Clearfield Republican. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1851-1937, 1875-11-03
OPINION OF THE COURT

ing.
OPINION OF THE COURT;
twenty-five votes, cast by student,
of Lincoln University, are challenged
on the ground of non-residencc of th,
voters" Are these challenges, or any
of them, well taken?
What constitutes residence is {
question of law; whether it exists in
particular case, is one Of fact.
Residence" is tho settled place o
abode-where one dwells without defn
itepurpose Of removal. Sometimes It'll
defined as the permanent place ofabodc
But this is not accurate; for, while Q
certain degree of permanency is essen
tial, absolute pcrmanency is not re
quired. A majority of men are moi
permanently fixed in their present
places of abode. For the purposes OF
this case, residence may be defined, as
just stated-the settled place of abode
We say for the purposes OF the case,
because this definition is subject to sew.
eral limitations-oi no Importance,
however, here. Temporary absence,
for travel, the performance of labor,
obtaining an education, or other pur-
pose, will not affect residence.
Then, were the individuals here chal-
lenged residents of the district? Or.
dinarily student who goes abroad to
an institution of learning, is not resi-
dent therein the legal sense of this
term. His presence is temporary
His residence remains with his parents,
or others with whom he lived. Or.
dinarily, We repeat, this is so, and the
presumption is, in the absence of coun-
tervailing proof that it is always so.
and the presumption is, in the absence
of countervailng proof that it is al.
ways so. And therefore in Fry's Ar
peal, 2lst, p. f. Smith, it was held that
the students at Muchlenberg College
were not entitled TO vote in the dis
trict in which it is located. But
student may, nevertheless, change his
residence to the place where his studies
are pursued. And he does so when he
gives up and abandons his former resi-.
dencc. But his absence at school is no
evidence Of such abandonment. lie
must prove it otherwise. See Cooley's
Constitutional Limitations, p GOO, Lin.
coin vs.. Hapgood II Mass. r $50, and
Putnam VS.. johnson, 10 Mass. r. 4sS,
But Sec 18th, article 9Th, of the re-
Gently adopted Constitution, of Penn
sylvania, provides as follows: "For
The purpose OF voting no person shall
be deemed TO have gained a residence
by reason of his presence, y
while a student Of any institution OF
earning"
What does this mean ? Taken lii.
orally it creates o distinction bet ween
residence generally, and residence as
qualification for voting. Notwith-
standing a student may change his
as we have before seen,
while" attending an institution of
earning, this section, in terms, pro
1ides that, for tho purpose of voting,
10 shall not be "decmcdp TO have done
o.
The Court then discussed at consid.
rable length the meaning of the Sec
ion quoted from the Constitution and
lso the evidence in the case. Judge
,utlcr said:
III must DO borne IN mind, that what
70 say and do here, is predicted of the
vidcnce before us; and that it settles
o more than the questions involved in
he election now contested. II may
o that these minors were all cmanci-
ated by their parents---tulned out
pom the world toprovidc and care for
hcmselvcs But this fact cannot be
'und in the absence of evidence; the ,
resumption is against II. If similar
uestions arise hereafter, In other elcc.
ons, they must be settled by the evil
ence then produced. Messrs. Ward,
twood, Palmer, Darnes, Webster, /
wine, Murry, Meyer, Donnell and ,
Talkcr, we find were entitled TO vote .
hile the remaing fifteen challenged
ere not. l0l .eyods E0iint e598tc
What effect will this have on the re- 0
'ltG Messrs. Kent, Hayes, Garrett
I'd Bunting each have majority Of
Taking fifteen from 7
is number, they still have seven and 9
o elected TO their respective Offices. @