## 4710

THE ATTO R&Y GENERAL

AUS-ITN 

### 11.

- WI&L W-ON 

### Am- GWIZECAL 

### Octobv z9 lg60

HonorableA. W. Walker County Attorney Dickens County Spur, Texas

,Dear Mr. Walkers: Opin-ion No. WW-952

Re: Voting rights of persons who have resided in the State
more than one year but have-changed their residence from one'county to another less than sti months before the election.

Youhave requested an .opinlon on the following 'question:

Is it legal for a person who has been's residen.tofthe State of'Texas 'for more than 12'monthsbut who has resided in Dickens County for only one month to vote on State and National offices in 'the

General Electlon'inNovember In -the electionprecinct of his residence In Dickens County, Texas?

In the brief accompanying your request you refer to AttorneyGeneral'sOpinion No. o-2666, dated August 31, 1940, and ask in effect whether that opinion is still a correct statementof the law. Citing ArticleVI, Section 2 of the Texas Constitution, Article 2967 of the Revised Civil Statutes, and the case,of Little v. State ex rel. Parsell, 75 Tex. 616,

90 Oii N 0 2bbb 1 th ~v~swfrZ~50~~8coLL.ypt~o~ot~~~%!?ii3~~~~s t~t~asFZZ~~ of the electionmay vo~te In the helection

precinct of his new residencefor all state offices and for all district offices whose districts Include both counties. The reason,foryour questioning

whether this holding is still correct Is explained in the foliowing quotation from-yourbrief:

"My concern in this matter is based'on the fact that Article 5.~15 of the Election Code Is worded differentlyfrom Article 2967 of the Revised Civil Statutes,which was in force in 1940. You will notice that Article 5.15 of the CodeHonorableA. W. Walker,page 2 (WW-952)

provides that the voter must make an oath that he has resided in the countywhere he offers to vote for six months,while Article 2967, which Article 5.15 replaced, provided that the voter must make an oath that he has resided in the districtor county where he of- 'fers to vote for six months. In other words, the words 'district or' were left out of Article 5.15. However,ArticleVI, Section,2 of the Constitution still reads the same old way. Also, see 15-B Tex.Jur. 387-388,Sec. 31, footnote 20. In addition,see said 1940 opinion and AttorneyGeneral'sletter opinions, JULY 11, 1932 (Vol. 336, p. 518), July 1, 1936 (Vol. 372, 382, Pi.

617 ynwO), and August 6, 1938 (Vol.

.
At the outset it should be observed that the only -place at which.a person may vote 3s eatthe place of his resldence at the time of the election. (Throughout this opinion, residencemeans legal residenceor domicile;8s~ distinguished from actual 'place

of abode while absent from one's domicile.) When a person changeshis residencefrom one.countyto-another, he immediatelyloses his right to vote In the county of his former residence,either by absentee~ballotor by. returning to the county to vote~on electionday, even thoughhe.may not be able .to.vote

in the county of.hls new,resldence until he has fulfilled'the

requisitelength of residenceto permit ~h$mto vote,

there.,Art. VI,.

Sec...2,

.Tex..,Cons,t.,;.

Arts. 2.06 and 5.05,.'Election Code; Sartwelle.v~.Bunn;120~~S~W.2d~130 (Tex.Civ.App.

,lg38).

.Thenature of the rlght.of.suffrage~~ (frequently called a privllege~rather than .aright)'@ stat&in the.following -.uotationfrom the..oplnion

InSolon v; &ate, 54 -Tex. ,Cg.ni. &! ; 1, 114 S.W. 349,.

352~(1908),~wj1ic+

&Jso cites~numerous other support$ng~.authorlties: ::. .~ 1,~ '. ,"#&; &&;,;mre isIt& & ;&& ,;tio '~$& ,;&

~:.not. a necessaryor~flxed' In&den% of~,.diti$&shippo .- oti:lnhereht:dm

each and every individual,:,but::~that_ voting is the.

exercise,

of. p.ol.itical-

.power,..arid

hog.
one Is entitled to vote,~unless the people.in their sovereigncapacity,have conferredon hlmthe right to do .so. .Itmay be 1ald;downasa~general propositlon'thatthe rightof suffrage.may.be regulatedand modified or withdrawnby the.:au~thorlty~,whlch,con-.

,. ferre~d It,. *.+ * ,Inthe,:case

:of.State,~v~."Dil~on, .32 Fla. 545i 14~'So:.

383; 22 .!L.R.A.'

~,124,~~,,.~n~,~treatrng

: this general subject, the court ~say: ;:',~'The: wright to! 

## 4711

Honorable A. W. Walker, Page 3 (WW-952)

The extent to which the Federal Constitutioncontrols the right of suffrage is summarizedin the following
rrom Voting and Election.Laws, Fublicatlons.

In E by ConstanceE. Smith 9 uotatlon Oceana C.~, m 11 (see,also; 18 Am. Jur., :Xlectlons,

gg 46, &';-2g C.J.S., Elections,gg 5-8): vote Is not an inherent or absoluteright found among those'generally reserved in bills of rights, but Its possession is dependent upon constitutional

or statutory.grant. Subject to the limitationscontained In the.federalConstitution, the elective franchise is under the control of the sovereign power of the states, expressedin Constitutions or statutesproperly enacted. Where a Constitution has conferred the right and prescribedthe qualifications of electors, it of course is paramountuntil amended, and the'heglslature cannot change or add to~them In any way; 'but,where the. Constitution

does not fix the right of.suffrageor prescribethe qualifications of voters, it is competentfor the Legislature, as the representative

of the lawmaking

power of the state, to do so. These principlesare well recognizedand fully establishedby authorityin this country.'"

. '* * * !Ihe

Constitution

grants to the state legislaturesthe power to prescribe 'the times, places and manner of holding electionsfor senators and representatives,' and also the.

power to~determine the manner of appointing presidential

electors. These two grants of power coupledwith each state's unquestionedauthority to control all elections for state offices endow the stateswith decisive control
over all elections;for, while it is true .thatthe Constitution,reserves to Congress the right to make
or alter regulationsfor congressional or senatorial elections,Congresshas only rarely exercised this power and then only in very limitedways. * * *

"One reads the Constitution In vain for a concrete definitionof who shall have the right to vote; there is only the declaration of the 15th and 19th Amendmentsthat a citizenmay not be denied the right to vote because of race, color, previous condition of servitude,or sex. A section of the 14th Amendment defining citizens as 'allpersons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdictionthereof' is relevant,since citizenship Is inall states a requisitefor suffrage. With the exception of these broad restrictions, full responsibility

for determining

voter qualifications
comes within state jurisdiction;* * *.'HonorableA. W. Walker,page 4 (WW-952)

Subject to the foregoinglimitations, It is thus

seen that in electionsfor federal offices as well as for state offices, the State may,grantor withhold suffrageas it sees fit and may imposewhatevervoter qualifications It chooses.

ArticleVI, Section 2 of the Texas Constitution provides:

"Everyperson subject to none of the foregoing dlsquallficatlons fiontained In Section 1 of Article Vg, who shall have attained the age of twenty-one

years and who shall be a citizen of the United States and who shall have resided in this State one year next precedingan election and the last six months within the district or county in which such person offers to vote, shall

d a qualifiedelector;** *." (Emphasis

Prior to 1951, Article 2955 of the Revised Civil Statutes,which Is now Article 5.02 of the ElectionCode, containedthis identicalprovision. Article 2967,:.R:C.S., ~, which is now Article 5.15 of the ElectionCode,~provlded that a voter who moved to another~ county after receivinghis poll taxreceipt or-exemption certificatecould vote in the precinct .of

his new residence

by making oath "thathe then resides.

in the precinctwhere he.offers.to vote..and.has

resided for the last six months in the district 'or county in which he offers to vote and twelvemonths In the .State." When the Election Code was adopted in 1951;. the words "district or" were dropped from Articles 5.02 and 5.15 of the Code. (In the historicalcommentunder Article 5.02 of Vernon’s Election Code, It is stated that the word "district"

was omitted becaus~e the word district is too indefinite.)

The Constitution

fixes the qualifications of an elector, and the Legislature is powerless to add to or take from these quallfic&.ions. Solon v. State supra. Ko Schneider,110 Tex. 369, 218 S W 479 221'S W ,8b07f&); Texas Power and LightCo. v. Brownwoo: Publil Service Go., 1sw 1 5 (Tex.Civ.App. lg.37 &<&*2~de~&dent School District' $?Gefe j6; 2 f )' WW 2d 08 (1956)

. Accordingly,~the Constitution

&d no; the stai- _. utes‘must.belooked to in determining what residence requirements are Imposed upon voters, sion of the words "district and forthis purpose the omlsor" ~from

Articles 5.02 and 5.15 of the Election Code may be disregarded. Your question, therefore,is to be answeredon the basis, of the 'residence requirementsset out in ArticleVI, Section 2, of the Constitution.

## 4712

Honorable A. W. Walker, Page 5 &W-952)

Voters who have moved from one county to another within less than six months precedin (17 an election must be broken down into two categories: those who have resided for six months within a districtwhich Includes the county of their former residenceand the county of their

new residence (underpresent governmentalorganization, the districtmay be either a congressional, senatorial, representative,judicial, supreme judicial,or State Board of Educationdistrict); ,and (2) those who do not have six months' residence in any one of these various types of dlstricts. (Throughout this opinion it is assumed that the voter has resided in the State for one year and is otherwise qualified to vote.)

Little v. State ex rel. Parsell, 75 Tex. 616, 12 S.W. 965 (1tQC) d fines the voting rights of.persons In the first categ&ye In that case, complainthad been made to~the followingjuryinstructlon:

!By~the language 'who shall have resided In. the State one year ~next preceding an election, and the last six months in the dlstrict,orcounty in which.he offers to vote,' is meant at.any State
or district election a person would be ,qualifled to vote for State or district officers if he possessed
none of the dlsqualif$cations mentioned in paragraph 2'of this charge, and had lived one ~year'in the State next preceding such election,and'.the last six ,months in then district in which he offered to vote; but at an electionheld for the purpose of~locating

a county seat, and to elect county officers only, the test as to residence in order to be.a qualified elector would be one year in the State next preceding such election, and the last six months in the county ,lnwhich he offered to vote."

The Supreme Court held that the instruction was not erroneous, saying:

'We think the court correctly interpreted the language quoted in the charge. It is found fin section 2 of Article 6 of the Constitution.In
our opinion it admits of no other reasonableconstruction. When construedas meaning that a residence for six months in the district should qualify

an elector to vote for district officers,we have
no difficultyin determining which district Is meant; but if we should say that such residence gives a right to vote for county officers,we should be at a loss to know whether It Is the congressional, judicial, senatorial,or legislativedistrict in which the voter was to reside in order to acquire theHonorable A. W. Walker, Page 6 (WW-952)

qualification. If such had been the intention, the kind of districtwould have been named, or there would have been some languagein the provision indicatingsome rule by which the question could be determined. Besides,the construction claimed by appellant that six months' residence in the district r

entit ed the voter to vote for county offices alsg WOUld have rendered the words *or county' superfluous, because every county in the State is, and will in all probabilitycontinue to be, a part of some district. Since the dlstrict Includes the county, it was unnecessaryto have used the word county if it had been intended that a residencein the district should give the, qualification

to vote for county officers."

ArticleVI, Section 2 of the Constitution was also construed in United Statesv. Slater, 6 Fed. 824 (Clr.Ct., D. Tex. 1881).which held that a voter who had resided for six months in a congressional districtbut less than six months in the county could legallyvote for congressman and for all state officers. The Court said:

"Dut if, being a citizen of the United States,
a residenceof one year in the state, and the last six months next before the electionwithin the district, will give him a right to vote in the election precinct in which he resides,for what officers
can he vote? Cur present constitution provides, (article6,.~ 3:) 'Allqualifiedelectors of the state, * *~* who shall have resided for six nionths Immediately

precedingan electionwithin-the limits of any city or corporate~town, shall have the right to vote for mayor and all other electiveofficers.' It is clear that a residencein the district for six months does not give the right to,vote for city or town officers,unless the residence has been In said city or town;'and, by parity of reasoning,such resldence would not give the right to vote for county.officers unless said six-monthsl~residence had been ', within the county; and, by a like parity of reasoning, such residencewould give the privilege of voting for district officers and for state officers,he having the other qualifications
, and having resided the required six months in the district,and the required
one year In the state,next before the election, and duly presentinghimself In the electionprecinct in which he resides. And this rationalconclusion is made irresistlbl~y strongby the previous uniform practice of permittingqualifiedelectors~ of.the State to vote for state and districtoffices,where

### 4713

Honorable A. W. Walker,~page'i' (WW-952)

their residencewas not such as to authorize them to vote,

fork county offices at the time and place of ,thelr

offering to vote."

Later decisionsof our courts have establishedthat voters who have resided In the county for six months may vote in elections.

of political~subdivlslons within the county .whlch'aredenominate.d,:~~as~ "ditricts"

without having six ,months ~I. residence:~ln:.lthe

pollt.ical

~s'ubdlvls,ion:

~': Warren v. Robinson,'

32“:S.W.~2d

871 '(,Tex:Civ'.App.

193O);'Shaw

v. Taylor, '14b S W.2d 452(Tex.Civ.App. 1940); Cranier v. Graham, 2b4 S.W.2h 135 Texc;Civ.App. 19%; error ref 302.S.W.2d627 (1957). Duncan v. Willis, 157 Tex. 31 ; In-&e last-citedcase, which Involved a'

school'dlstrict

election,the Supreme Court clarifiedthe meaning of "district" in ArticleVI,,Sectlon2 of the'Constitutlon, ~8sfollows:-

.~ . ‘

.”

. ‘

_ "Petitioners' .asslgnment

again raised the mooted construction of the word 'district8appearingin ~the-con~stltutional section..

'In Little v..State..~exirel.

Parsell,~:"j'5

Tex. 616, 12 S.W. 965, this~ Court construed the term 'dlstrictl~ :as meaning, a.pol~itidal

subdivis~ion

embracing&e. ormore' counties and'%& 6ne..~referring to subdivisions..of., a"county such
as the school districthere involved~.".:,This.,constructlon ~w~~~.

~&LB~,~ssi?d~~~ln

.Creme,r vt Graham;',Tex:Civ.App. 264 S.W.2d~l35;'136'wherein~it'was stated't@t .~%vhether rightly or wrongly, Courg-,thatthe wordithas,been decided~fiy.,th-e‘Supreme "district"

asused finthe..phrase, disJunctively..withrthe 'word,"county.~

is ..me~anlngless,

' and that the ~authorltles supportthe.rule,that tan .elector

must be a resident of the..State for one year, resident of the county for six months;..,and a resident of the subdivisionof the county fiuch: as a'schoal' districg,whereln he votes at the time'heVotes, but 'notnecessarilyforsix months.' 'Applicationforwrit of error.ivis 'refused~in the Graham case and we regard the constructlon"of.the constltutlonal'phrase as settled. See Cremer.v.Graham, supra, and authorities cited therein. This construction undoubtedlyac-~ counts for the deletionof the words 'district or! from Artlcle~,5.02

of~the Election Code: Under the rule above~,set

forth the courts below were correct In holding that the'fivepersons above ,mentioned were entitled to vote at the election in question.although they may not have resided In the Glenwood School District for a period of six months prior to.the date of the election."

In Duncan v. Willis the Court 'took note of the deletion Of "districtor" from Article 5.02 of the Election Code without expresslypassing on what effect it had ondlstricts.,embracingHonorableA. W. Walker,page 8 (W-952)

one or more counties. The Court'suse of the expression "mootedconstruction" might suggest that it thought the constructionof "district" had become moot by virtue of the deletion,but this evidentlywas not the Intendedmeaning. By discussingthe construction which should be placed on the constitutional provision,the Court recognizedthat the word "district"

continues to have force despite its deletion from the statute.

It is our opinion that, under the foregoingdecisions,
a person who has resided for six months In a defined,district of the State which includesmore than one county, but has resided less than six months in the county of his residenceat the time of the election, may vote for offices of the distrift and for all officeswhich are voted on throughoutthe State, but he may not vote for offices of districts in which he does not have the six,months t residenceor for county and precinct offices.

The second category of voters--those who do not-have six months' residencein a defineddistrict--presents the question of ~whether

by virtue of one.,year's residence In the State they are entitled to vote'for~ statewideoffices, although they may not vote for district,county or precinct offices. Several Attorney General ’s letter opinionsbetween 1930 and -19&C held that they may vote for state offices,while others rendered during the ssme period held that they-cannot vote for any office. ~The only authoritiescited In support of the holding that : they could vote for state offices were Little v. State and United States v. Slater.,There 1s strong argument in favor of the view that this should be the rule, but we are faced with the fact that the Constitution states the residencequalificationscvnjunctlvelyas one year's residence in the State and six months' residence In the district or county. To be a qumfled elector for any~officeor for sny,election, a person.mustfulfill both conditionsof residence. Neither the language of the Constitutionnor the statements made in the cases',construing this provision justify the concluslon,that the six months' residence :; in the districtor,county is waived as a qualification for Voting: in state elections.

1If the~voterhas the six months' residence in the district,he will be entitled to vote 'for statewlde,offlces : regardlessof whether an office of that district is being voted on at the,electlon. :, For example, a person,who has resided In a;state senatorialdistrict for six months may vote for states

offices in a year for,whichno election for State Senator Is held In the district.

### 4714

HonorableA. W. Walker, page 9 (WW-952)

Texas is not alone in denying a voting right to persons who do not meet both state and local residence requirements. In every other State, in addition to residence in the State one must also have resided within a county or an electionprecinct for a required length of time ranging from 30 days to one year, with approximately half of the States requiring 3 months or longer.2 Smith, Voting and Election Laws, supra,pp. 15-19. 7?ollowing

comment: That, author makes the

"Although

no one would recommend abandonment of residencerequirements altogether,It is often contendedby responsiblecritics that
some state regulations are overly stringent. It is estimated,for instance, that over five percent of the Americanvoting population is unable to meet the residencerequirementIn most electionsand the implications of such widespreaddisfranchisement in a democratic society cannot be ignored. One has only to look at the statisticsof populationmovement In the United States, especiallyduring and since the second World War, to know that the problem of disfranchisement of sizable portions of the electoratecan only become more acute unless residencerequirements are reduced to reasonabletime limits."

We are keenly aware of the seeming inequity of denying to citizenswho meet the state residence requirementthe right to vote for statewideofficersbecause they have not resided in some one localitywithin the State for a period of six months. Rut to hold that a person may vote for statewideoffices on the basis of one year's residence'inthe State without regard to the length of residence in the district or county, it would be necessary to Ignore the second residence condition. Howeverharsh or unreasonablethis conditionmay be, the plain .requlrements

of the Constitutioncannot be ignored. Relief 'mustcome through amendmentof the Constitution. It is our opinion, and you are so advised, that a person who does not meet the requirementfor SIX months' residence In the district
or county is not entitled to vote for any office in the general election.

2California

and Wisconsinpermit new residents of the State to vote In presidentialelectionswith less than the normal residence requirements, and Connecticutpermits former residentsto vote by absenteeballot in presidentialelections until they become electors in the State of their new residence.HonorableA. W. Walker,page 10 (WW-952)

Advertingto the categoryof voters who have six months' residencein a districtbut not in the county, we have noted that Article 5.15 of the Election Code omits the words "district or" in making provision for voting by persons who have changed their residencesince obtaining their poll tax receiptsor exemption certificates. This statutenow reads as follows:

"Art. 5.15. Removal to another county 'or

electionprecinct

"If a citizen after receivinghis poll tax receipt or certificate of exemption,removes to another county or to another electionprecinct in the same county,he may vote at an electl.on;general, special, or primary, In the precinct of his new residence in such other county or precinctby presentinghis poll tax receipt or certificate of exemptionor his affidavit of Its loss to the precinct judges of election,and state in such affidavitwhere he paid such poll tax or received such certificate of exemption,and by mating oath that he is the identical

person described In such poll.tax receipt or certificate of exemption,and that he then resides In the precinctwhere he offers to vote and has res1de.d for the last ~slx.(6) months in the county in which he offers to vote and. twelve (12)months in.the State. But no such person shall be permittedto vote in a city of ten thousand (10,000)inhabitants,, or more, unle~ss he has first presented to the tax collectorof his residencea tax receipt or certificate, not less than four (4) days prior to such election orprimary electionor made affidavitwhere he paid such poll tax or recelved'suchcertificate of exemption;and~the collector shall,thereupon add his name to the list of qualifiedvoters of the precinctof his new residence;and unless such voter ha,s

done this and his name appears in the certifiedlist of voters of the precinct of his new,residence, he shall not vote."

The.deletlon

of'referenceto residence, in the distr~lct raises two questions: (1) what form of oath shall the election judge requfre of the voter, and (2)must the. voter who has moved Into e city of lO,OOO.ormore Inhabltants complywith the requirementfor~havinghls~ name placed on the list of qualifiedvoters.

On the first question; it is- our .op,inion.'that

the election judge should require the voter to make the oath

### 4715

HonorableA. W. Walker, page 11 (WW-952)

required in this article, substituting "district" for "countyn. The elections

judge shouldmark out on the voter's ballot all offices for which he Is not entitled to vote, before permitting the voter to mark his ballot and.casthis vote.3 In electionswhere voting machines are used, the clerk attending the machine should lock out the offices for which the voter is not entitled to vote before permitting him to close the curtains 'and

~cast his vote. (Section2 of Articles 7.14, Election Code, requires that the machine "be so constructedthat
a voter cannot vote for a candidateor on a propositionfor whom or on which he is not lawfully entitledto vote.")

On the second question, it is our opinion that the tax collector should add the voter's name to the list of quallfled voters upon the voter's request and upon being satisfied that the voter has resided for six months in some districtof which the county Is a part. 'While the oath which the voter makes at the polllng.place will disclose that he does not have six months' residence In the county, the tax'collector may properlyplace a notation to this effect alongside the voter's
name on the list of qualifiedvoters.

With the deletion of "district", this statute leaves the tsxcollectors in a state of doubt as to their authority to add the names of voters who have not resided in the county for six months. It also leaves the voters In doubt as to whether this statute Is applicableto them. "No such person" refers to any citizenwho has moved to another county or election precinct after receivinghis receipt or certificate, but it could be taken to refer only to such personswho have resided In the county for six months efter the removal. If the voter has attemptedto comply with the requirement but the tax collector

has refused to add his name in the belief that the statute does not authorizethis action,we think it is clear that the election judge should nevertheless allow him to vote upon satisfactory proof of his qualifications as an electorand of the reason why his name does not a the list of qualifiedvoters. Att'y Gen. Op. V-1@3106;2). Election judges have authority to administeroaths for the purpose of obtaining such proof, and It would be advisable

3This procedurenecessarilygives the election judge

an opportunityto see the number on the ballot which the voter receives, contrary to the provision in Article 8.11 of the Election Code that the voter shall be allowed to take his

own bal1o.t

without the number being known to the election JUd43e.However,we are of the opinion that the voter should not be furnishedwith a ballot which would enable him to vote
a full ticket, and he must surrenderthis safeguardto the secrecyof his ballot if he wishes to vote.HonorableA. W. Walker,page 12 (WW-952)

for the election judge to preserve In affidavit form the voter's statementof the reason why his name Is not listed.

Where the voter has made no attempt to have his
name added to the list, the questionbecomesmore difficult, While the failureof the Legislature to define Intelligibly the requirements

imposedupon the voter should not deprive him of his constitutional right to vote, we have come to the conclusionthat personswith less than six months' residence in the county are reasonably put on notice that they must comply with this requirement, and a voter who fails to make applicationto the tax collectorIs not entitled to vote.

In order to be a qualifiedelector of this State, a personmust meet both conditionsof residence set out in ArticleVI, Section 2 of the Constitution;

namely, residenceof one year Snthe State next precedingthe election,and residencethe last six months in the district

or county in which he offers to vote.

A person, otherwisequalifiedto vote, who has resided for six months in a defined district of the State which includesthe county of his .former,residence

and the county of his new residence, but.,has

resided less than six months In the county of his residenceat the time of the election,

may vote for offices of the district and for all officeswhich are voted'on throughout the'state,

but he may not vote for offices of districtsIn which he does not have the .slx months' residenceor for county and precinctofflees. A~personwho does not mee.t the require-, mentfor six months' residencein the.distrlct

or county is not,entitledto vote for any office.

The only place a person may vote is in the .countyof his~residence at the ,time..of

the election. Upon change of residencefrom.one county to another;a person loses his right to vote.in the county of his former res$dence,evan,though he may.~be

unable to vote in the county of his new residence.

Yours very truly,

wILI.WILSOW AttorneyGeneral~ofTexas

### 4716

HbnorableA. W. Walker, page 13 (WW-952)

MKW:bh

APPROVED:

OPINION COMMITTEE W. V. Geppert, Chairman

J. C. Davis, ,Jr. ,.,Rilqy EUgene.Fietcher. Robert H. Walls Iola Barron Wilcox

RETIEWED FOR TH&Al'TORN~ GENERAL BY: Leonard Passmore