The daily Evansville journal. (Evansville, Ind.) 1862-1863, 1863-08-03
Ought Soldiers to Vote /?

Ought Soldiers to Vote?
JUDGE DAVID RoRER, of Burlington
Iowa, true and loyal Democrat, re-
nouncing all party associations during
the rebellion, and in favor of using all
means for its suppression, gives his opin
ion upon the right of allowing soldiers
to vote We commend his views to those
butternut lawyers who go about the coun-
try communicating the people, preaching
constitutional law and opposition to
allowing soldiers to vote:
Judge Rorer, in his speech at the Court
House last Thursday afternoon, discuss
ed briefly, the constitutionality of the
law permitting soldiers to vote in the
field. The following is the gist of the
argument in favor of the law AS Judge
Rorer is one of the oldest lawyers in the
State, and ranks high at the bar for his
experience and knowledge of law, we
deem his remarks worthy of considera-
ton, and invite the attention of the
reader to them:
The right to vote was inherent, and
existed before there was any constitu-
ton.
1t is like unto one of those rights,
which, in the language OF Justice Black
stone, are posterior to the formation of
States and society"
This right is acknowledged, not grant
ed by our state bill of rights, wherein it
is declared that "aU political poUer is
inherent in the people" 1t is, like our
own institutions, founded OH political
equality. The people, having no lords
nor masters are equal ~ ...,,...- ;. :.
of power or privilege; but restricts some
| of their powers, and transfers others TO
the government.
Then as this great right existed inde-
pendent of the constitution, and was not
conferred by it, that part of the constitu-
ton which declares who may vote,
though affirmative in language, is mere
ly negative in effect 1t gives no new
/ right, but denies the exercise of the suf-
ferage to those not therein described.
Though this provision restricts the
number of voters, the constitution no.
where fixes the place or places Of taking
or the manner Of taking or giring the
votes, except that it shall be by ballot.
All else is left to the General Assembly.
Then as there is no restriction as to the
place in which the citizen shall be when
| he delivers his ballot, it follows that the
law which allows him to do so in another
State, is constitutional In so doing he
performs duty; for the State has a
right to his vote. In so doing he exer-
cises right not parted with on becom-
ing soldier. A right dear to free men
and " formidable u only to "tyrants
and traitors.
The Legislature may allow that right
to be exercised in person only, and only
at the local polls; or they may allow it
to be done by proxy instead of in person.
And SO, may they allow the polls to be
taken to the voter instead of requiring
him to come to the polls. This, too, in
another State, as well as at home This
law confers no new right. 1t merely
provides for the better exercise of an ex-
listing one Therefore it follows that the
vote is valid, if the voter was otherwise
qualified elector, whether the power to
pass the law, existed in the Legislature
or not The main point is, was the
voter legally qualified? If he was, then
no harm has been done. Non constat,
but the voter would have come home and
1,1 would, III under y different GeIrtdmsrahces,
deem very high authority. The Supreme
Court of Louisiana, in Andrews rs. Sau
cier, held in substance, that the Legisla
ture can not, by encompasslng the rign
, IN vote, with unconstitutional provisions
E make the votes of electors null and VOID
a That if the votes Of the citizens are de
nosited. the intent and design of tn
h election are accomplished. That the re
9 sult of elections should not be dependen
o on some unconstitutional provision
:. the police part of an election law. Ths
a if the voters go forward and vote unde
A q defectipe lar, those Who are candidate
d ouokt to be the last to complain when IL
o. result has been effected neither by tt
% nnconstitutionality of the law, nor /
* fraud. error, or collusion. So, allowlr
it. the law to be unconstitutional perm
to ting the soldiers to vote in the held, al
in Other States, but which no one real
II believes. vet if not voted but by leg
or voters, it is valid and fair, for the resi-
he would have been the same if they b
-as voted at home. If any voted who we
er. not qualified, the objection should be +
: on that ground, as is holden in Grit
nd Us. Wall, by the Supreme Court OF A
vas hama, another one of the rebel Stat
of Of It is hoped that these authorities m
N nrove satisfactory to those who turn tn
sh. faces towards the South as the Muss
ex- man does to the east, when they say tn
low prayers. 90.
lue, In taking the Not1 "oi1au' ',;t;
L