The San Francisco call., 1910-02-18
ELECTION BOARD
WINS TEST CASE
Supreme Court Decides That Pc
titiOn Signers Must Be on
New Register
Henry I. Grieb Denied Right TO
Use Old Lists for the
August Primary

Only those electors registered since
January Z. 1910. may legally sign nom
ination papers for candidates seeking
partisan nominations at the primary
election to be held on the third Tues
day in August.
That is the decision of the supreme
court in the friendly test case brought
in The name Of IIarrX T. Grich against
the san Francisco election commission.
The decision was written by Justice
lBenshaw and concurred in by Chief
Justice Beatty and Justices Shaw, An
gellotti and Lorigan.
Justice Shaw declined to concur in
some of the rea soning of the opinion.
but agreed 10 TT as 4 whole. Justices
SIoss and Melvin did not participate in
the courts deliberation and did not
s. gn the decision.
VICTORY FOR COMMISSION
The decision Of the supreme court is
p sweeping victory for President Gator
IF the election commission and the
proponents OF The sole use Of the new
register Senator Lester q. Burnett
who ou behalf OF Grieb demanded that
the new register b. used as supple
mental 10 the old. made an ingenious
case. but rallied to convince the court
that The provisions of the law were not
explicit and plain.
The decision Of the supreme court
means THAI only those electors who
have registered IS partisans since the
beginning Of the new register on jan
nary T. 1919. are eligible 70 sign NOM
mating papers for candidates who de-
sire 10 submit their claims upon party
preference To- the voters in August
The plaintiff demanded the right to
use lie registration Of 1908 and 1903
because the new registration would not
bC complete ia point Of time sufficient
so permit OF lis use at the August pri-
mary election.
In support of this contention the
uIaintiff urged a code prOviso designed
10 cover special elections and munici-
Tai elections in the smaller cities which
are held in March and April Of the
even numbered years.
The court held that the proviso was
not intended to affect August primary
elections or the nomination of can
didate~ 10 be voted for at the November
elections The opinion points out that
the language Of the proYiso indicates
tlat the August primary elections for
tuc nomination Of county and state can
didares was not considered an eNcep-
tioHal case requiring the protection
Torded by the proviSo.
THE fact that If the plaintiffs peti-
t-on was granted. the operation Of the
d!roct primary law would not be uni
form this year is made one of the
prominent features of the decision.
Prior 10 The enactment of the direct
primary election law the partisan fea-
ture or the registration law applied
only 60 II cities brought specifically
within its provisions The result was
that the old register for the entire
state outside of those cities did not
show the partisan Affiliations of the
electors. The partisan registration sec
Ifon was specifically made q part OF
She direct primary election law. thereby
providing that none should De entitled
TO vote at the ensuing primary election
unless his affidavit Of registration in
Guided a statement of his partisan
Affiliations.
Tile court declared that if the old
registration should be used the provi-
sions Of the primary law could not he
complied with i'm any part of the state
except in those cities in which parti-
san registration was provided prior to
che enactment Of the direct primary
law.