Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1864-07-14
.The soldiers, voting Act.

n"' 'Ae extension OF the
s''''i'e ii"hchise 10 the military absent
'ioi'i 'he s'"'e Is constitutional. The
"a" i'sen '..hich seeks TO give this ex-
'ens'oi' IS unconstitutional, because of
~ II" King the judges of the Supreme |
Wv .ft party TO its own creation. There |
8 no provision in the constitution which |
gives the Supreme Court power to CO.
operate In the enactment of laws. If the
Legislature had referred the Soldiers
Voting Act to the faculty Of Middlebury
college, or, for instance, to the seleetmen
of Montpelier, rendering their action ne
cessary to its validity, this measure
would have been clearly uncoustitution-
ali neither body of men would have
been under any obligation to act in the
case. And much more clearly still is
this the case when the Supreme Court is
thus invested with legislative power;
for it is not only against an express pro-
vision of the constitution, which is, that
the judiciary shall be kept separate and
distinct from the legislative department,
but it infringes the fundamental prin-
ciple of the independence Of the Judicial
ry. No judiciary could be considered in
dependent, in expressing its opinions,
against the action of body of men from
whom it holds its Office by an annual
tenure.
1t is not 10 be supposed that a state
judge will be over careful in tie observ-
ance the provisions OF the federal con-
stitution where q question Of state
rights is concerned yet still, that con-
stitution should be preserved as well as
| our own But state that empowers
their military in the federal service to
vote, openly violates that provision
which prohibits to the states the passage
Of any act impairing the obligation of
contracts. The soldier, on entering the
federal service agrees, or enters into a
! contract with the government, that for
a certain consideration he will serve the
| government against all its enemies or
| oppoSers whatsoever, and obey the Presi-
dent and all officers set over him; and
| by no possible right can q state inter
pose to modify this contract 1t is de-
cIared in Kent's commentaries, vol. l,
page 4l9, that the 'impairing Of the OBJ
legation Of contracts could never depend
upon the eatcnt OF the change which the
law effects in it, Any deviation from
I its terms, by postponing or accelerating
the period of performance which 1t pre-
scribes imposing conditions not pre-
scribed in the contract, or dispensing
with the performance Of those which are
expressed however minute or apparent
| ly immaterial in their effect upon the
contract or upon any part or parcel OF
it, impairs its obligation" 1t is no CON
ditiOn Of the. service in the federal army
that the officer or soldier shall also be q
constable, or clerk, as prescribed by
the act, and shall have time to attend
to elections and other political matters
which, as a general rule, are destructive
of military discipline, and therefore in
| furious to the government.
1t is true, the federal constitution
gives to the states the right to appoint
the officers of the militia corps in the
service Of the general government, but
these officers are military officers, and
not clerks, or constabIes, or other officers
Of elections. Our Soldiers voting act"
not only appoints these officers, but it
renders them substitute for the board
of civil authority consisting of select
men and justices of the peace, which is
prescribed by our own state constitu-
ton to decide upon the legality of votes
The act dispenses with the constitution
al method of preventing fraudulent vot-
ing and substitutes one Of its own!
Again, the federal constitution de-
clares that the qualifications of electors
for presidential electors and congress
men shall be the same as for the most
numerous branche Of the legislature;
but according to the Soldiers Voting
Act, as passed through the Supreme
Court, the military who are not qualified
for voting for members Of the legisla-
ture, are qualified for voting for presi-
dental electors md congressman
This analysis might be continued still
farther; but there is quite enough of it,
one would suppose. When it is reflected
| that there is no necessity for the law,
not even in a political or expediency
point OF view, but that the state would
stand in a much better and sounder re-
publican attitude before the world with
out it, one cannot help regretting that
such law was ever passed, or that the
Supreme Court ever Attempted to save
any of its parts by sort of compromise
in its favor. In one point OF view the
act, as measured by the current notions
of the day. is invidious and unjust, since
it draws distinctions in the fayors which
! ,x,,1r Y,onY, yx-b<, ,.o oil oct,aI