Arizona republican., 1916-08-24

He therefore brings this action under Paragraph 2S99 of the Civil Code, 1913 to compel such cancellation.
 To this complaint the defendant. Owen E. Murphy. as county recorder, aforesaid, has filed a demurrer which raises the true issue in this case. to- wit: Is the reason given-a change of party utilization after registration sufficient one to allow the elector to cancel his registration heretofore made. and presumably. register with T different party affiiation.
 Under the constitution of our state, Article VII, Sec 12, the legislature is directed to pass registration laws for the purpose of securing the purity of elections and guarding aginst abuses of the elective franchise, By Article VII, Sec. 10 of that same organic law, We have formally recognized the party system of nominations, and have. through various acts of the legislature placed partisan primary elections on practically the same footing as the general elections. Whether this be
 wise or not may he disputed; that it Is a fact cannot be denied.
 The constitution itself provides the qualifications for voters at the gener- al election, but left to the legislature the ItHulTtfntfllS tDi litlpetllilB the party primaries. That body, in its wisdom. after experimenting with various methods of testing party feal l ty, has finally provided that the cleo J tor at the times he registers must state his party utilization. and that he shall only participate in the prt- mary of the party shown to be his 1 by precinct register.
 In order 10 understand and interpret a law which may be ambiguous on Its face. il is necessary to know the req sons which led up to its enactment.
 The reasons for the requirements Of
 the registration law in regard to par ] ty utilization are known to every fol- lower of our recent political history. | It is an unfortunate fact that many voters, otherwise honest. do not ap- preciate the meaning of a party pri- mary. Such primary, both in law and | common honesty. k purely q family
 affair and a democrat should no more enter q republican primary than John Doe should interfere in the fam | iIy differences of Richard Roe. IL Is notorious. however. that before the passage Of the last registration law
 there was a reckless disregard Of this | principle. and that thousands Of vot- | CTS participated in primaries or a | party whose principles they did not believe in. and whose candidates they | did not intend 10 support
 1 l. Is undoubted that the reason which led To the feature of the regis tration law in question in this case was the violation of the principles oi party primaries above set forth. and tha: the present law was meant |. correct. as far as possible. that evil | consider the laws governing registra ticn.
 The county recorders of the varioui counties are, of course. the registra ton officers thereof. and they aion'
 can cancel an entry made.
 Ii is admitted that the only causei for cancellation expressly stated bl
 our law are found in Paragraph 2Ss Civil Code, 1913 IL is also admitted by plaintiff that the only clause m tha
 paragraph which could be considered to apply in this action is as follows I"(5) upon the production or certirle'
 copy of judgment directing the can
 cellation to be made.
 The only way in which a judgmen
 directing the cancellation of an entr.
 can he obtained. is found in Paragraph 29s. Civil Code 1913, Upon deman'
 first being made in writing therefor
 and his refusal to do so. then an, person may proceed by action in tn
 Superior Court to compel the Recorde to cancel any entry made on the regis
 ter illegally. or that ought to be can
 celled by reason of facts that hay
 occurred subsequently to the time 0 such entry.
 IL is contended by plaintiff that hi
 change of party affiliation is one O
 the facts set forth in the underline
 portion of the statute just quoted, an for that reason he is entitled to hi judgment
 IL may be conceived that there ar few. if any, direct precedents on th point in question. l know of no stat having precisely our statute. either o registration or primaries. and the cas must therefore be decided on reaso and analogy.
 Paragraph 2ss7. supra. gives seve reasons why the Recorder shall canoe the entry. The first four reasons ar the removal, death. insanity or con yiction of q felony Of the elector. Tn . sixth and seventh reasons are differen forms of the others. The remainin one is the production of the certifie
 copy of the judgment above referred t'
 Paragraph 2S99, supra, requires as
 condition precedent to an action sue
 as this. a written demand to the count 2 recorder for cancellation. and refusi l on his part.
 { It is apparent that the Recorder ha l no right under the statute to canc' l for the reason given in this case. 1 . members Of the company which