ly changed. The informality of a hat
or open table drawer has been replaced by an official ballotbox, and
an official ballot has taken the place of the tickets furnished by each
candidate.

The "Crawford County plan," as it was generally called, was adopted
by various localities in many States. In 1866 California and New York
enacted laws to protect primaries and nominating caucuses from fraud. In
1871 Ohio and Pennsylvania enacted similar laws, followed by Missouri in
1875 and New Jersey in 1878. By 1890 over a dozen States had passed
laws attempting to eliminate the grosser frauds attendant upon making
nominations. In many instances it was made optional with the party
whether the direct plan should supersede the delegate plan. Only in
certain cities, however, was the primary made mandatory in these States.
By far the larger areas retained the convention.

There is noticeable in these years a gradual increase in the amount of
legislation concerning the nominating machinery--prescribing the
days and hours for holding elections of delegates, the size of the
polling-place, the nature of the ballotbox, the poll-list, who might
participate in the choice of delegates, how the returns were to be made,
and so on. By the time, then, that the Australian ballot came, with
its profound changes, nearly all the States had attempted to remove the
glaring abuses of the nominating system; and several of them officially
recognized the direct primary. The State was reluctant to abolish the
convention system entirely; and the Crawford County plan long remained
merely optional. But in 1901 Minnesota enacted a state-wide, mandatory
primary law. Mississippi followed in 1902, Wisconsin in 1903, and Oregon
in 1904. This movement has swept the country.

Few States retain the nominating convention, and where it remains it is
shackled by legal restrictions. The boss, however, has devised adequate
means for controlling primaries, and a return to a modified convention
system is being earnestly discussed in many States to circumvent the
further ingenuity of the boss. A further step towards the state control
of parties was taken when laws began to busy themselves with the conduct
of the campaign. Corrupt Practices Acts began to assume bulk in the
early nineties, to limit the expenditure of candidates, and to enumerate
the objects for which campaign committees might legitimately spend
money. These are usually personal traveling expenses of the candi