The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1882-10-28
The Law as II Is.

Mr.. Acknowledgement BLAIEs opinion as
to the rights Of voters is, as we have here
tofore said, full Of errors. He has re-
yersed the maxims OF the law, and set at
defiance the Constitution and laws OF the
State. Let us contrast his opinion with the
United States law on the subject as this
law is contained in the Statutes at Large.
First, let us reproduce Mr.. BLAIR's
words lie says:
,st<49>sfcfore, il q registered voter presents
H III Judges OF election the certificate OF
= fhe rieyk OF the court to whose office the
asst1sor's books are returned, dated the
sslllny OF election, or any other satisfactory
cf&vidence that no capitation-taX has been
assessed against such voter, then the law
presumes that such voter is not haDle 10
such tax, and such officer becomes bound
for the same by his omission OF duty, I'M
less satisfactory reasons he given Tor sucn
failure TO assess said voter with his capita
tion.tax; but in either event such voter Is
entitled TO vote"
To justify this extraordinary opinion,
Mr.. BLAIR argues that because tits the duty
of the commissioner Of the revenue to US
sess every voter with the capitation-tax,
therefore it is not the duty of the voter to
cause himself TO be assessed. 1t would be
impossible for any man to make such
blunder as Mr.. BLAIR has made ii he were
not blinded by partisan prejudice, Now,
read the United States law. 1t is as fol-
lows:
"SectiOn 2007. Whenever under the Con-
stitution or laws Of any State any act is re-
quircd to be done by citizen as a prere-
quisite to qualify or entitle him to vote the
offer Of SWch citizen to perform the act re-
Quired TO be done shall, ii il fail to be car
ried into execution by reason OF the wrong
ful act or omission OF the person or ofhccr
charged with the duty Of receiving or per-
hitting such performance or offer to per-
form or acting thereon, be deemed aud
held as performance in law Of such act;
aud the person 80 offering and failing to
vote, and being otherwise qualified, shall
be entitled TO vote in the same manner and
to the same extent as if he had IN fact per-
formed such act"
That is plain enough. The voter, not
the assessor, nor the commissioner, nor
the registrar, is required to perform what
ever act the law OF any State prescribes H.
a prerequisite to voting. II the commits
sioner has failed to assess any voter such
voter must offer TO be assessed. He must
do his duty, in other words. If he applies
to the registrar, and the registrar refuses
to register his name, he may, il he is ac
tually voter, vote upon proving that he
has "ofered to perform the act" required
by lawn this case, the act OF regisira-
ton. But he cannot vote if be fails to APP
ply to be registered. So as to the payment
OF the capitation-taX. The law Of Virginia
requires that tax to be paid as prcrequi-
site to voting. No man can vote who
has not paid it, or offered to
pay it and had his offer declined.
The United States law is conclusive on
this point. 1t knocks Mr.. BLMR's Coal-
ton opinion into smithereens." The law
says the voter must offer to pay the capita
tion-taX, or he cannot vote. BLAIR says
that the assessor or commissioner Is to per-
form the duty of assessment for every man,
and that every man can vote who is over
looked by the commissioner, whether he
Golfers to perform the act" required by
law or not.
But let it not be forgotten that BLAR's
opinion binds nobody. No election officer
need pay--no election officer ought 10
pay-any attention to it. II these election
officers were not nearly all of them the APP
pointees OF Readiuster judges there would
be no room for apprehensons OF wrong
doing on their part We trust that ever
these will refuse to be misled.
We have consulted several OF the ables
and most distinguished lawyers in Rich
mond, and they with one voice declare tha
Mr.. BLAIR's opinion is wrong. We do no
believe that there is a single lawyer il
Richmond, known outside of this city, who
will endorse IL.