Students of history and political science have watched with great interest the course of British politics during the past two years. To American students a certain similarity in the character of the constitutional and economic questions before both countries has appealed with special interest; for the central problem in England, dominating all others, is how to deal with new perils and tendencies and with inherited problems and traditions in the face of the demands of an increasing democracy. These matters naturally have many aspects and include a variety of topics. Furthermore, historical perspective and the use of sources now naturally denied to the investigator will give the historian in a later generation certain advantages; yet by limiting this article merely to certain impressions of recent party politics, recognizing always that the future historical student will undoubtedly be able to supply corrections, it may be possible to make use with caution of a small portion of such material as is now available to the writer. In any case it is, impossible because of lack of space and unnecessary for the readers of this journal to attempt a chronicle of events and analyses of documents already familiar.

One of the unsettled questions in direct primary legislation is the test of party affiliation. Upon what terms should the voter be permitted to participate in the selection of partisan candidates? Should he be required to prove past action with the party whose primary he would attend, or should a mere declaration of present intention to give it his future support suffice?

The former requirement may take the form of an oath that the voter has generally supported the candidates of the party in the past, or at least at the most recent election. Such a test of party affiliation has the apparent advantage that it protects the party primary from invasion by members of other parties for improper purposes, and thus preserves the purity of the partisan nominating system. This advantage, however, is more apparent than real. There is no effective way of discovering a case of perjury without at the same time violating the secrecy of the general election ballot. An oath which can be neither gainsaid nor corroborated excludes only the conscientious voters, who do not need it, and admits the unscrupulous members of all parties.

A less objectionable test of party affiliation may take the form of a declaration that the voter has not participated in the primary election of any other party within a prescribed interval. This declaration may be enforced by a system of party registration, which will impose material obstacles to capricious or dishonest changes of party affiliation.

Since the Middle Ages Spain has been continuously established within the boundaries of Morocco, and at the present time Spain is the only foreign power possessing a foothold on Moroccan soil. The three island presidios, Penon de Velez de Gomera, the Alhucemas, and the Zaffarines, lying off the coast, and the two cities, Melilla and Ceuta, clinging with desperation to the mainland, comprise the Spanish possessions.

Ceuta is by far the most important of these possessions. The fortress is built on a headland extending into the sea toward the east. On the west only, can it be approached by land. As at Melilla, a strip of neutral territory separates the walls of the city from what may be called by courtesy, Makhzen territory, although actually Ceuta, like Melilla, is shut in on the land side by the independent tribes of the mountains. Ceuta has a population of about 14,000, its commerce is unimportant as yet, but there are possibilities of very considerable increase. From Tangier, thirty miles to the west, and from Tetuan, about twenty-five miles to the south, the roads are difficult and dangerous, and there is little communication. Ceuta is kept in touch with Spain by a boat service which makes the trip to Algeciras and return each day.

There is no aspect of contemporary politics more significant than the remarkable growth and extension of the movement for direct legislation in America. While various phases of the referendum, such as advisory voting, the adoption of constitutions and their amendments and of local charters and laws have been of common use since the colonial period, the unrestricted use of the initiative and referendum whereby the people are given unlimited control of machinery for the enactment of constitutional and statutory law, is a very recent development. Prior to the last decade it was scarcely looked upon as a permanent feature of our governmental system. It smacked of Populism and found its supporters chiefly among certain faddists who sought by this means to secure, at least in a limited degree, the adoption of their political nostrums.

But the problem of the referendum in America is no longer an academic one; for scarcely is there a state in the Union but must seriously consider the incorporation of this principle into its fundamental law. From its beginning in the single state of South Dakota, ten years has seen its spread through ten western commonwealths and the question of its adoption is now pending before the people in as many more states.