The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1869-02-10
DECISION UNDER THE RRGISTRA
TIOE ACT.
OPINION OF JUDGE N. HARRISON.

OPINION OF JUDGE N. HARRISON.
At special term of the Circuit Court
of Greenbrier county. held and conttn-
ued at the Court House thereof, on
Thursday, January 10th, 1869.
In the matter OF the petition of Alex.
auder Walker asking for a rule against
the Board Of Registration of Green
brier county, to show cause why
maudamus should not be awarded to
compel them.to reinstate him as regis
tered voter.
Upon an inspection OF the petition
and exhibits filed Herewith, and after
hearing the argument Of counsel, the
Court is of opinion that the Board Of
Registration is not an inferior tribunal
within the meaning of Section 6, Arti-
Gle OF the Constitution of West Vir-
cinia, which declares that "the Circuit
Court shall have the supervision and
control of all proceedings, before JUS
tees and other inferior tribunals, by
mandamus, prohibition or certiorari;
that the functions and proceedings of
such Boards are not Analogous to those
ofiustice and the other inferior tribunals
which were contemplated and intended
by the Constitution n the clause afore-
said, and that the effect of such a con-
struction would be practically to con-
vert the Circuit Courts throughout the
State into a tribunal for the trial and
determination OF the rights of voters
instead OF "the Board of Registration of
each county," as prescribed by the I'D
section of the act OF February 25th, 1867
The Court is further of opinion that
oven II the Board OF Repatriation were
otherwise an "inferior tribunal
within the meaning ofthe 9th section OF
the 9th article OF the Constitution, yet,
under the Sth section OF article Sd OF the
Constitution, Except in cases where the
Constitution itself has provided other
wise) the Legislature is fully authoriZ-
ed to "prescribe by general laws the
terms of Office, powers. duties and COM
pensation Of all public officers and
agents, and the manner In which they
shall be elected, appointed and remOV-
ed" and that the registration acts of
1867 and 1868, which give to the Board
OF Registration of each county thesRole
Jurisdiction ITO try and determine the
right OF any person to vote therein" is
one of the Constitutional and legitimate
modes by which such officers und
agents shall be elected.
The Court Is further of opinion that
even If 1t had Jurisdiction OF this
petition, that the petitioner, by
his own showing, was properly
stricken from the list of registered
voter of this county, because he admits
that he was duly notified by the Beard
OF Registration to appear before them
and prove his loyalty, which he says he
declined to do, because he had previ-
ously taken the Test Oath, and had
been registered as a voter, pursuant
thereto, and 1t was therefore for the
Board of Registration to disproVe his
loyalty, instead of requiring him to
prove If. This is not the law. The Court
is of opinion that, under sections IL and
13 of the Act of February 25th, 1867,
and as amended and e.enacted by the
acts OF July 22d, 1868, and March 18th,
1SGS, the Board of Registration is fully
authorized, upon proper notice, to sum-
mon any registered voter they may
deem disqualified, to appear and prove
his qualification, and. upon his failure
TO appear, or, IT so appearing, he shall
tail to produce satisfactory evidence to
the Board OF Registration that he is
qualified voter, (o( 1Dhtch the Board
alone arc the proper judges, 1t is not
only the right, but the duty of the
name from the Register. The language
of the law leaves them no discretion.
1t says: "The Board lin such case) shall
strike his name from the Register of
vctars." The act of March 4th, 1865.
section 9Th, authorizes q special meet
Ing of the Board whenever a majority
of the Board shall deem II necessary.
The object Of the Legislature was to
meet the very case of the petitioner, and
to prevent or at least correct any abuse
of the law by the registration OF parties
who were never entitled to be register
ed, but who had managed in some way,
either by falsely taking the Test Oath,
or otherwise, to evade the law. 1t was
known to the Legislature that many
evasions and abuses OF this description
had been committed by parties who
had participated in the rebellion to such
an extent as to preclude them from pro-
perly taking the Test Oath; and it was
because they did take IL, notwithstand-
| ing, and because registrars were often
In doubt as 10 the legal effect of such
an oath, that the law was passed. The
Court does not meanp by these remarks,
to question either the loyalty or veraci-
~ OF the petitioner, who is highly re.
spe stable member of this bar; but in
tho opinion of this Court, however loyal
| or respectable, he was as much bound,
when properly called upon by the
Board, TO appear before them and prove
his loyalty as any rebel in the county
who had falsely taken the Test Oath
with view to being registered. The
Court is further of opinion that the
Board OF Registration did not err in re-
fusing to permit the petitioner to appear
by counsel. That Board Is not Court,
before which an Attorney, as such has u
fright to appear and practice. The
statute makes no provision for such ap-
pearance, and II, in the exercise of their
exclusive jurisdiction in such matters,
the Board OF Registration think proper
to act without the aid OF Counsel, they
have not only right to do so, but, in
the opinion of the Court, no good would
result to the community from con-
trary practice. The Court is further Of
opinion, that the Board of Registration
did not err-i n refusing, to sign the Bill
of Exceptions In the petitions mention
ed. Isl. because the Board Is not a
Court before which Bill.of Exceptions
can be properly rendered. I'd. Because,
hit were, having sole jurisdiction OF
the matter, any bills of exceptions to
its rulings, would be not only super
fluous, but absurd.
The Court Is further OF opinion that
the Board did not err in refusing TO give
to the petitioner copy OF charges and
specifications, as demanded by him.
The Board OF Registration is neither a
Common Law Criminal Court, which
requires a formal Indictment, nor Is it
a Court Martial, requiring charges and
| specifications to be preferred, before
a voter can be stricken from the
| Register, All the Law requires, Is
''that notice shall be given him Gas was
done in this CASEY at least three days
previous to the next regular session Cor
special meeting) of the Board, to ap-
pear at such session with satisfactory
| in default thereof, he shall be stricken
off; and being once so removed from
the list Of voters, che shall not after
wards be registered, except upon appli-
cation to the Board of Registration, as
| provided in the Act. (See section IL,
act OF July 22d, 1861 The Court Is of
opinion that the registration laws OF
West Virginia, however stringent, are
In strict conformity to the Constitution,