The Burlington weekly hawk-eye. [volume] (Burlington [Iowa]) 1860-1876, 1863-05-02

man of Maryland, Kentucky or Missouri.
who can look upon secession as anything
but fraud, an impostor, horror bloody
almost unparalleled? &C Cincinnati Gazette.
The SOLDIER VOTE.-Judge Rorer, in
his speech at the Court House last Thurs
day afternoon, discussed briefly, the con-
stitutionality Of thelaw permitting soldiers
to vote in the field. The following is the
gist Of the argument i'll favor of the law
AS Judge ROrer is one of the oldest law
yers In the State, and ranks high at the bar
for his experience and knowledge Of law,
we deem his remarks worthy of considers
ton, and invite the attention of the reader
to them:
''The right to vote, was inherent, and
existed before there was any constitution.
1t is like untoOne of those rights, which,
IN the language Of Justice Blackstone, are
''posterior to the formation of States and
society,"
This right is acknowledged, not granted
by our state bill of rights, wherein it is de-
clared that 'al political po,cer is inherent IN
thepeopte." 1t is, like our own institutions,
founded on political equality. The people,
having no lords nor masters are equal.
The constitution is not to them grant of
power or privilege; but restricts some of
their powers, and transfers others to the
government.
Then as this great right existed indepen-
dent OF the constitution, and was not con-
which declares who may vote, though af-
hrmative in language, is merely negative
in effect. It gives no new right, but de-
MES the exercise of the SUFFRAGE to those
not therein described.
Though this provision restricts the mum
Der of voters, the constitution nowhere fix
es the place Or places of taking, or the man
a n IN pSo,a4a< fhn
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 q duty; for the
State has right to his vote. In SO doing
coming a soldier. A right dear to free men
and formidable 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
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 existing 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? Ifhe was, then
no harm has been done. Non constdt, but
the voter would have come home and vo-
ted but for this law. On this point refer
to what our misguided opponents would,
under different circumstances, deem very
high authority. The Supreme Court Of
Louisiana, in Andrews as. Saucier, hold in
substance, that the legislature can not, by
encompassing the right to vote, with I'M
| constitutional provisions, make the votes
of electors null and void. That if the votes
| of the citizens are deposited, the intent and
design of the election are accomplished
That the result Of elections should not be
| dependent on some unconstitutional pro-
| vision of the police part Of an election law
That if the voters go forward and vote
under detectige !aw, those who are ca,sdi.
dates ought to be the last to complain when
the result has been effected neither by the
unconstitutionality of the law, nor by
fraud, error, or collision. So, allowing
the law to be unconstitutional, permitting
the soldiers to vote in the field, and in
other States, but which no one really be.
lieves, yet if not voted but by legal voters
it is valid and fair, for the result would have
been the same, if they had voted at home
If any voted who were not qualified, the
objection should be put on that ground, as
! is holden in Griffin Vs. Wall, by the Su.
preme Court of Alabama, another one Of
the rebel States. It is, hoped that these
authorities may prove satisfactory to those
who turn their faces towards the South as
the Musselman does to the east, when they
say their prayers.
In taking the vote abroad, we assert nc
new principle. We take dispositions abroad
which are valid in our courts. In so doing
in either case, we violate no law of the Other
State. Though Of no force there, it is by
our law, of full force here. It satisfies oul
statute and our tribunals.
Secs, los and $40 of his conflict of laws, that
every State will Judge for itself how far il
will adopt, or reject acts done by its own
citizens in another State, or country; and
that so far as rights, duties and acts &C.
Cured, discharged or done, under law Of
one State in another State, the rule is, thai
when they come under the cognizance Of
their own State, for enforcement or protec-
ton, they may be sustained, if in cOnfOrmi.
ty to the law under which they occurred.
| We have commissioners Of emigration, in
other States, acting under our laws, and
paid by our Government-or have had
! Are their acts void? We have commits.
sioners of Iowa in other States, to take and
certify deeds and other instruments of wri.
ting for use in Iowa. Are their acts void
The United States have consuls in foreign
ports. They administer oaths and exercise
certain judicial powers, in matters concern
! ing our citizens abroad. Are their acts
void? As to the vote for members of Con
gress, our State Constitution has nothing tt
do with it. The Constitution Of the United
States expressly allows the Legislatures o
the States to fix the times, places and man
ner of voting for members of the House o
m CGa1l no q