Bedford inquirer. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1857-1884, 1866-08-10


board, notwithstanding il is the only tribu-
nal established to determine in the first in
stance who are qualified voters
La discussing this question, there is clear
distinction between the positive pains and
penalties inflicted upon the deserter, AMI
the negative penalty of his status or condi-
ton in society. Each flows from the opera
ton Of thislaW but for the infiicti0n of the
former, as pnnssIt8teas, trial and conviction
are essential; while the law itself having
declared the latter, no active peralty being
provided, the law has provided no further
steps, the punishment consisting IN the SIM
pie condition OF the deserter. Should he
never be pursued for positive punishment,
his condition Of voluntary disfraDchlsement
still remains as his status under the law. A
full pardon is necessary to restore him.
The inquiry which an election board makes
into the right of suffrage is not for the pur-
pose of punishment, but simply to determ-
Inc the existence of a privilege The appli-.
cant offers his vote, and must establish his
right to it. Citizenship is the first subject
Of inquiry under the election law, and must
be ascertained before the vote can be depOs-
tied. The provisions of the general election
law of 1889 are plain Every person
claiming right to vote at any election as
aforesaid, shall, If required by either of the
inspectors, make proof, then follows FIVE
condition of chip of which the proof
is to be made, viz, by birth, by settlement
before the 2Sth Of September, I776, by the
oath Of allegiance of foreigner prior TO the
26th Of March, $780, by citizenship in one
of the United States, admitted and recogni-
zed therein, and finally by naturalization.
The law then defines the proof TO be made
In certain cases.
Thus it is clear that the voter must estab-
lish his citizenship, and that the election
board are the triers of the fact. Under the
constitution the following facts must be
proved by the voter to establish his right.
|. That he is a white man. 2 That he is a
frecmen. 3. That be is citizen. T. That he
is of lawful age. ). That he has the requi
site State and district residence. 6. That be
has paid the requisite tax. The first fact,
color, is ordinarily determined by inspection
a legal mode of proof. But IT inspection
fail to establish his white blood, will any
one say he cannot prove his white parentage
or that qualified elector cannot rebut, by
proof of black parentage, by permission of
the board2 As to the second qualification.
freedom being the common condition Of the
people. he is presumed to be freeman, but
nnauestionablv this fact may be refutted
As to the third, citizenship, We have seen
that it is not presumed. but by the express
terms of the law it is TO be proved if requir
ed by either inspector. Take the case of
one party in the State and a voter for years
but who has voluntary reinqulshed his
citizenship here by removal 80 another State
OF. TO a foreign country, say Great Britain,
and has been there natuTallzed by act OF
Parliament, viii any one deny the right to
show this loss Of citizenship here. or the
power Of the election board to determine
the faet2 The disfIanchisement in such ease
is caused BY the voluntary act of the citizen
and the act is that Of removal and acquiring
citizenship elsewhere. As proyable and
triable fact IN what respect does it 9sder
from a failure 20 report to the draft. That
he was drafted, was registered deseTter,
and failed to report under the proclamation
are facts simply, and just as capable of proof
a. removal to Great Britain and natuFaliza-
ton there. Loss of citizenship Is simply
the legal consequence in either case,
whether by desertion or removal
Then for what purpose are these facts
proved before the board? For the purpose
of punishment OF the inhiction of penalty?
No-not for these-but simply Is facts on
which the question of citizenship rests-a
question which they must determine before
Z
for admitting illegal votes as well as for ex-
Guiding those that are legal How is it
possible to assert that an election board is
incompetent to perform the very thing the
law enjoins them to do. Theargument that
trial and conviction are necessary to. estab-
lish the fact OF desertion as a preliminary to
disfranchisement, is founded in the idea of
inflicting punishment which IS incorrect,
as have shown and in the impression that
there is some constitutional impediment to
ascertain the disfranchisement in any other
mode But how is the deserter to be tried2
Not by jury, or indeed by any civil tFibu-
nal. 1t is a military offence, unknown to
the common law, except so far as that law
recognizes It's military character and juris-
dietion How then, independently of the
law which declares H., Is disfranehisenlent
70 be established Not by court martial,
for its proper province is to inhlet the
military penalties provided, but not to de-
clare mere loss Of a disconnected right.
a trid by court martial is trial for an of
fence, and the Judgment of the court only
declares the punishment to be inflicted By
military law. But what power does military
law confer over political rights2 Civil rights
such as those OF liberty and property, may
be involved in the consequences of punish
ment But where is the power conferred
by military law to declare the loss of citizen
ship, or suffrage, or the capacity to hold
civil offices? The right of citizenship is SIM
ply political, mere condition or status of
the Individual Il is not sufficient to tell
US that conviction of desertion is necessary
before the political status can be known.
It is not denied that it is necessary before the
punishment can be inflicted, bat those who
assert the conviction to be necessary TO
exhibit the state or condition Of the deserter
politically, must go further and show that
the disfranchisement depends on the conyic-
ton, and that this conviction Is the only
legal evidence of the political status of the
deserter. But where is this to be found in
the law itself or in any military code, tostry
the fact of disfranchisement2 1t is Just
here their argument fails, for while they
prove conviction to be necessary to punish
ment, they do not show that il is essential
to the POLITICAL status or that there is any
known power in a military court 70 pass
sentence of disfTanchiselaent, nor do they
show that there is any lack of power in Con-
gress to declare loss of q political status
without such trial. A civil St1tHs is not a
right falling within the constitutional guards
over life, liberty and property, The right
to be Juror viewer a legislator, a uaagis-
tfate or other civil parsonage rests upon no
constitutional grant, and is guarded BY no
constitutional inhibition bat the qualification
and the disqualification, whatever they may
be, are simply declared By the constitution
on the law. All those clauses of the oonstl-
tuition such as secure the right of trial BY