Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1847-06-15
To Tie Edifors 81 The Enquun:

KING 4 QUEEN Co June 8. 1877.
hlessrs Editors: Can an lndipidaM rAo IS deat
and dumb ene,etss the right Of subrage?
Al The last spring election in the county oi
King & Queen, this question was settled in thr
negative by The commissioners holding the elrc-
ton al The Court House As one Of the voters ci
this county, believe this decision 10 be wrong
| therefore ask place in your paper Tor this
article, and hope that, il you think lhr question
asked worth deciding, you will invite communi-
cations from the pens ol those able 10 determine
il. do not believe il was the design of the re-
modeers Of The Constitution 10 throw another
disa ability on that unfortunate portion oil our COM
munily who already labor under SO many nalu-
raj ones. do not believe that that individual
who has properly 10 be taxed, individual rights
10 protect and common sense sufficient 10 trade
and traffic with the rest Of mankind, ever was
meant 10 be excluded from The right OF represen-
,alion by The Constitution OF Virginia. know
there are some who shave The Constitution 50
close in their construction OF il, that will be
amazed al The stupidity Of any one who will pre-
tend 10 say that a mute can vote, when The Con.
stituiion says that 1.-THE votes shall be given open
", viua poce, and not by ballot" With all de-
ference, however, TO The opinions OF others, con-
tend that il is neither against the spirit nor the lei
ter Of The Constitution. II we look TO The Con-
slilulion of l776 10 see what rights mules exer-
cised under it, we find il as silent az mate on
this subject But in the Bill OF Rights we find il
declared, "ihat all men having sufficient evi.
dence Of permanent common interest in AMI
attachment to the community, hare The 'igh
Of suffrage" Now, under this declaration, none
| presume will question the right of The
mute 10 vote who lad property, who had his re-
sidence and his kindred around him, Ill 10 prove
his interest in, and attachment, to, the community
in which he offered TO vote. Then il is clear 10
my mind, as mules were not prohibited from
voting by The Constitution Of l776 that under the
broad declaration before noticed in the Bill of
Rights, they must have had that right. The
question then arises, has the Constitution Of
1880 taken from the mutes this privileges l
think nol-frst, because | believe that if the
amenders OF the Constitution had intended il,
they would have done so in express terms; but
so far from expressing such an intent, they have
negatived The presumption; for by reference 10 the
I4th Section OF the Sd Article of the Constitu-
lion OF 1880, we find this woviso "That the
right OF suffrage shall not be exercised by any
person OF unsonnd mind or who shall be pau
per, or who shall be non.commissioned officer,
soldier seaman or marine, in the service OF The
United States, or by any person convicted Of any
infamous offence" These then were the persons
prohibited from volng and as mules are rot class
ed with these, submit that This omission repell
the inference that they were TO be excluded.
think all must be satisfied that this right OF sui
frage was not taken from the muIes, il at all by
any express term or terms 10 be found in the
Constitution of $780, and that il was matter Of
inference in The King and Queen commissioners,
| feel certain; for the grounds upon which they
rejected The mue's vote were these: "You cannot
vote, Mr.. c.. because your God has mol enabled
You 10 speak to us your choce-Yol cannot
vote, Sir, because the Constitution forbids your
voting by ballot both Of which are good and con.
slitutional objections" But contend that Mr.. C..
might have voted, though not pira voce. or by bal
| ot but by voting "openly," term used separate
| y, and in an independent sense by the Consli,u.
| tion as | consider. The votes, says The Consl.
tuition, 18th Section, Sd Article, "shal be given
openly, or riva roS, and not by ballot" leaving il
to the option of the voter whether he would vote,
in a manner open, so that all who chose could
know how he voted-for instance, pira roce, or by
carrying the person voted for to The sheriff, and
there, by manner Of his own, make himself IN
derstood to the sheriff, the commissioners and The
bystanders; or 10 lose the privilege of voting be-
cause he preferred TO vote by ballot.
think il Unfair that the word "openly" should
be so construed as to mean pipa roce, and rtrd
roee only, when The object of the Constitution
seems 10 be, 10 discard voting by ballot, and TO
erect in its stead an open, public and undisgnsed
manner of voting. Some may think il impossible
for muies 10 make themselves understood; but
think this will be the last objection raised, GER
tainly by those who have an acquaintance among
this unfortunate class OF people.
Among other reasons, desire TO know whether