Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1828-04-08

the rgl. OF injured parties 10 their action on the /
case; nor did any statute ever give tho sheriff /
authority to require any oath of electors. BY the
Common Law, they have such authority; they
are bound TO act at their peril; and they are,
therefore, under the strongest motives TO DO right
believe, sir, this is the law OF England at this
time.
But, sir, different course in some respects was
pursued in this country at very early day In
1860, the House of Burgesses fined Martin Baker
sheriff oil New Kent county, five hundred pounds
| oil tobacco Tor exercising undue influence in the
election OF Burgcsses for that county, without the
! authority Of any law the subject. 1 do not
know under what authority they acted. 1 am
| unable to determine whether they considered h,
bad conduct as contempt to the Governor, by
whose authority the writ of election was issued or
as a contempt 10 the House itself 1 believe the
House OF Commons seldom, if ever, exercised any
such authority. | know OF such case. Flee
tons there, are held under the Kings writs of
election, and If any sheriff exercise undue nfu-
cnce in any election, il is Ed contempt to the
House, but 70 the King; and the House cannot
properly punish him for such contempt-they can
only correct the return; and the King only
punish MN In the ma nncr prescribed by statute
| 1t was, however, found necessary to legslate on
the subject ia this country; and in 1899 by an act
10 prevent undue elections of Burgesses, an oath
OF the qualifications OF electors might be required
| 6y any ~ the candidates, fceholdeIS, before
/ 6ny uofe should be Poied and non irechoders
Tor voting, were made subject fine of five
hundred pounds of tobacco. But by the act of
| 1856, the law was amended. and the oath might
| only be required By the candidates, or any of
| them, OF their agents. This act has substantially
continued in force TO the present time About the
time OF the Revolution, much OF the law "a at,-
/, thorizcd fine 10 be recovered against non-free-
holders, for voting, was repealed, and does not
! now exist. The law authorizing an oath TO be re-
qured OF electors, persons Offering to vote ne
yer was intended 10 give the sheriffS right to re-
quirc any such oath for their own satisfaction mot
y or he sthin \
them from their Common Law responsibility
he law was made for the benefit of the candi
dates, and was intended to preserve all the votes;
that II, upon scrutiny, before the House 1.-THE Sc.
nate of the House of Delegates now being the
constitutional judges of elections such votes were
found good, they should be counted and not lost:
as was the case before The act of assembly has
been read several times TO the Senate and / will
not now read it again. Ii seems TO me very certain
that no oath authorized by it, unless required by
some candidate, or his agent; and there can be no
candidate on this question TO require it, The act
does not authorize the sheriff to require any oath
because he is presumed to know the qualified elcc
tors, and he has no Common Law authority e.
ther TO require, or administer any such oath.-If
the sherlits do not know all the electors, tiey
must exhibit their title papers, or aif;dayts of the
facts, showing their right to vote; and the sheriff,
~iii receive, or reject their votes, as they NAV
thinS right-they cannot swear them; and if thew
reject good votes, it is at their peril.
Sir, the amendment does certainly contain n
new principle, and one which, L hope, will not be
ADOPTED There Is one section of the bill Q be-
lieve the iiith) which provides that fine shall be
imposed on the sherifts and other officers for re-
lJuStng, or falling to perform any of their duties
prescribed in the BILL and the bill makes il xpress
~ their duty TO take the votes OF all the qualified
voters and negatives their right to take the votes
OF any others L think, then, that the sherifs will
be bound TO take the votes of all the ouoIifiad va
tiers who shall offer vote and to reject the votes
oil all persons not qualified There Will be no
candidates here to bring their actions on the case
put the Commonwealth may recover her fines
and presume nearly the sames rules of evidence
VIII apply upon prosecution Oh the part of the
Commonwealth for a fine, which do apply in ac-
lions on the case in England against shcris for re-
iusing TO poll good votes.
The sherifs, generally, know the opinions of
the electors OF their ouncs, and if the anne nd
nent be adopted, they will have il in their power
uIiaer pretence Of doubts, to require oath from
as many persons as they please, and driv from the
| Poils every scTuPulous man, and every man who
doubts his freehold title. Thus where the sheriffs
| are IN favour OF a Convention, they may prevept
hundreds OF votes from being polled against a Con.
| venton; and where they against the PROPOSE
| non, they may prevent many from beinp poiled
| on the other side. | aln unwilling to place The
| electors oil this country in this situation But |
wish to know why it is that the gentleman from,
| nelson did not pursue the general election law a
| little further: BY that law, if a man refuse IN
| swear, his vote is pood the back of the book:
| put by the gentleman's amendment, If a man re-
| forever vs.
IbeIieYe, sir, if the amendment be adopted. it
Wil not cover, any complete justification to the
sherlffs TO require the oath frora as many person
as they please, and enable them in safety TO exer.
else great influence over the electors But ifit be
rejected, they must act, a, | have before said NJ
their peril, and there will be nothing 10 cover them
they must do right | am convinced that sheriff,
never had any authority, either in England or
III this country, to require any oath of electors.
/ and believe that, such authority in the IRE
sent bill could do good. and might do much
evil.
| The oath which the gentleman's amendment
| requires otthe officers before they commence tax.
ing the polls, also think useless IL IS true some
oil these o!lccrs may not be under oath until after
the polls shall have been takch, but most of them
VIII act under oaths of Office and if one oath will
not bind them 10 do right, two cannot The oath
TO be taken by the officers after examining and COR
rectng the polls, If taken falsely, believe will a.
mount to perjury, although rot declared so i'm the
bill. They will be substantially required TO swear
that no votes remain on the polls but such as
majority OF them concur in believing are lawful
votes, and that none have been stricken from the
polls but such as majority of them concur i'm be-
iieviDg were not lawful votes think their oath of
Office and the responsibility under which they
must act viii be sufficient TO guide them in taking
the polls correctly, and that the oath 10 be taken az
Ter the examination OF the polls will give them COM
pIete authenticity.
1t s true that the shcrihs may reject some good
votes, but the friendso Convention have prepared
The bill in its present shape, and they are salts
ned with it. 1 think the amendment ought to
| be rejected, and the sherifs will then act under
stronger motives to do right than il it were adopt
ed.
debate to be continued
nfff sfoYfrI La IL. r. IL