Raftsman's journal. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1854-1948, 1869-07-28

qiry and investigation they shall find them
to be unqualified; but, in the absence Of
the person, they can only do this on the tes-
timony of at least two reputable citizens,
who are private houehoiders.
The argument is that the | W is uncon-
stitutional because the carvassers might a.
buse their powers They are not permitted
to strike off the name of any unvualiied vo-
ter, and if they do he has his remedy at law
to compel them to return his name. The
canvassers are legal tribunal established
to decide on evidence of qualification, are
sworn officers, and are required to proceed
in due and proper mode. But law can
be pronounced unconstitutional only when
the law itself subverts the true ,lctor
rights, and not because the tribunal acting
under it may make mistakes or abuse func-
tions. All tribunals of every kind could be
set aside upon such an argument. The
language of Chief Justice Marslrall may be
again referred to on this point.
Another ground much urged is that the
proper time for the proof Of the qualifca-
tions of electors is the day of election, for
then only it is said, the period of residence
is complete, and from the nature of the
facts this cannot fe shown before. Grant
the very law before us By this law it is on
that day, the election day, the election board
sits to receive. the vote and the proof then
the elector appears before them and proves
his franchise; then the evidence is produced
and the decision made upon it. But what
clause in the Constitution forbids the means
to be provided beforehand which furnishes
evidence of the fact? What clause forbids
the making up of record ten days before
that shows that the person offering his vote
to the board was an actual resident in the
precinct ten days before, and was then set
down as entitled to claim his privilege on
the day of election? Why is such a record
not good evidence that his residence actual y
began in the district or pre- existed there
ten days before the election? 1t certainly
does not diminish the true electors right,
but, on the contrary, tends to secure it. 1t
is better than the testimony of some ir-res-
ponsible and base periurer. Brought to prove
false residence at some low boarding house
The record has the merit of truthfulness,
and il relieves the true and honest eec;or OF
those unfounded and malicious objections
to his vote made by partisans of either side.
Here is the legal proof that his residence in
the district began in the due constitutional
time. What better proof can there well be
of residence complete on the day Of cleo
ton than the personal appearance of the
elector on that day, claiming his vote, with
his balol in one hand and the register in
the other? l. is good evidence, for the le-
gal presumption of re e-idence arising from
such proof is, violent.
But it is unnecessary to discuss this sub
ject at greater length. The want of time
to condense the argument has made this
opinion already too long. Enough has been
said to show that free and equal elections are
the true end to be secured, and that the sys-
ten of laws regulating the elections is only
the means of securing the end that this
system Of regulation is the subject of legis-
lation over which the Legislature exercises
sound discretion; that no clause in the
constitution requires uniformity or regula-
ton, or prohibits legislation according to
the obstacles which different localities pre-
sent to prevent free and equal election !;
and that it is mistake TO substitute uni
forrnity of regulation fer the free and equal
election which it is the object of the regua-
ton to secure. We have been also shown
that none OF the features of this law sub
verts the rights of the true elector. of this
city, and that is the only test of the consti
tutionality of ady provision contained in the
law
1t IS true there is kind of liberty this
Registry Law will destroy. 1t is that IL
centiousness, that adulterous freedom which
surrenders the polls to hirelings and vaga-
bonds. outcasts from home and honest in
dustry; men without citizenship or stake in
the government; men who will commit pur-
jury, violence, and murder itself. To pre-
vent this Is the purpose of the law, aud it
should have the aid of fair men of all parties
20 give it Il fair trial, and secure its true end.
1t may have defects-doubtless it has; and
what system devised by the wit OF man has
not? But its defects, if any, should be
remedied as they are disclosed by expert
ence The law is not unconstitutional. 1t
is part of the political system of the State,
on y hich its offices and its very continuance
depend; and We, as Court, have no right
to put hands upon the whole system on the
grounds of mere hardship, and for defects
of regulation which are not clear or palpable
violations of the letter or very spirit of the
Constitution.
The decree of the Court of Niisii Priins is
reversed, and the special injunction di. solved,
and the case remanded for further pro
proceedings.
Thompson, G. j.. and Sharswood, J.,
dissent.
savera, little girls at Lowell saved up