Los Angeles herald., 1909-10-01

are made by declared members of par
ties.
II am, therefore, of the opinion that no
elector can be denied the right to vote at
the coming city primary election on the
ground that he did not, when he registered,
declare his party ahiliatiOn. 1t is equally
immaterial, so far the city primary Is
concerned. that a voter did SO declare MS
party afTiliatiOn; for, since the city primary
is in its very essence an entirely nOn-party
primary, the partican sympathies OF the
voter are entirely superfiuOus in any legal
sense. as to the city primary, and can nave
no effect upon his right to vote thereat'
Inquiry has been made as to
whether registered voters residing IN
the territoroy which it is proposed TO
annex to the city at the special cleo
ton set for October 10, 1909, can vote
at the city primary to be held NoVeln-
ber 10, in case such annexation Is
carried.
Annexed Territory Covered
"As to the registered voters in the
territory proposed to be annexed on
october 18th, in the event of the cleo
tion resulting favorably to annexation,
it is certain that the PLACE OF RES
IDENCE has not been changed there
by. The law of registration takes no
note of residence in cities as such; the
only political subdivisions recognized
precinct. Precints are established
by the board of supervisors OF
each county, and their duty in
that regard is to divide such county
= into election precincts, Of
which there shall be as many as shall
be sufficient to make the NUMBER Oh
votes polled at any one election pre-
cinct to be not more than 2OO, as
nearly as can be ascertained.
when an elector registers he does
so. under the constitution, as resi-
dent of a particular PRECINCT ana
the fact that such precinct is or is not
within a city is merely incidental, ana
is no part of the restrictions under
which the constitutional guarantee OF
the right of suffrage is conferred.
Now the annexation of territory to
city is an event which may, under the
law. occur at any time; it is In the
nature of a continuing right. II the
territory above referred to is an
nexed prior to the official call OF the
primary election it would seem that
such election is AN election authorized
by law in such territory. Wltnln tlle
broad language of the constitution, as
well as in the entire city at large, eX-
elusive of the new territory
Entitled to a Vote
SHOULD the registered voters resid-
ing in such territory, that is, those
who shall have registered since jan
uary. 190S and prior to OCTOBER l.
1909, be excluded from the privilege OF
voting at the primary election, such
action amounts to disfranchisement
in a certain sense, a penalty Whlch is
not, as a rule, to be implied. 80 iar
as [ am advised there is no particular
statutory provision that would cover
such a case as TINS.
But it seems to me that the more rea-
sopabIe view and the more consistent
with the purposes of the law, is that, when
precinct is, by annexation of territory,
brought within city. the right of previously
registered voters in the precinct IN sueh Ter. TER
ritory to vote is not lost. While II Is true
sucb precincts come within the terrt0rlal
boundaries of the city, the PLACE OF hEsi-
DENCE of the voter is not changed thereby
in any sense, either in fact or in any par
ticular of which the law, when it specifies
the essentials OF the right to vote, takes any
note.
"As between a view that would
deny the right to vote and one that
would uphold it under the clrcuIn-
stances here under consideration
think the latter is certainly to be pre-
ferred, and indicates the safer course
TO be followed in providing for the
primary election.
"There is a practical side to the
question also that should not be lost
sight of. In any case where the r1gnt
of a body of voters to participate in
an election is or may be open to
question and they are denied the right,
the legality of the entire election
might be prejudiced if it subsequently
appears that such denial was illegal.
on the other hand, if such voters are
permitted to vote and their votes can
be segregated, as would be the case
here. the reception of such votes, if
illegal, could only effect a possible
change of the result but the legality
of the election itself would not be dis