THS

 

 

u—-—.--

 

THE DIRECT PRIMARY

THESIS FOR DEGREE OF M. A.

WAYNE VAN RIPE-IR

1927

 

-‘ ~‘c'4‘J-‘l-.~ .4

 

 

gis DIRECT nggég;

3:!

Wayne Van Riplr

Submitted as partial fulfillment of tun requirements
for the
Degree of Master of Arts
at

Mienigan State College

-0-

May - 1927

4cm “.fi’IEIBlIL-IZIT-

I wish to express my appreciation
for the assistance rendered no by Dan E. H. Ryder
and Mr. R. B. Lyon 0: the History Department or
1110111an Sta“ college.

4.49.3:3. 21 22.15.22.321?

-oOo--

P880

1 - 1mm: mummm wmom ............. 1
II - THE RISE 0:? M DIRECT PM! - -------- .. 4
III - FEAWBES OF THE DlflECT PW! ---------- 5
IV - TREND 03 ms- .‘DIAEGT mama ........... m
v - concwemn ------------------ - - 24.
31mm: ....... ID ID O ------ c- .- - 25

“0’-

Informal
Confer-
enoss

Last 3--
lative
Censuses

conven-
tion
System

I - BMLY LLLEIZLEA’LIZEG ilL’i-lUJU

The nominating systems of this country have passed through
four distinct stages of develOpment. These stages have all been
the products of the various political, social, and economic
influences which have shaped the destiny of our country from
Colonial times down to the present.

Little need be said here of the first two of these stages.
The first consisted of informal conferences of interested citizens
during the early Colonial period whereby nominations of local
officials were made for the coming election. This stage quickly
passes into the second stage thereby nominations were made by the
legislative caucuses consisting of groups of each party. This
system was especially effective with reSpeot to state and national
offices, but before it had become firmly established candidates
for local office in the townships and cities were often nominated
by meetings of the party leaders,or caucuses. Frequently these
groups would appoint certain of their members to confer with
the representatives of other similar caucuses and thus we have
the third system develoPing independent of legislatures.1

At its origin the convention system was hailed as a marked
improvement over the old system, and was supposed to meet the
conditions sufficiently. it made provisions for the voice of

the peOple in the choosing of the party nominees. That is,

 

l. 033 and Bay - "Introduction to American Government.“ p. 768.
Beard - ”American Government and Politics." p. 150.

Adven-

taxes

-2-

the choice of eech voter could be transmitted from delegeted to
delecflte until it found expression in the party's duly chosen

no-inee for office.1

Other srgunents advanced for this cyst.
ere thst it furnished en unexoelled opportunity for perfecting
their psrty erpniIeticn. for «ti-sting the party's strength

in verious ports ef the state or district concerned, for Judging
the populerity of the rivel espirents for noninstion, for srousieg
party enthueisen. for conciliatiug functions by agreeing upon
'bslsnced" or cupr-iee tickets. and for for-outing party

a
platfcms.
This system continued from shout the year 1830 to about

1880 es s general uninsting system for local as well as etete
end noticnsl offices and is still used in cone ferns by e few
of the states. Hsny citizens, especially those with politicel
ambitions. would favor the return of the full fledged use of
this systu. After the Civil War, however. we find influences
st work throughout the country which not only helped to eupheise
the elreedy existing defects in the convention cyst-s but which
also aided in erecting nore wetness“. We find that s period
of greet prosperity on e scsle seldun seen or equsled in the
life of soy notion followed the close of the war. i'his tended
to divert the ettention of the people from the course of
political events at the very tins when intelligent end honest

 

lo M and Eye 0p. Oi‘e p. 769e

3e Ibide pe 769s of. m‘mrIn. -Ohe. 2.5.7; “fire Pt. Is
an. 5 for 8 full discussion of the rise smd fall of the
Convention System.

Di e-
seven-

teen

--3--

public action was nest necessary and consequently offered to an
unscrupulous party manager unusual opportunity for corruption)
the convention system easily lent itself to the mnipulstiens
of certain leaders who became known as Political Bosses end it wee
believed that the bosses in turn were controlled by the large
industrial interests. (bees of bribery and corruption of delegates,
prolonged deedlooks, bitter notional struggles, end bargaining end
trading of offices for the support of delegates were mercus end
contributed to the general conclusion tint the results of the
Conventions did not fairly represent the will of the rank and file
of the party.8
Among the specific evils arising fron the old convention

syetu were :3

l. ”the limitation of the voter's choice to s set of
delegates cc-itted to one ceudidste, but uninstructed for others.
in such csses e candidste could trade his delegates for votes of
delegations controlled by other cendidetes.

z. “The frequent appearance of the dung candidste
who held the locsl delegsticn solely for trading purposes.

3. ”Delegations were seated at times by s process of
outright fraud or of indefensible trickery.

4|. "Frequent obJecticns were made to the qualificstions

of the delegates appearing in the conventions, many of who. were

 

1e “CR1“. 0e 8e "' "Prim EhOtime" 9e 4e

2. lies-rial. 0. B. - "Honinating Systems." in Annels of American
Academy of Political Science. Vol. 106. 1923. p.l.

3. lbid.

Decoy of

Conven-
tine

Syste-

m-
Ientsls
of the

Direct

4-

deemed to be unfit for the responsible tssks devolving upon then.
5. "The frequent purchsse end eels of delegetes to

conventions; disorder end mlt in conventions; the deliberete

betrayal of trust by elected delegates were not infrequent

occurrences.”

II - THE RISE OF THE DIRECT PRIMARY

We find that, as a result of these uni other serious ressone.
the convention system soon come into disrepute in verious ports
of the country. the first sctive reform egitstion came from
Philadelphia where the Union league club of that city offered s
prise for the best constructive esesy on the subject of perty
no-inetione.

fhe successful competitor offered e plen whereby ell sendi-
dstes should be chosen by direct plurelity vote of the politioel
perty, end ell such no-inetions should be ads on s fined dey
by ell pertiee end should be conducted under the some rules end
reguletione es control the regular election.1 these are the
funds-entel principles of the present system of Erect Priory
lleotione.

fhe feetures of this sch-e were first adopted in Orowford
Dainty. Pennsylvania, in 1868 end soon after in mutants em
Virginie. Ehere wee not, however, nuch reel legislation slang
this line until after 1880. but by 1890 half of the states had

 

1e “trim. 0e 8e "" "mm Bhatlmne p. 13s

i017
Pri-ry

Optional

-5-

placed on their statute books laws regulating in various ways
the conduct of primary elections. Between 1890 and 1900 primary
reform advanced more rapidly due to the influence of the intro-
duction of the Lustralian Ballot. By 1910 the direct primry was
supported by party lenders including Roosevelt. Wilson, Hughes,
La Follotte, and Johnson, and had been widely adapted throughout
the United States. The World War brought about a general save
of reaction throughout the country and has tended to man a
successful use of the system more difficult than in nornal tines.
Forty-five states adopted the direct primary as e means of
nominating candidates to office. Connecticut. Rhods island, end
lew lienioc were the states which did not pass such laws, and of
those states which did pee the: New York end ldsho have partially
repealed their lews within the last few years. Other stetes have
nterielly chased the working of their lens until they very fro-
the very detailed nethod existing in the Richard's Prinry laws
of South knots to those other states which have adopted and
localisedparty nethods of making nominations.

m - mm or m mam new:

The various prinsry lews fall into two classes. First,
we have the mandatory and second. the optional primary. Under
the workings of the llandatcry Primry. all, or certain designated
Midates for elective offices, must be nanineted at a regular

primary election. By the terms of the Optional Primry laws.
all. or certain designated candidates for elective offices may

—6-

be nominated by a primry according to the will of. the governing
powers of the party.

There are six states which have optional primaries, namely.
Alabama, arms-Ls, Delaware. Georgia. Kentuclw, and Virginia.
lhe mining of the forty-five states having primry laws have
Randatory ones. A. state having a nandatory Primary law, however,
may. under certain circumstances, use the optional method of
ruminating candidates. fhus. in Michigan the question of mint-
ing candidates by the primary in cities of less tun 70,000 My
be admitted or re-suhsitted to the voters of am biennial primary
electim. on petition of twenty percent of the voters; villages
and townships ufler the general law, nc‘minate canadidatee at a caucus,
but on petition of ten percent of the voters of any village the
question of nominating village officers by means of the priesry
my be suhitted to the voters, and if approved by a naJority there-
of. candidates are thereafter nominated at a caucus in which ballots
are used as in a pritllary.1 Aw village adapting the prinry-
caucus system may at any tine revert to the systen provided by the
general law. In townships. the primary-caucus plan nay be adopted
by the township board on its own initiative, or on the petitin
of twenty-five percent of the voters the adoption of the plan is
obligatory. Minnesota, Massachusetts, Ohio, lorth Carolina. South
Carolina, Florida, and West Virginia also have optional provisions

in their primary laws.

 

l. Kettleborough. 0. - "Direct Primaries.” in Ann. of her. head.
Vel. 106, 1923a p. 12e

Olosed
Prinry

Open

l’artisan
frinry

-7-

Other important features of the direct primary system in-
clude the Open and Closed Primary and the Hon-Partisan Primary.
'i'he Closed primary is the most sermon of these and aims to secure
a fair Opportunity for the expression of a party's Opinion. Io
accomplish this, only regular members of the party may take part
in it. Candidates for nomination at the Oren primary bear the
designation of their respective parties, but no disclosure of
party affiliation is erected from the voters. fhc Hon-Partisan
primary provides for the placing of all names on a ballot with
no party decimation whatever. The two candidates making the
highest showing are named upon the general ballot to be used at

the regular election.
These various types of primaries vary chiefly in the matter

of party responsibility for the candidate med. here is no
party responsibility whatever in the Non-Partisan plan while the
closed primary names the party directly responsible for the
winning candidate nominated by the regular nubers of the party.
he open primry. honver. while making the party responsible,
any do this by means of electors of other parties who are not
regular members of the party in question and the candidate may
thus be a nun with wha the majori ty of the party are not in
answer-

As a precaution, the states having the closed primary
system have develOped a series of party tests and a complete

registration system. Under such a system the voter usually has

.8...

to state his loyalty to the party and that he either voted for

, the majority of the party candidates at the last election or else
that he intends to do this in the following election. is a
further precaution.nost of the states have adopted separate
primery'bellots*vhieh ere usually cf’e different color.

The comparisons in Table i show that there has been s.
decided increase in the number of states officially'defining and
coministering tests of party affiliation and that the princry
election is booming ncre strictly s closed primary. It should
also be noticed that there has been s growing desire for official
definition and administration of the tests of en elector's
eligibility to participate in party primary elections with thirty-
one states providing that the entire tests shall be defined by
the legislature. in only seven.etetes are the political parties
given unrestricted Jurisdiction.

Hsny states which have closed primaries are so ls: in their
enforcement of these laws or the laws are so constituted es.to
give the effect of Open primaries. Chat is, at the time of the
election these might be closed according to law; in that each
party has separate ballots, but the laws of the state might not
make any other provisions for party protection with the result
that the members of the minority party night vote the ballot of
the majority'psrty'end thus influence the candidate elected for
which the other party‘will have to assume the responsibility.

This is especially the effect in those states which have

Thrill-3 1. Showing the Changes in Party Affiliation
Provisions of the State Primary Election Laval

333:8388333383388883833388388838

~1908- ~1920-

‘“ .—
— -— — ww—iw

 

to Open mm. 4 3
II. Closed Prinz-y-
e - Authority prescribing test.

1. m. political party 14. 7 '
2. The legislature 25 31
3. Psrty end legislsture B 6

B - The voter's declaration.

1. Pest allegiance only 6 5
2. Present effilieticn only 1? 13
3. luture intention only 4 z
4. Pest scticn end present

affiliation l 6
5. Past action and future intention 3 3
6. Present affiliation and future

intention 5 O
7. Past. present, and future 4 8

0 - MN 0: declaration.

1. Declaration at primry (no

permanent record) 15 12
z. Enrollment under party supervision 7 l
5. Official registration ll 26

=33:::=:======:S=:=::=:=:===:23:
1. Killer HoOlintock, in the Anoricen Political Science Revise.
Vol. 15, P. 465e 19224

-10..

the system of Open primaries with no attempt at keeping then
closed. In these states the voter is given the ballots of all
the parties. He selects the ballot of the party which he wishes
to vote and the other ballots are destroyed after the election.
The chief fault of this system seems to be in the Opportunity
it gives for the voter to shift his party alignment temporarily
when he has no intention of voting with that party permanently.

Hon-partisan primaries are conducted in practically all
respects like an ordinary primary except that the ballots carry
no indication of the {flirty alliance of the. candidate, and no
attempt is made to inquire into the party pmferenoes or those
who wish to vote. The two candidates polling; the highect number
of votes for each office are voted upon at the regular election.
This for!!! of primary eliminates the weak candidates and insure:
the election by a majori ty vote.

In summary it would appear that of these three methods
of conducting primaries, the closed primary and the non-partisan
primary ere the fame which should be developed and emphasized.
These tea can be utilized very effectively in conjunction with
each other. hit. is, i would recommend the non-{firtisan primary
for the nomination of local and county officials with the closed
primary used for the prinoigfll state officers. This recommendation
necessarily implies the introduction of the short ballot of which
more will be said later. I believe that by a. use of these two

eyetemc combined we will be able to secure better men in all

filmm—

N“
of the

offices with little thought given to their political alignment
and more to tug-air egecific mnlifiotsciuiw.

The advantages of the air-Jot prinnry are often overlooxud
by them; peoglo MN also to brew; Cum-ll the oyotou, so u brief
atltteueut of timoo sill ems'ole no to more completely Judge the
merits of the oiwrgoo which are moo ngzdnot it. these ere. in
brief, as follmxoal

l. rho direct primary furnishes on Opportunity for
active political participation on the port of the ran): and file
of the party.

2. it taxes any from the politicians each of their
former omtrol over nominations and places mt control nore
nearly in the hence of the peeple.

3. it offers an easier avenue of approach to the

election of oonpetont men.

4.. It provides a mecca of approving or reJecting
selections» of the party leader. and or introducing nee ones.

:3. In the case of serious conflict, the direct vote
seems to give a better opportunity for poyular succees than the
delegate we mod.

6. It places a weapon in we nexus of the petty
members ehioh they my use him effect in once of need.

7. Jribery and corruption are rendered, it not lore

 

1. For s full discussion of the advantages of the primary, see
P. 0. Ray - “Introduction: to Political Parties and Precuul
Politics”. and 0. 3. Herriam - "Nominating Systems" in Ann.
5f 3310:4033 Acadfi'lye Vol. 105:3 figi‘cb, '53:...

Dis-
In!!!»
tests

or the

Primery

-12-

difficult, et least less potent than formerly in determining
nominations.

These are Just a few of tho inyrovorent: which the direct
primry has made on the nmirating system of tire country. The
supporters of tho ayatom do not saJ tho: it i. 2 perfect guarantee
of good government. but content that it givns tho people a real
chance to morn their*will prevail, thich tho machine systen.does
not. It is based upon a system of intelligent voting by the
people. “hon the voters lie down tiny must take the oonseqnonoee,
But the primary givoo than a chance whenever thoy have the I111
to take it.

The faults of the diroot primary loom up tometimee to
mountainous promrtiono. Eagecially after some important winery
election much as the last one in Pannsylvania whore money'ees
spent with apparent abandon in the savoring of tho Republioen
'Nomination for United States Senator. It lo urtor anoh.ef£airl
that we have a deluge of prnyagands filling the columns or the
press until we are Mimost led to believe that unless Ie immedietely
regal our primary lot-vs the democracy 112.3. full carrying 811 with
it.

Some of the most agaoific faults monaicned in connection
with.tho direct primary'aro:

1. The olnborato and racialcsa capcmiture of my
in the securing; of nominations L0 office.

2. That it creates a. bullet v.‘.-licn autos intelligent

in tho
Olly-loll

voting inpoooiblo.

3. the: it breaks down tho party principal or gonn-
Iocnt and icooro party rooponoibiiity-

‘- '15:“ such a oyom oval-burdens the cloction manhunt?
by roguiring too campaigns.

5. it igncroo tho nocoooity ct consultatioh and ccntoronoo
in tho oiootion of tho Midst“.

6. It ciao tho ottcroo ct colt-advertise” and Moo.

7. 1t clininatco may non who would ho dooirod for tho
ctnoo.

8. It «who in placing candidatoo in ctrioo hy o
linority ooto when mom candidnooo may“.

I do not attempt to diocuoo all of tho oumooood tool“ or
the primary oystem horo, but 01100» W those ohich l oonoidor
to ho charactoriooic at tho ottitudo or the chrity at tho pronto
tino. in my diacuouion i shall «manor to proacnt tho problono
so fairly no poooihlo and ccnoidor what inprovcmonu. it any. oro
boing prcpcooc and oxocutod in tho various out“.
an. quution or may in tho primry cmpoign arouses tho

quichoot and non couploto attention or ovoryono pox-hopo hocoooo
of tho imports» 918cc hold by my in tho life or ovory in.
dividooi. to tho ova-ago lay-an ouch o minim as rocontly occk
phoo in Pomoylunio io as big no“ on! ohonld ho flopped by
on ooono pcooihio. A tcooi c: apprcximotoly 31,900,000} ooo

 

1. Chinook. 73. 143: Juno 2.3. 1926 — m 274.. - "??vilo o:
ammomcy.“

oxponood during thio mpoign and tho "iconoo indicatoo that nah
o: thio no opont corruptly on o oyotom c: voto bwina. it io in
thio oonnor that tho upondituro or my io dangerous. for corrup-
tion my ho oaoily diagniooo. inch on oxponoitoro oloo ooono thot
it io nocoooory toromtcbo richorbvo tho booking otnoooyod
pocplo if he is to becomo o candidate with my hopoo o: onooooo
in o otato ohoro ouch oxpouilmroo oro troonont.

Tobonanimtodinnprimryamnmotbomtotho
rotors. Unlooo ho is o diotinguiohod nan ohooo viooo ono octiOIo
havo boon trooly admtiood through tho sodium of tho pron. ho
will hovo to mm on of tho voriouo publicity cm on! ogonoioo
ohich ore Ell Von cootly. Elmo, in tho one of tho ototo ct
Pennsylvania. it n condidoto Iiohod to cirmlarioo tho rogullr
voto ct tb ototo by firot olaoo mil to oould ccot “3.000.; for
pcotago olono. nogloctina tho out or printim ond cloricol holp
Ihioh ocolo bo non important itouo in tho oxponoo liot. it io
than that“ canooooooooaoooo torthooxpohoihro otooooot
thomonoy during thio loot mmgnanooo conomit that tho
logitinto uponooo would run tairly high. but onroly not no
high to $1,000,000. for ono candida“.

it not not bo forgotton trust nnoor tho old conuntiu
oyotu thoro on also much corruption on! oxcoooioo ooooy upon-
dituroo. It on Jay Gould who said that he mtod tho control
of tho logiolaturoo or oovorol otatoo no he undo thon with hio

E: 100o cit.

.15;

own money. The question which should be answered is which system
affords the voter the most protection against such a policy? Under
which system will his wishes have an affect?

I believe that considering all sides of the case there is
loss actual reason to object to the primary system on this count.
It is only the excessive cases which we hear about and when one
of these does appear public sentiment usually causes a reaction
which either carries the office holder out of office or mains him
refrain from running for reelection. The late Newberry case in
Michigan was a good example of this and the anith case, now pending
in lllinois, with the Pennsylvania case, both seen fair to equal
this with results.

it is reasonable to suggest that considering that one-
third of the Senators are elected every two years there were
thirty-two elected at the last primries and election. Surely
of this number twenty-five were nominated at the primaries of
the various states seeing that forty-five of the states have
primary laws. Yet. out of this number of nominations by primriee,
we only heard of two states in which excessive expenditures of
money had taken place. What happened in the other states? Surely
if such conditions had existed here we should have heard of it.

One of the most powerfully contested primaries of this group was
that in Iowa where lir. Brookhart and Mr. Guanine were running
against each other. These men both carried on extensive campaigns,

but when the campaign reports were in, Mr. Brookhart. the successful

Short
Ballot

~45-

oandidate, had spent only $l,d79. during his campaign, while Mr.
Guanine spent $4,899.

Hany othsr'oampaigns took place in which the expenditures
were no more than this and there is reason to believe that the
people's wishes were effective in the results. if states like
Pennsylvania and Illinois wcnld enact reasonable laws regulating
expenditures and make punishment for offenders a sure thing, then
the menace of excessive money expenditures would be greatly
diminished.

It is in the length of the ballot which the direct primary
in its present fem necessitates that a real problem exists. it
the present time, in most states, all of the state and county
officers are nominated at the primary. This array of offices
make a list of candidates which males it almost impossible for
any qualified voter to intelligently man his choice. (he of
the many examples of this was manifested in Detroit in 1924
where the voters of Wayne County had to select from among 216
candidates those best qualified to serve in the various omnty
offices. In reference to this the Detroit Free Press stated
editorially, "It would puzzle an experienced politician to
identify a good may of them, while to the average man in the
street or woman in the home, knowledge extends no further than
a vague recognition here and there of the names of some present

office holder. on. root 1. a blur." 1

 

1. Detroit Free Press. Editorial, Aug. ll, 1924.

-17..

&ch an array of candidates unknown to the voter usually
results in the voter voting for the first name on the ballot with
no thought gluon to tilfi gualificnticzzs of the various candidates.
Lith experiences of this in. mind. the lame of may 01‘ the states
usually provide that the names 21311.11 be rotated on the primary
onllot in soon a way that all the mines appear first on ego-a].
number of times. This evgualizea the number of chance and ignorant
votes and helps to bring a. fair choice by emphasizing the intelli-
gent voting.

The fault lies in the necessity of leaving so “such to chance.
If there were fewer offices to choose candidates for, than the
voters would be able to know the individual qualifications of each
and consequently vote intelligently. It is this evil that the
short ballot is devised to remedy. There are very few of the
county offices which should be elective and there are max-w of the
state offices which could be clitrzilmtod from the ballot. It is
proposed tut those offices elimimxted should be placed on a merit
system of e-zppointment. The renaming offices mould create a ballot
of important offices which would not be excessive for the voters
to talce an interest in and which would allow them to vote intelli-
gently.

Such a system would bring more peoPlo to the polls also.
it the present time may argue that the people do not vote at
the primary. This is true miniy because the voters refused to

waste their ballot and they have not the time to investigate

Attacks
Against

Prism-y

.13i

every candidate thoroughly. It is a well morn fact that when

we have a real issue bemoan cmu‘ziozztee at primaries. the people
get out and vote. Such a condition would be brought about by

the short ballot. The offices toult Le for; and the issues defined
and a voting interest could be aroused in mtmy people who are

new law ti to .

IV .- THE TREND OF THE DIRECT PRIMARY

It has been previously indicate-.4 that a general wave of
reaction against the primaries has swept the country since the
World filter and tended to mice a successful use of the direct
primary more difficult than in normal times. this has teen
cvicenced by many attempts to overthrow the system. Ibis his
been successful in some states. Thus, Kev: York abolished the
primary for the nomination cf officials elected on.e stetedwide
ticket.1 The state continues. however. to use the primary in
nominating representatives to congress, members of both‘brsnches
of the sssembly; and city and county officials. Idaho else hes
returned to the convention system for the nomination of congression-
al end state candidates after an attanpt for the complete repeal
of the primary had cinema

Kore recent attacks with less success here been slide in

several other states. The Colorado legislature passed a law in

 

1. Congressional Digest. Oct. l926. Editorial Research Reports,
Sflpte ll, .st

3. Ibid.

Leaders
for and

Against
the
Primary

-19-

1925 repealing the primary laws of the state, but the system was
saved by the Governor's vetc.1 The Vermont law was saved in the
same year by the deciding vote or the Lieutenant Governor in the
Senate. In Ohio the people took the initiative and by a petition
signed by 242,000 sexed tor the repeal of the direct primary
system.2 In New Jersey the republican state convention omitted
the party to a platform looking to the abandonment of the system

while in Indiana both parties would abolish the direct primary.3

At the present time the legislatures or forty-tour states
are in session and it was freely predicted‘l' that in at least
thirty of. these active organised drives would be made to have the
primary laws repealed. These predictions have as yet proved
baseless ani the primary laws have not been changed by the legis-
latures or these states.

The active agitation against the primary is given an impetus
by the leadership or Vice-President wees who is supported by
many of the active political leaders of the day and the organised
industrial associations or the country. These leaders who are
foremost in the support of the primary are Senators Beveridge of
Indiana, Borah of Idaho. Johnson of California, and La Pcllette
of Wisconsin. These leaders are supported by such organisations

as the American Federation of Labor. the Anti-Saloon league,

 

1. Congressional Digest. Oct. 1925. Editorial research reports,
Sept. 11, '26s

2. Ibid. RtItIOH “10“ Aug. 3, '25s

3. 151d. 7

4e Chicago Tribune. Jan. 22, 1927e

Suggested
Reform

520;.

the Rational league of Women's Voters, and the Peeple's Legis-
lative Service.

There are also many who instead of trying to tear the
system down are really trying to do some constructive work and
consequently have made merous suggestions as to improvements.
In April, 1924, the editor of the Independent Magazine made the
following noteworthy suggestion. "If elections are held in
November, set the date for the nominating convention in April,
the nasinations to be made by the representatives of the party
voters in convention assembled. After the convention allow the
qualified voters a reasonable period, say sixty days. in which
to record dissent free the findings of the convention by filing
eith the proper authorities petition for the nomimtion of other
individuals. In the event that such petition carry the names
of a considerable number of voters, at least twenty percent of
these qualified, then the authorities shall declare tint the
nominations have been contested and that a primary shall be
held not later than sixty days from that date. the successful
candidate at the primry to be declared the official nominee of
the party.“ the chief importance of this suggestion is that
it would do away with the primary in those oases where there is
no Opposing candidates names. It is the usual case these days
that the primary election contests are chiefly over a very few

offices while the remaining contests are usually put in as a

 

1. Imapmente Vol. 113. April 12’ '24s pe 189s

fhe Pre-
primary

:21;

matter of form. In a lot of cases also there is no Opposition
for any of these offices, especially in the minority party. Such
a plan would help to eliminate mesh of the expense to the govern-
ment by eliminating one of the elections. In other respects this
plan is very much like the pro-primary plan which has been put
in operation in several states either by legislation or by practice.
The pro-primary,cr informal convention, combines the old and
new plan of nomination and provides that a convention of delegates
shall meet and provisionally nominate one candidate for each office.
These men are now recounended by the convention to the voters of
the party. If any element of the party does not liloe the list of
men provisionally nominated by the convention, it can prepoee
other names, and if such independent nominations are made. the
voters decide between the two at the primry.1 This plan has
the meritof giving the people the benefit of recmendations
from their party leaders, at the same time permitting them to
choose other candidates if they so desire.
The pro-primary system has been adopted by three states,
namely, Maine. Nevada, and Wyoming, while two other states,

Haryland and Washington, have placed the question entirely in

”the hands of the state central ccnesittee.’a In several other

states these conventions are occasionally held without any

 

l. Hum-o, W. B. - "Current Problems in Citizenship.” pp. 96-102.
See also Wallace, 8. 0. - "Pro-Primary Conventions." in
Annals of American Academy. Vol. 106. March '23. pp. 97-
105.
as Wallace, 3e Ce ' Op. 01‘. p. 97c

 

~22-

legislative provisions. Thus, in 1922, the democrats of Michigan
inaugurated the system and candidates have since been chosen by
this means by the party. That the republican party recognized the
effect of this system in the state is evidenced by a section of
Governor Green's inaugural address of January 1, 192?. He says,
"the pre-primry convention is a splendid innovation as it gives
political parties, rather than individuals, an Opportunity to
draft platforms and mains it possible to call for service dis-
tinguished citizens who would not inject themselves in a contest.
it is not necessary to malts any laws to provide for pro-primary
conventions. i‘he national conventions are conducted under laws
of their own making, and this system has a distinct advantage for
it has been proven in Michigan tint Judges an be found who will
interfere with conventions when the hand that makes them asks for
political aid. Whatever changu are proposed in our election
laws, there must always be given to the people the right to
finally choose their candidates.“

Besides stating the status of the primry in Michigan, this
statement of Governor Green shows conclusively that for the present
the primry is to remain unchanged in this state. Mr. Green is
s. strong party man and his opinion here expressed my be assumed
to represent the party attitude. Nevertheless, the Opponents of
the primary have not stepped work, for in a recent editorial in

the Detroit Free Press the following statement was made: "Good

 

.1. Green, Red - inaugural Address. January 1, 1927.

Changes
in the
Michigan
Law

Influence
of 3
Recent
Supreme
Court
Decision

-23-

government throughout this country as a whole is utterly impossible
of maintenance as long as the primary persists. The two things

are as unmixable as water and oil. The primary, imposed on the
country by misguided 'reformers', has done more to pull down the
level of the general administration of public affairs and turn

the control of government sachinery over to cliques, blocs,
demagcgues, incompetents, and adventurers, and to substitute
government by men for government by law than lave all the deliberate
plots ever conceived by bosses and creeks.” 1

One important additim to the primry law of the state of
Hichigan has been made as the result of the workings of the system
in the last few years. a bill has been passed which definitely
permits recounts sfter primry elections when requested.2 Ibis
point has caused much trouble in the past with recounts refused.
Also in this law is a minor point advancing the date of the fall
primaries one week.

The nation as a whole will be extremely affected by the
decision of the United States supreme Court rendered ‘liarch 7,
1927.3 This decision declares the Texas law unconstitutional
which undertook to bar the negro from participation in the
Democratic Primaries of that state. It was assumed that the
constitutional amendment, which protects all citizens from

being deprived of their right to vote, applied only to the

 

1. Detroit Fr“ Press. Editorial. April 19, 1927.
3. Lansing Capital News, March 24, 1927.
3. U. 8. Supreme Court Decisions. March 7, 1927,(see current

panel's) .

-24;

final election. The supreme court takes the attitude that any
election in which the public participates must admit all who
apply. Consequently the primary elections must be conducted on
the same basis as the final elections.

The main question which will affect the nation is not the
question of the vote as it is that by this decision the primaries
are included in those processes which are under Federal super-
vision. This will involve all the states as well as lens, for
if one state is under Federal supervision than all the states are
subject to the same regulation. It will remain to see what
attitude the Senate takes when it passes on the credentials of
Senators elect anith and Vere from lllinois and Pennsylvania
whose primry campaign expenses were excessive. Many claim that
these cases do not come under Federal supervision, but the
group headed by Senator Borah of Idaho point to this deeision

as giving the Senate the right to inquire into the primaries.

V - CWCLUSIOH
It has been my purpose in this paper to present the ery
situation as it exists today. It is in no stable condition and
many changes are to be looked for in the near future. What truss
changes are will depend mainly upon the various localities and the
attitude of the pecple. The evidence all seems to indicate that
there Will not be an complete return to the convention syst-

ss long as the present powerful influences are behind it.

~25-

Cortain improvemnts and charges which are most dominant
are the short ballot, more rigid state control over the primaries,
the non-partisan primary, and the pro-primry. All of these
are live questions at the present time and it is the firm belief
of many that With the increased interest of the public in the
question, a system of primaries may be worked out which 7-111
give the missus of service to the people. Until some proved
better system oz" maxing nominations is brought forth, we should
keep the direct prinnry and give the suggested improvements 3

fair trial.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

-25—
-BI 8L1 OGRAPHY-

w W ”heifer

Beard, C. A. - "Arnerican Government and Politics." 4th Edition.
1924. Hacflillan.

Senna, L. J. - "Direct Primary." Y. 14 - No. 6 - The Reference
Shelf. H. W. Wilson 00.

Boots, R. S. «- "Direct Primary in New Jersey.” new Jersey State
Bureau of Research. 1917.

Cannons, J. h. - "Direct Logislaticn and Peepls Veto." 2nd
Edition. 1907.

Cree, N. - "Direct Legislation by the Peeple." 1892.

Cruikshank, A. B. - "Pcpular Hiegovernment in the United States.”
Hoffat, Yard and Co. 1920.

Ihllinger, P. U. - ”Nominations for Elective Office in the United
States.” Longmans, Green and Co. 1897. (Harvard
Historical Studies. V; ‘e’

Debel, N. H. - ”Direct Prinnry in Nebraslm." Nebraska Legislative
Reference Bureau. 1914.

Baton, A. H. - "Oregon System: The Story of Direct Legislation in
Oregon.” pe 82-91e 1912s

Fanning, Clara 3. - ”Selected Articles on the mm: Primary.”
Debaters' Handbook Series. 4th Edition. ii. W.
Wilson °0e 1913s

Hall, Am Be - "Papular Governmenta.dn Inquiry into th. Nature
and Methods of Representative Covernnmt." mm.
1921. Chapter V.

Hedges, G. 1.. - "Where the PeOple Rule; or, the Initiative,
Referemnm, Direct Primary Law and the Recall in
Use in the State of Oregon." pp. 45-92. Bender-
licse Co. San Francisco. 1914.

Horsck, E. E. - "Primry Elections in Iowa." Iowa State Historical
Society. Iowa City. 1912.

Howe, P. C. - ”Wisconsin an Experiment in Democracy." Scribner.
1912.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19 .

20.

21.

22.

24.

25.

27.
28.
29.
30.

31.
32.

Indians. Bureau of Legislative Information. Staten-gents on Direct
Primaries. 1915.

Ingram, J. D. - “Plan of a Direct Election Law for Determining a
True Primary and Final Election Law by the hill of a
Concurring Majority of all the Voters Concerned.”
1909.

Jewett, E. G. - “Jewett's Prirrary Election Law for the State of
86" York." 1904s

Jones, C. L. - "Readings on Inrties and Elections in the United
States." Midiillflne 1920.

La Bollette, R. )1. - "Haninaticn by the Direct Vote of the Peepls."
(In La Eollette Edition of liaising of America.) 1906.
V. 2e ppe 397-405.

La Follette, R. 11. - "Primary Elections for the Hominstion of all
Candidates by Australian Ballet." Address delivered
before Michigan Universi ty, Ann Arbor. Mr. 12, 1908.

Lawton, G. W. - “American Caucus System." Putnam. 1895.

Luce, R. - "Primary Election.” Public Policy Pub. Co. 1903.

EcCracken, '51. D. - ”Swiss Solutions of American Problems.“ 1897.
2nd Edition.

McLaughlin, A. 0. and Hart, 1. B. - "Cyclopedia of American
Govermnent.“ Appleton. 1914.

Merriam, C. E. - "Primary Elections." Univ. of Chicago Press. 1908.

Merriam, 0. Es 'D "Amrican Party System." iiaoiiillan. 1.922.199.289-
298.

Heysr, E. C. - "Nominating Systems." 1902.

Munro, ‘3. B. - "Current Problems in Citizenship." liaoliillan. 192‘.
Hunro, W. B. - "Government of American Cities." 1920.

national Municipal League. Proceedings for 1904-1910.

New Jersey. "Primary Election Law of the State of New Jersey." 1903.

033. F. a. and Ray, 0. P. - "Introduction to American Govermsent."
Century. 2nd Edition. 1926.

-27-
33. Ostrcgorski, 1i. - "Democracy and the Party System in the United
States." 1180311111111. 1910.
34. Overacher, Louise - "The Presidential Primry." Liacllillan. 1926.

35. Ray, C. P. - "Introduction to Political Parties and Practical
Politics." Soribner's. 1922s

36. Reinsoh, P. S. - ”headings 0n American State Government." Ginn.
1911.

3?. Hanson, De 0. - "Prinnry Elections." Putnam. 1895.

38. Schaffner, ii. A. - ”Primry Elections." Wisconsin Library
Commission. 1908.

39. Scott, S. B. .. "State Governmnt in Pennsylvania." Harper Press.
1917.

40. Shibley, C. H. - "People's chereignity vs Trustocrscy." 1904.
41. Sturcke, L. - "binary Election Legislation in New York." 1898.
42. Sullivan, J. a. - "Direct Legislation by the Citizenship." 1893.
43. Taft, William H. - "Fowler Government.” Yale Univ. Press. 1913.
44. Warner, P. l. - "Nomination of Candidates by Direct Vote."

45. Woodburn, J. A. - "Political Parties and Party Problems in the
United States.

Periodical list a the. must man
Academy of Political Science.
1. 3:229-39 Jan. '13. - "Statements on the Direct Primaries."

2. 33210-19 Jan. '13. - "Direct Prinry versus the Convention." -
‘0 Be Hart.

knerican Magazine.
10 673407-14 “be '09s ‘ "01d ONOI' Gila-1180”]. u " Us As “it's
American Political Science Review.

1. 1:83-4 Rev. '06. - "Primry Elections." - R. H. Whittle.

-2 ‘2}-

American Political Science Review continued.

2..

3.

4.

5.
6.

7.

8.
9.

10.

11.

13.
13.

14.

15.
16.

17.

13.

12250-3 Feb. '07. - "Notes on corrupt Practices and Primary Reform
in Connecticut." - R. E. Whittle.

13256-5 PGbe '07s - "D1110: NMMtiOfl 13' Of “121318112." - B. H.
Whittle.

2343-7 Nov. '07. - ”Plimry Elections and Majority limitations.” -
0e Kc Who

23417-21 May '08. - "Prinz-y Elections." - L. B. Aylsworth.
23578-85 Nov. '08. - "Manx-y Elections.” - 1.. B. Aylsurcth.

31371-81 Aug. '09. - "How York Direct Primriec Bill or 1909.” -
Ac landington.

33551.2 a... '09. - "Primry Elections." - J. A. Lapp.
33563-5 Nov. '09. - "Primry Elections." - L. B. Aylseorth.

43569-71 Nov. '10. - "Primary Election Law of. Illinois.” - 1.. E.
Ayleworth.

63532-62 Nov. '11 - "Direct Primaries and the Second Ballot.” -
‘0 I. HOlOMbCe

51600-4 lov. '11. - "Second Choice Nomination laws." - 8. 0. Laurie.

0:60-74 Feb. '18. - *Prinry Election Legislstion of 1909-10.” -
10. Be ”Worth.

7:87-90 Feb. '13. - "let Prim” Act ct Kinnescts." (1912) - W. A.
Scheper.

93309-12 Kay '15. - “Direct Primaries."

101710-26 Nov. '16 - “Operation of the Direct Primnr in Hichigen."
A. 0. Hillepangh.

13:264-6 May '19. - ”Recent Print-5t and Election Lave." - 0.
Kettlebcrongh.

161412-31 Aug. '22. - "Trend of the Primary." - R. 8. Boots.

Annals of the American Academy of. Political Science.

1.

203611 - "rest of the Primry Election System in Minnesota." -
P. H. Anderson.

f‘
"199 "

Annals of the American Academy of Political Science continued.

2. 263203-17 - "Municipal Nomination Reform." - II. E. Deming.

3e 258326.? - "RUGGED Amendments to the Primry “We” - He He W‘“ne

4. 28:442-62 - “Problems of Primaries." - J. I) L. Verplanck.

5. 106. 1923. Complete on the Direct Primary. Contains articles on

Arena.
1.

all phases of the system as follows:

(1) Hmimting Systems - 0e 3e Merriam.
(2) Direct Primaries - 0. Kettlcboronsh.
(3) Removable Obstacles to the Success of the Direct
-- 3. We Mfle
(4) Why 1 Believe in the Direct Primary - G. W. Norris.
(6) Defects in the Direct Primry - K. P. Geiser.
(6) The Direct Primary am Party Responsibility in
Wisconsin - A. 3. Hall.
(7) Opinions or Public lien on the Value of. the Direct
Primi-y - We Be “Me
(8) Reform of the Presidential Raninsting Methods -
Pe 0e Ray.
(9) Barty Platforms in State Politics - R. 3. Boots.
(10) Ron-Partisan Naninstions and Elections - R. l. Cnehman.
(ll) conventions - 8. 93. Wallace.
(12) Proportional Representation in the United States -
I Ge 3e KOBEe
(13) Prevention of Minority Nominations for State Offices in
the Direct Primary - B. R. Williams.
(14) Th. California D1330“ Primry '- Ve Je “Its
(15) Ehe Direct Primary Law in Maine and Has It Has Worked -
0e 0e Howell.
(16) Operation of the State-wide Direct Primary in New York -
1.. Overacker. A
(17) The Workings of the Direct Primary in loss - P. E. Hcrack.
(18) The Operations of the Richards Primry - C. A. Bsrdahl.
(19) The Operation of the Direct Primry in Indiana -
F. H. Guild.
(2) Digest of Primary Election Laws - 0. Kettlebcrough.

341417-18 Oct. '05. - "Why the Peeple and Not the Machine lust

Control the Romina tione.”

2. 353587-90 - “Dinct Primries." - 1. Cross.

3.

36362-4 - "Witt is the Direct Primary?" - 1. Cross.

Arem. continued.

4. 36:541-4 "Real Significance of the Wisconsin Primaries.”

5. 41:377-8 "Governor Hughes on Direct Primaries."
6. 41:461-6 - "People's Rule in Oregon.”- 0. 21. 11000110011.

7. 41:550-6 "Direct Primaries versus Ross Rule." - l. 1:. Brickman.

Atlantic chthly.
1e 798450-57 Apr. '97e O "Nouninatlng System." - Ee Le mne
8e 110141-5 July '12. - "Direct Primary BIPOMM‘." - Be WOOme

3. 135:742-8 June '25. - "Direct Primary: A Study from Life.” -
1e Be Oakley.

Chautauqua.
1. 353114-15 Day '02. - "Democracy in Nomination.“

2. 38:10 - "Pregnse ot the Direct Primaries." -
C. R. Woods-nit.

3. 52:324-6 Rev. '06. - "Defects in the Direct Nomination System."

4. 65:97-9 Dec. '11. - "latest in Governmnt." - A. R. Bester.

0011101" I e

1. 7328-9 Her. 29, '24. - ”Can You bust the Primaries?" -
0e Ke mvis.

2. 73:9 liar. 29, '24. - “Gifford Pinchot doesn't agree."
Congressional Digest.
1. 33354 July '24. - "Rites of Btate Primaries."

2. 5.255-86 Oct. '26. - "Is the Direct Primary Sound? A Pro and
Con Discussion."

Current Opinion.
1. 7331-5 July '22. - "Weathercccks of the Harding Administration.”
Current Literature.

1. 4915-7 July '10. - "Governor Hughes last Political Fight."

Eclectic.

1. 146379-82 Jan. '26. - "Direct Primary Nominations." - W. Hanstreet.
Poi-um.

1. 33:92 liar. '02. - "Primary Election Hovement.” - A. mtnne.

2. 422493-505 Dec. '09. - "lamination Reform in America." - C. R.
WOMffe

3. 50:48-58 July '13. - "Failure of the Primaries, Direct or Other-
wise; an Appeal for Direct Elections.” - J. D. Miller.

4. 55390-7 Jan. '21. - "Direct Primaries: Symposium.” - Wadsworth
and others.

5e 553205-‘16 30b. '21e .. "Direct Primries." - Je Be We Gardiner.

e. 682791-800 sept. '22. — ”Home Rule‘and Direct Primaries.” «-
Je 1‘. Bylan.

7. 70:1845-50 Aug. '23. - ”Tory and the Primary." - G. H. Payne.
Hampton.

1. 28:260-2 May '12. - “Advanced Legislation of Governor Wilson." -
Je He McCarter.

Harper's Weekly.
1.046310 Aug. 9. '02. - "MNO‘ Primaries."

2. 54214 July 2, '10. - "Direct Primaries and the Special Session
at Albany." - C. Johnston.

3. 65.30 Liar.25, '11. - ”Direct Primriee in Action." - 1.. J. Abbott.
independent.

1. 6232495-7 Oct. 18, '00. - "Minnesota's New Primary Election Law.“ -
se le mule

2. 54.2694-5 Rev. 13, '02. - "Results of the Minnesota Direct
Primary 8ysten." - T. n. Knappen.

3. 563100640 May 5, '04. - ”Outsider's hpsriences with Inside
Politics.“ - R. Pomeroy.

4e 6583674 hbe 4. '09. - “amtor 300: on mr.°t Ehctione."

independent continued.

5.

6.
7.
8.

9.

10.
11.
12.
13.

14.

15.

661730-2 Apr. 8, '09. - "How tin Primary System Works (in South
Carolina)." - J. 0. chphill.

661924-5 Apr. 29, '09. - "Is it a floral Issue?" (Editorial).
6811020-6 May 12, '10. - "Fight for a Clean Ballot.” - E. R. Finch.
701870-1 Apr. 27, '11. - ”Direct Primary in New Jersey.”

831144-5 Ray 26, ' - "How the Primary System works.” -
Je 0e 301313111110

1081573—4 July 8, '22. - "North mkcta Primries."

112-189 Apr. 12, '24. -"Direct Primaries." (Editorial).

1121193-6 Apr. 12, '24. - "Decay of American Parties." - R. Lansing.
113118 July 5, '24. - "Discnssion of the Direct Primaries."

11312110 Oct. 4, '24. - "Reforming the Direct Primry.” - P. W.
Dallinger.

1173257 Sept. 4', '26e "' wadimctad mmriese'

Literary Digest.

1.
2.
3.
4.
6.
6.
7.

391330-2 Sept. 4, '09. - "Value of the Direct Primry in Doubt."
491672 Oct. 10, '14. - ”Doubts or the Direct Primry."

58125-6 July 6, '18. - "Testing Loyalty in the Primaries.”

68110-11 Aug. 24, '18. - “President's Hand in the Primries.'

73110 June 17, '22. - ”Primary as 0 Rich Man's Came."

8915-7 June '26. - "The Iellov Phril in Pennsylvania Primries.‘

90110-11 July 10, '26. - “Erect Primry Under Fire.“

Michigan Political Science Association Publications.

1.

611-149 Harsh, '05. - "Primary Reform."

lichigin LEW Bfldafle

1.

16121-3? Nov. '16. - "Direct Primary Legislation in Michigan." -
As 0e Millspaugh.

-3 3...

HcClure's.

l. 371505-19 Sept. '11. - "How the Oregon Democracy has Destroyed
the Political Machine."

2. 381479-80 Feb. '12. - "Yflnt the Direct Primary did for California."
Ration.

1. "Progress of the Direct Primries." Y. 791290.

2. ”New Phases of Primary Refom.” 7. 82128-9. Jan. 11, '06.

3. "Primry Laws and Party Tactics." 7. 83148. J1. 19, '08.

4. "Primary. No Cureall." IV. 871131-2. Ag. 13, '08.

5. ”Publicity for Parties." 7. 881292. liar. 25, '09.

6. "Speaker Wadsworth and the Primaries for New York." V. 881128-9.
30b. 11, '09.

7. ”Interest in Direct Primaries." V. 89146. J1. 15, '09.
8. "Direct Primary.”p(E. L. 0. horse.) 7. 921114. Feb. 2, '11.
9. ”He! Jersey's Election Laws." V. 921335-6. Ap. 6, '11.
10. "Logic of the Direct Primary." (A. Ball.) 7. 98-11334. Feb.5, '14.
11. I“Primaries and Issues". 7. 1031338-9. Oct. 12, '16.
12. "Defects of the Primry.” V. 1051336-7. Sept. 27, '17.
13. "Dashing the Primary.” V. 1061313. liar. 21, '18.
national Conference for Good City Governmnt.
l. Wilder, A. P. - "Primary Election Laws." 19001212-25.

2. Hempstead, E. A. - "Crawford Co. or Direct Primary System." 19011
197-217.

3. Spam, 0. B. - "Direct Primaries". 19011184-96.

4. Spahr, C. B. - "lethods cf Nomination to Public Office: Historic
Sloetch." 19041321-7.

6. Deming, R. I. - "Recent Primary Legislation and Statutory Pro-
visions Regulating independent nominations to Public
Office. 19041328-35.

National Conference for Good City Government continued.

6. Cheney, 0. B. and Simpson, D. F. - "Political Organization and
Primary Legislation in Minnesota." 1905132746.

7. Deming, H. E. and Trowbridge, L. W. - "Political Organization
and Primry Legislation in New York.” 19051309-26.

6. Hearing, 8. and Trowbridge, L. W. - "Political Organization and
Primary Legislation in Pennsylvania.” 19051293-302.

9. Lester, C. B. - ”Primary Legislation and Party Organization in
Wisconsin.” 19058329-48e

10. Deming, ‘11. D. - ”More of the Control by Permanent Political
Organizations 01‘ the Methods of Nomination to
liunicipal Offices." 19051347-65.

ll. Deming, H. B. - "Corrupt Practices and Electoral hethcds in New
Jersey." 19061308-28.

l2. Greeley, L. H. - "Present Status of Direct nominations." 19101
328-339.

13. "national Reform.” 1910153344.
Kati onal Municipal Review.

1. lakes, R. L. - "Primary Election Expenses in Chicago." V. 21657-
60. Oct. '13.

2. Ross, C. G. - ”Proportional Representation, Preferential Voting,
and Direct Primaries." 7. 3149-56. Jan. '14.

5. WOOdl'llff, 0. R. .. "Philadelphia's m." V. 68727-8. NOV. '17.
4. Boots, R. S. - “A New Type of Direct Primary.” 7. 81473. Sept.'l9.
5e 300:8. Re 3e ' "Presidential Primary." 7. 98595-517e Sept. '20.

6. Herrism, C. B. - "Recent Pendencies in Primary Election Systens.”
V. 10:87-94e Feb. 'Zle

7. Kettleborough, C. - "Direct Primary in lndians." V. 101166-
50e Mar. ’21e

8e HHGhBS. 0. Re C "flat. 0: tho Direct Primary." Vs 10823.31e J2n.'21.

9. Boots, R. S. - “The Direct Primary Weathers the Storm.“ V. 101
322-24. 1921.

-35-

National Hunicipfll Review continued.

10. Walnut, 1‘. II. - ”Gifford Pinchot and the Direct Irimw.” V. 111
332-36. Oct. '22.

11. Boots, R. S. - "The Career of the Direct Primary in Nebraska."
Vs 112373-9e EOVe .220

12. "Direct Primary Littled Used in County Election in Iowa." '7. 131
667-8.

13. Peeler, 11'. - "Primary or Convention - Which?" V. 151525-30.
Sept. .260

New Republic.
1. Allen, 1.. - "Great Primi'sry numb v." 7. 7155-7. May 20, '16.

2e Langmuir, Ce He - ”First P.r160t tnfl PT1MBTYe" V. 73201e
Jo. 24. '16.

north American Review.

1. Green, C. '27. - "Facts about the Caucus and the himry." V. 1571
257-69. Sept. '83.

2e ’brd, He Je - "D1r90t Primary." Vs 19081‘14e Jle '09s

3. Cupbell, R. H. - "Representative Government vs. the Initiative
and Primary nominations." V. 1901222-30. Ag. '19.

4. LBPIBdO. W. T. C "Nominating Primary." 7. 2008235-43e‘A8e'1‘e
Outlook.

1. 571950-2 Dec. 18, '97. Nominating; Ballot.

Essential Reform.

2e 588261‘2 Jun. 39, '98.

3. 581266-8 Jan. 29, '98. Primary Election Reform.

4. 591797 J1. 50, '98. Eric Side of Direct Primaries.

5. 601146 Sept. '98. Direct Primaries in South (hrclina.

6. 631475 Oct. 28, '99. - Direct Primaries in Kansas and Missouri.
7. 66191-2 Sept. 8, '00. - Primaries, Direct and Indirect.
8. 661861-2 Dec. 8, 'OO. - Direct Primaries in Pennsylvania.

9. 671477-8 liar. 2, '01. - Direct Primaries Demanded.

mtlcok
10.
ll.
12.
13.
14 .
15.
16.

17.

18.

19.

21.

27.

28.

29.

31.

“:5-

continued.
721486-7 liar. 2, '02. - Direct Primries in Massackmsetts.

751237 Oct. 3, '03. Here Victories for Direct Primaries.

791611 Liar. 11,'05. Primary Law of North Meta.

83:144-5 may 26, '06. Illinois Primary Elections.

831586-7 J1. 14, '06. Direct Primary (in lisconsin and Illinois).

831821-2 Ag. 11, '06. Direct Primary (in the South).

84:120-5 Sept.15, '06. - Proud toward a Rare Democracy.

841688-9 Nov. 24, '05.
Primaries e

Grand Rapids Plan for Non-Partisan

851106 Jan. 19, '07. Direct Prinnries (in New Jersey).

881343-4 Feb. 15, '08. - Direct Primaries for Illinois.

891965-7 Aug. 29, '08. Illinois Primaries.

891976-7. Aug. 29,'08. - Conventions vs. Direct Primries.

90151-2 Sept. 12, '08. - Direct Primary and the New Idea in New
Jersey.

901383-9 Oct. 3, '08. - Nominations in New Jersey.
901383-9 Oct. 24, '08. - Direct Prinary on Prial.
91191-2 Jan. 16, '09. - Governor Hughes on Party Nmimtions.

911370-2 Feb. 20, '09. - Nominations by Conventions and Direct
Nominations.

911426-8 Feb. 27, '09. - Direct Eminaticns (for New York).

911848-9 Ap. 17, '09. - Direct Nominations in California and
How York.

95:131-2 Buy 28, ’10. - Defeat of the Direct Primary in New
York.

951468-9 J1. 2, '10. - Direct Nominations.

951507-8 J1. 9, '10. - Governor Hughes, the Primary and
Legislative Reform. T. R.

Outlook
32.
33.

34.

40.

41.

42.

43.

-37-
continued.
961370-1 Oct. 8, '10. - "battle of Jaratoga".
971426-33 Eco. 25, '11. - Every Linn nia- own Jamming-11 Lauger.
971945 Apr. “4:4, '11. - :uulic Control 01‘ 1210011101115.
981231 Je. 5, '11. - Direct Domination in Kev: York.
10017554 Apr. 5, '12. - State Conventions and Primaries.

104116-18 May 6, '13. -- Direct Primnry and the Direct Election
01 Senators.

104185 tiny 17, '13. - Direct Primary Dovemsnt in New York.
1041221-2 .Bay 31, '13. - Sulzer Primary Eight.

1041353—4 Je. 21, '15. - Nonppertisan Campaign for Direct
Primaries .

10415554 J1. 12, '15. - Two Issues: Direct Primaries and Judges
of the Right ’Iype. Theodore Roosevelt.

1431873-5 Je. 25, '26. -WEvils of Democracy."

14418 Sept. 1, '26. - Revolt Against the Primry.

Political Science Quarterly.

1.

271648-68. Dec. '12. - r‘orestalling the Direct Primary in Oregon.

Review of Reviews.

1.
Z.

3.

4.

5.

6.

171563-9. my '90. - Liovement for Better Pricnriunil. H. Hotchxiss.
241465-8. Oct. ‘01. - Mimeeota Primary Election Lama-A. L. Iéearkle.

311537-41. Her. '05. - Political movements in time liortnweet. -
G. B. Cheney.

341178-15. 1314;. '06. - Oregon as a Political Experiment Station. -
J. Semier.

551748-51. Je. '07. - Democracy and the hetereleum in Oregon.

391274-7. Her. '09. - Direct Hominati one in New York.

«1);,-

Beview of l-levicws continued.

7. 411597-9. tiny '10. - Doom of tne 01d "l’iachine" Convention. -
1'1. 3. Binkerd.

8. 461439-45. Oct. '12. - Direct Primary: Promise and Perfomence. -
A. We Dunn.

9. 471682-6. Je. '13. - Governor Sulzer and the right for Direct
Primaries.

10. 481596-9. Dov. '14. .. When the Primaries Fail. - J. 3. Pardee.
Saturday Evening Post.

1. 19918-9. Dec. 11, '26. - 01’, By, and for the People - Yes and No. -
A. J. Beveridge.

Survey.
1.1421118. Apr. 19, '19. - Baltiumre Primaries - a "..'orxeh0p.
Weekly 118V10We

1. 4151 Jan. 19, '21. -- Ie the Direct Primary lbcmed? - 1'. Id.
Davenport.

Woman Ci ti zen.

1. 11.5. 10118-19 Je. 27, '25. - Direct Primary in the 1925 Legio-
laturee.

2. 11.8. 11123 Nov. '26. - Politicians or the P901116. - G. Pinchot.

3. 11.8. 11130-1 lot. '26. - Save the Primary. - E. J. Hauser.

4. me. 11183 Jan. '27. - Ohio Retains the Primry. - 3. Burton.
World'e Work.

1. 613715-16 Aug. '03. - Progress of the Direct Reform.

2. 1019404 Nov. '13. - Direct Primary and the Preferential Method. -
Kc Ae Bickel.

3. 3317 Nov. '16. - Recent Experiments with the Primry.