Studies in American History 
B69 
but covering 6 primary elections, 1912-1922, we find that out 
of 73 such contests the cities won 36 and the country 
towns 37.®^ 
With respect to the lower house of the state legislature, the 
opponents of the direct primary predicted that in case a rep- 
resentative to the legislature represented several towns, one 
being much larger than the rest, the smaller towns would 
never furnish a representative. For example, it was declared 
in the legislature, 1911, concerning the legislative class made 
up of Hallowell, Manchester, and West Gardiner that : “Under 
the present system (convention) . . . Manchester would 
have one term. West Gardiner one, and Hallowell three. But 
if the Davies Bill becomes a law neither Manchester nor West 
Gardiner will be represented during the next ten years.”®® The 
extent to which the prediction failed is indicated by the fact 
that West Gardiner had its turn in 1914, Manchester in 1916, 
and Hallowell its three in the three succeeding biennial pe- 
riods. A survey of a large number of similar representa- 
tive districts shows that in the main the tradition of 
distribution of representatives between towns has been con- 
tinued unaffected by the change in the system of nomination. 
The answer to the second question, “What has been the 
effect of the direct primary upon the number of candi- 
dates?” may be gained from an analysis of the following 
table : 
TABLE VII. — Primary of 1922 and 1924 
Republican 
Office 
Num- 
ber 
Candi- 
dates 
Unop- 
posed 
Major- 
ity 
Plu- 
rality 
United States Senator 
2 
5 
2 
Governor 
2 
5 
2 
State Auditor 
2 
5 
1 
1 
Representative to Congress 
8 
9 
7 
8 
County Offices 
181 
339 
97 
148 
33 
State Representative 
302 
420 
176 
273 
29 
State Senator 
62 
100 
11 
37 
25 
Total 
559 
883 
291 
471 
88 
Bowdoin College Biilletin, Municipal Research Series, No. 4, p. 16. 
Maine, Legislative Record, 1911, p. 1063. 
