The Baltimore County union. [volume] (Towsontown, Md.) 1865-1909, 1866-07-28
Gov. Bradford Approves the Regis
try Law---Regards it's Justice
TndianI1tahla.

National ana State atlarS at FREDERICK, on wed
nesday the 18th instant, has been published en-
tire. The Governor approves the policy of Pres
ident Johnson, and condemns the reconstruction
plan of Congress, mainly on the ground that it
gives white man in Pennsylvania just as much
elective power as a white man in South CARROLL
ma. How it is possible for man of Governor
Bradford's sense of justice and right to claim for
the people of the Southern States representa-
ton for the freedmen in Congress- thus giving
the disloyal whites of those States three times
the elective power of a loyal white man, or a re-
turned soldier in the North, we cannot conceive,
and his arguments fail to convince US on the sub
iect. This representation of the slave in Con-
gress was, like Slavery, one of the evils of the
past, and its adjustment should be regarded as
the righteous result of the war. To reconstruct
the Union on such basis of representation is
virtually giving to the soldiers of General Lees
army reward for their treason, and furnishing
those of General Grant for their sacrifices and
sufferings in the cause Of the Union. By the
continuance of the old basis of representation
the keepers of the prison pens at Belle Isle and
Andersonville, will have three votes, whilst those
of their victims who survived their horrid bar
barities are to have but one. In this matter of
reconstruction let justice be done, and the white
men of all sections of the Union placed upon an
equality, giving to the one no advantages over
the other.
The Governor evidently does not agree with
Mr.. Blair and his &c Conservative friends - in re-
lation to the Registry law of Maryland He
q cannot understand how any one can dispute
{" the justice of the principles of that law
But we give his remarks on this subject entire
l should here conclude what have to say
for feel that must have taxed already your pa
thence, as ! have nearly exhausted my own
strength-were it not that there is one subject
the omission of which would certainly lead to
the conclusion with some that / had purposely
avoided alluson to it. l allude of course, to the
Registry law, the repeal which the radical press
is constantly striving to show is a fundamental
principle of the conservative platform. 1t has
always seemed to me that well those who
favor as those that oppose the repeal of that law
place entirely too much stress upon the effect of
such repeal. So far as the most material ques-
ton connected with the subject-the disqualified
ton of disloyal voters-is concerned, it must
readily occur to every one, on slight reflection,
that as these disqualification are a part of the
Constitution of the State and are not for the first
time prescribed in the Registry law, the repeal
of that law would not remove these Disqualified
tons, nor, as it seems to me, have any other ma
terial effect than to transfer all questions touch
ing them from the Officers of Registration to the
Judges of Elections.
am aware that loud complaints in many
parts of the State have been made against the
law but l am inclined to think that when you
examine them they will be found to consist rather
in objections to the manner in which in some
places it has been administered than to the law
itself or the provisions of the Constitution it
intended to enforce. Indeed, | cannot under
stand how any one who claims to be loyal in the
most liberal acceptation of the term can reason
ably object to these provisions. 1t must be re-
membered that they are in the Constitution of
State that never pretended to secede, that never
wavered in her allegiance to the General Gov
ernmenH and the general principle that they
avow is that no man who left the State and took
up arms against the Government, and of course
against this State, or who aided abetted and en-
couraged others thus in arms is entitled to the
elective franchise. That any man with any pre-
tentlons to loyalty can dispute the justice of such
principle or the necessity for its adoption at
such time, is, as repeat, proposition | can
hardly understand.
there may be an honest difference of opinion as to
the duration of such dsqualifcatons. The act
ofl777, by which the persons known during the
Revolution as non-jurors were disqualified as vo-
tiers, continued upon the statute book until 1885,
three years after the conclusion of the war; when
it was repealed. Speaking only for myself as to
the proper time for continuing the Disqualified
tons provided in the Constitution of 1864, |
should feel very much disposed to regulate our
aok., k1oA- h., AZ
of the individual who seeks restoration of his
electoral rights. With some exceptions, we
might probably safely pass an act by the required
constitutional vote, which should invest the Gov
ernor with power to remit the disfranchisement
whenever the individual filed in the Executive
Department petition for the restoration of his
franchise, stating his readiness to renew his oath
of allegiance, to observe it faithfully hereafter
and to conduct himself in future as a good and
faithful citizen.
As regards the provisions of the Registry law,
it is probably like many other acts of Assembly
upon new subjects, and may be chargeable with
defects which were hardly foreseen, until we act
ed under it, and are then so manifest, that those
who made the law, if they had their work to do
over, would probably themselves apply the re-
quired correction.
One defect of that kind, as it seems to me, is
the want of some such supervisory power as would
secure greater uniformity of action on the part
OF those entrusted with its execution. 1t is very
manifest to me, from facts that have come to my
nowledge-indeed, under the circumstances it
could hardly be otherwise-that the law has
been very differently interpreted in different parts
of the State; this might be remedied either by
an appellate tribunal in every Congressional dis
trict, or by single tribunal ofthat kind, COM
posed of member from each of such districts.
In regard to the kind of construction the act
should receive, can neither agree with those
who claim for it a LIBERAL nor those who demand
a strict construction of its provisions; both Sug-
gestions seem to me to imply something more or
less than just, 1t should receive, in my opinion,
a fair, just and legsl construction, and from Ca
ses reported to me am satisfied it has at times
received a construction that the law would not
warrant. One instance may be given Relying
upon that clause of the Constitution which de-
clares that the oath taken by the applicant for
registration shall not be conclusive, of his right
to vote, the Officers of Registration, as am ip-
formed, have in many cases refused to register
him, although after questioning him at length
under oath, they have failed to elicit any admis-
sion Of diSoyal or disqualifypg act, and al
though no witness has testified to that effect.
Such course is not authorized by any proper
construction of the law, in my opinion, for though
by its terms the oath of such applicant is not
ctuSa0e, IL IS oy every principle OF legal consruc-
ton presurnptiUe evidence in his favor, and sufs
fcient until his disquallfc ation Is established by
some other testimony. This is not only the legal
rule, but it is the manifest intent of the act for
in speaking of the duty of the Registers, it de-
clares that in the cases of disqualified voters, in
stead of entering their names in the column of
qualified voters, they to insert in lieu there
of the names of one or more witnesses by whom
the disqualification was proven" thus clearly
showing that the law itself contemplated in all
such cases the presence Of competent witness.
These are my views very frankly given upon
this law, not that they are worth more than the
v;ouc IF onv ofhar cif;xor Int o tbo Low, I'd ;to