALPH. Direct Primary Legislation: A brief sketch of its progress in the various states. Tacoma, 1907, pam. Presents arguments in favor of the closed primary, p. 9-10.

MEYER, ERNST CHRISTOPHER. Nominating systems: direct primaries versus conventions in the United States. Madison, Wis. 1902.,

Gives an admirable summary of arguments for and against the closed primary, in ch. 9. Who shall vote at the primary? p. 330-51. REMSEN, DANIEL S. Primary elections: A study of methods for improving the basis of party organization. 2nd ed., New York, 1905.

Calls attention to tests of party allegiance imposed by party authorities. p. 21 and 49.

SIMPSON, DAVID F. Direct primaries in Minnesota. Publications of the Michigan Political Science Association, Mar. 1905, vol. 6, no. 1, p. 59-67.

Declares that the experience of Minnesota shows that voters from one political party may vote the ticket of another political party in spite of the fact that the law provides a rigid test of party allegiance, p. 60 and 63.

TUTTLE, ALONZO H. Limitations upon the power of the legislature to control political parties and their primaries. Michigan Law Review, March, 1903, vol. 1, no. 6, p. 466-95.

Reviews court decisions s relating to the test of party allegiance,

p. 478-80.

VERPLANK, J. DELANCEY. A problem of primaries. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Nov. 1906, vol. 28, no. 3, p. 84-94.

Points out the several classes of voters who are excluded from participating in primaries under the test requiring declaration of past party affiliation, p. 86-8.

UN

NATURE OF THE TEST

Primary election laws deal with the question of party allegiance from the two standpoints of the open and the closed primary.

OPEN PRIMARY

Secrecy in voting. Under the open primary the use of the Australian ballot enables an elector to vote a party primary ticket without disclosing his party affiliation.

See Wisconsin Laws, 1903, c. 451 under which absolute secrery in voting is secured.

Party affiliation. Electors are prevented from voting for more than one party at any primary by the method of counting the votes under the open primary laws which generally provide that ballots are to be counted for any person only as a candidate of the party upon whose ticket his name is written.

The Missouri law (1907, p. 263, sec. 18) follows the Wisconsin plan (Laws, 1903, c. 451) by providing that if any elector write upon his ticket the name of any person who is a candidate for the same office upon some other ticket than that upon which his name is so written, this ballot is to be counted for the person only as a candidate of the party upon whose ticket his name is written and is in no case to be counted for the person as a candidate upon any other ticket.

In Oklahoma under the law approved May 29, 1908, any

qualified elector offering to vote at a primary is to designate the party ticket he desires to vote and is to receive the ticket called for.

Non-partisan municipal primaries. A tendency toward non-partisan primaries for municipalities is shown in recent legislation.

Compare the laws of Ia. 1907, c. 48 and Wis. 1907, c. 670.

CLOSED PRIMARY

Under the closed primary the nature of the test may be considered: 1st. from the standpoint of the authority prescribing the test, 2nd. from the standpoint of the voter subscribing to the test of party allegiance. From both standpoints the nature of the record which is kept of the voter's declaration of affiliation is significant.

Authority prescribing test

Party authority. Quite frequently the prescription of the test for participation in primary elections is left to the party authorities. This is particularly true in many of the Southern states where direct primaries are more generally optional or permissive rather than compulsory. However a number of compulsory direct primary laws also leave the prescription of the test to the governing authority of the party.

For typical laws which leave the prescription of the test to the party authorities compare the provisions of: Ala. Laws, 1903, No. 417; Ark. Dig. of St., 1904, sec. 2892-4; Fla. Laws, 1901, c. 5014, as amend. by Laws, 1903, c. 5248, as amend. by Laws, 1905, c. 5471: Ga. Laws, 1890-1, p. 210: Tenn. Laws, 1901, c. 12 and c. 39 and Laws, 1907, c. 422; and Va. Pollard's Code, 1904, sec. 1220.