Los Angeles herald., 1910-04-05
NEW PREC|NCT|NC
MAY MAKE BLANK
PRIMARY BALLOT
Vote Boundary Changes Menace
Validity of Nominating
Petitions
LAW CANNOT BE FOLLOWED
Test Case Needed to Ascertain
Signatures Necessary in
Many Districts

q A result Of Investigations made
N by Charles Wellborn, Democratic
IA police commissioner, and Albert
M. Norton. chairman of the Democratic
county central committee, 1t was
claimed last night that many If not all
of the nominating petitions Tor tne
August primaries may be lnVanualeu
and that a chaotic condition IN pre-
election affairs is imminent II test
case is not at once taken into the
courts to decide on what basis the
vote of the precincts Is to be estimated
by the petitioners.
A number of petitions now are being
circulated. and several already have
obtained what until yesterday was gem
orally considered the requisite number
of signatures.
II was discovered by Mr.. Wellborn,
and later also announced by Mr.. NOT
ton. that the problem OF estimating the
party vote of the precincts Is one or the
most difficult which politicians ever
have bee ncalled on to solve In local
campaigns Mr.. Norton said:
'The California election laws plainly
state that in order to get their names
on the primary tickets the candidates
must obtain the signatures of per
cent of the voters of one-fourth of the
precincts of the county. This law also
plainly states that each candidate must
secure not less than per cent, ana not
more than 10 per cent, of the voters
affiliated with his party at the last pre-
cedng general election in 25 per cent
of the total number of precincts.
PRECINCT LINES CHANGED
about half Of the precincts of Los
Angeles were recently changed, and
the whole vote thus shifted and divided
SO that there Is no way at present of
tfpor n nnTtV vote
majority of the precincts.
"There were $50 old precincts. the
boundaries OF so per cent of which were
changed, so that there are now 1876 new
precincts, but the forty-six newly Gre
ate1 precincts IL will readily be seen
far from represent the precincts In
which the votes cannot now be esti-
mated.
''For instance, old precinct No 2
was changed and new Nos. 2 and 3
were created from II; new precinct No.
6s contains n part of old precincts Nos.
35. 36 and 3s; new GA contains part of
old 80 and 81; new SIS contains part of
81 and 3S; new Sc contains part of 3S
and 80; new 81 contains part of 26, 81
and 39 new 60 contains part of $50 and
1S3 and so on through most Of the list.
"The petitioner cannot tell at pres
ent what is the vote of any of the pre-
cincts so affected, because there Is no
tions taken from the old and added to
the new precincts.
1.-THE county clerk is required by law
TO make affidavit TO the petitions filed
with him, but he is unable to do this
under the present conditions, and a
most complicated problem confronts
the various candidates.
'I have looked into the matter close
ly, and from Investigations II would
seeem that a majority If not all of the
following precincts may be thrown out,
as petitions circulated In the precincts
mentioned must be invalidated for the
reason that no one can say whether
there is less than per cent or more
than 10 per cent represented on the
petitions therein circulated. There
seems to be no possible way to tell
what is the actual vote of the pre-
cincts affected The precincts I refer
to are Nos. 2, 8, 4, 8, 6, 9. II, 10. II,
43, 40, so, 81, SO. SO. "a. So, Sc, 57. 5S,
81. SO, SO. 81, 65 66. 81, So II, so, 81. "a,
95. 1O1, 1873 124, 100, 1877, 1873, 49, 143,
146 147, 152, 1863, 164. 1876, 1856, 167 1874,
201 202, 204 2O5, 211. 212, 214, 215, 216,
217. 21S, 219, 220, 221. 224.
REQUIRES TEST CASE
"Three per cent of the Democratic
vote in the county at the last election
amounted to $50 votes. and 10 per cent
at the last election amounted to 2200
votes. The least number that can / Q
signed to a nominating petition is 66j
to be obtained from the entire vote OF
each party in 25 per cent OF the pre-
cincts. The largest number legally OBJ
tainable is 2200, to be obtained from
25 per cent, or one-fourth of the total
number of precincts.
"Taking for example new precinct
No. 63, which is made up of portions
nf nj
How is the petitioner to know just
how many votes 1t is necessary for
him to get in new No. So, when he does
not know and has no way of estimat-
ing what proportion of the original
vote of Nos. 35. S6 and 3S was trans
ferred to the new precinct, and on
what basis can he compute?
"If the petitioner gets signatures on
any basis of estimates so far conceiv-
able, he is very apt to get less than
the legal minimum, and If he goes at
1t recklessly, to make certain of Sc
curing enough signatures. he is very
apt to get more than the legal 10 per
dates to estimate?
"Under the election law, no estimates
can be computed on the old precinct
lines, therefore no logical or satisfac-
tory estimate can be made in the new
precincts.
"Wnat is per cent OF ~ per cent
of the vote of precinct No 81? What
would be safe number OF signatures
to secure in that precinct? 1t is i'm
possible to say.
Undoubtedly a test case must be
made, and that Immediately. In the
meantime 1t looks TO me- and to 9TH
ers who have investigated the mat
ter. that petitions already circulated
and held ready for fling must be in
validated and when q decision has
beeen rendered these petitions will have
to start over again.
meanwhile, it would look as though
candidates now in the field had best
withhold their petitions until some def
mite conclusion can be reached"