Carson City daily appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1907-1930, 1910-06-04
Direct Primary Law Upheld
(Continucd from Page y

Il the law, (l)aVis V, Bcasoh' 100 -
). 1913. 10 Sup. Ct, 299), or the dc
,lruction ri the government itself
In So lar as Britton v. Hoard, ~
tal, JH (6l Pac. Ills, 81 l.. X. \.
ll5), Is not III harmony with this
view, II ii may be c"h'Idered' We
cannot approve It.
i.add ' liolnes, ~ Oregon. lS|
1873.
Counsel Tor Appellant seemingly |
lail to appreciate that the electoral
test OF an clector spoken oi i'll the
constitution l. tor the election Ot
uulhlic officers asd not for the rlcc-
non 1T which party nominees are
selected.
The Supreme Court Of California,
in the recent case of Socialist Party
V Uhl, said:
The right and duty of the legis-
laturc to prescribe Il test Tor electors
voting 1T I primary cannot be qucs-
toned, nor do wp prcCCivc any rcaS-
enable grounds TOR questioning the
validity 81 4 test aS To candidates.
Socialist Party Y. Uhl. 155 Cal.
Any reasonable test oi party atiilia
ton may be required by the Lcgisla-
tue oi those who desire to partici
pate i'll primary elections OF the var
lou parties.
State V. Nichol, tWash) 81 pac.,
72S. State v. Michel, l2l La, 574.
State V. Drexel, ~ Neb., 10. Hoppin
v. Stack, u y. J. L., 5o2. Morrow V.
Wipi, lis n. w. ll2l IS d. 1909.
Rouse v. Thompson. 22S ILL.,, 522.
The test prescribed by our statute
- practically identical with the test
prescribed under the Primary Act
ol the State of New York, sustained
ly tho New York Court of Appeals
,rcaking through Judge .Alton b.
Comm, lo4 New York. 5S5. 81 l.. K.
y. 674.
ii. 1t is further contcndrd by
{ uHscl for Appellant that the lrw
L. NuId III that ii denies certain pOlit
cal arties the right to participate III
l:|Aary elections authorized by the
Vet, and provides ne method ny
WhIch their candidates may t3pva!
urun the official ballot
.>.a!n We lind the position -:
counsel iallacious i'll failing to keep
IL mind the substantial distinction
winch exists between primary cleo
ton, which is an election simply ior
the nomination OF candidates oi the
various parties. and the election oi
Iublic officers when the voter, OF al
parties at the polls determine, from
among the candidate, selected ii the
primary elections and independent
candidates, who are To- b. the oth
GERS to administer their affair, ui
State. y primary election, At which
nominees ui the various parties are
selected, i, not To- be ~couiouudcd
9th fl9 slgst 81 ~ ,ttIs.rS UttlItr
the meaning oi the constitutional
night 81 electors to vote for al
uuncro that are now ur hereafter may
he elected by the people
Line Y. Board, l54 Mich, 529
Montgomery '. Chcll, * ). " $50
tky. 1905. Morrow Y. Wipl, IL;
y. ". III ll2+ IS. ID. l90S). State
'. Johnson, 81 Mimi, 22l. State Y
Nichols wash ~ pac, rs. State
V. FELTON,, II y. ST, 55+ 57S. Do"ley
V. Jackson, l04 NJ. App, p.
As t~ersely stated by the Supreme
Court al the State ot South Dakota
III i, ior the party L" nominate; ini
the people to elect.
Morrow '. Wipl, rs y " Rep
IS D. ll24.
The Supreme Court III Minnesota
III considering the constitutional pro.
Vision similar To our OWN, Sdlh.
III the election al candidates to
the position OF nominees - An cleo
tiun within the meaning 81 article !
oi the constitution, then the prini
any law, rs above construed. i, nm
constitutional 1t would, i'll certain
cases, deprive the voter 81 his privil-
cgc t. cNCrCi,c the elective franchise
Such an occasion might arise when
ne candidates appear Tor NOMINATION.
no provision being made for lIlliug
vacancies or leaving blank lines on
the ballot to enable the voter t. write
III the name OF some person III ms
choice. But it /, very clear that The
election al nominees provided Tor IN
the primary law is not the election
referred to III the constitution, The
language oi article ! bearing upon
the subject L. aa follow
Every male person 81 the age al
twcnty-one years or upwards, belong
ing to either OF rho following classes.
who shall have resided III the United
States one year and i'll tlri~ state tour
months next preceding any election
shall be entitled to vote at such cleo
fion in the election district 81 which
he hall at the time hay. been l"r
zen days q resident r"r al officers that
now are or hereafter may be elective
by the people.
"iy '"itlcere' j. meant the c>scutlNc
or administrative agents 81 the state
81 the governmental subdivisions
thereof, and the election mentioned
has reference only to- the selection ot
person, L. till such offices. The rlrc.
ton thu defined canu"t reasonably
be given so broad an interpretation
~ H. include the selection II n"nF
&c, Tor such offices
State cx rel Guuldcu y johnson,
~ Mimi. 225 224.
The Legislature mas the undoubted
right, in the regulation OF primary
elections, to prescribe qualifying
ci~assifcations Tor political parties
Who desire t" avail themselves OF the
privilege OF getting on the official
ballot through the manner prescribed
by law.
The Supreme Court OF California.
in the case of katz v: Fitzgerald, III
A. H.. -s. mail. IN'