Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1884-05-13
Old Registrars in Again.
SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS DECIDE THAT
THE ELECTORAL BOARD LAW Is UNCoN-
sTITUTIONAL, NULL AND VOID.

| THE ELECTORAL BOARD LAW IS UNC0N-
| sTITUTIONAL, NULL AND VOID.
The Supreme Court of Appeals last
Thursday decided that the act of Assembly
providing that all registrars and judges and
commissioners Of election should be chosen
| by electoral boards composed of ssFree-
holders" was unconstitutional, null and
void.
! AS matter Of fact though of course it
did not appear in this proceeding. the use
of the word ''freeholders" was unintention-
al. Several sections of the new law were
copied from the Code of 1860, and unfortu-
nately this word was retained and attracted
no public attention until the bill became
law over the Governors veto. The Senate
then passed a bill amending the law by
striking out the word 'freeholders. That
was sent to the House in due season. but
there it was either lost or ignored until the
closing days of the session, and it never be-
came law. In the mean time, however.
the General Assembly had elected the cleo
toral boards. Now on account of "free-
holders" the whole law is set aside. In
near about half the counties of the State
we will lose little or nothing by this decis-
ion. We are anyhow much better off as to
election machinery than we were last year
when we defeated the enemy. Besides that,
"a majority of the State Canvassing Board
are Democrats.
Judge Lewis rendered the decision of the
court Judge Hinton dissented from the
opinion of the majority of the court.
In substance he said that he regarded
the law in question as constitutional. The
provision WHICH declared all persons who
could vote eligible to any office within the
gift of the people referred only to such Off
GERS as were chosen by the people at popu-
lar elections 1t had no reference to Off
GERS chosen by the General Assembly.
Such offices were not within the gift of the
people, but within the gift of the Legisla-
ture, and as to such offices the Legislature
had the right to prescribe the qualifications
for the same; that the Legislature had the
power to create the office and the power to
prescribe the qualifications for it; that many
fOrcible illustrations might be drawn from
their past unquestioned actions. They had
the power to prescribe that judge of cleo
lions should be able to read and write;
that the Legislature had the power to pro-
vide that if the judges did not act within
the prescribed time, that then freeholders
might act; that certain officers should be
physicians, &c, and that this was admit
ted.
Now, then, why not? He could not see
why the Legislature might not have the
power to prescribe that the Electoral
Boards should be composed of freeholders.
That such a provision was altogether i'm
material, and he believed the Legislature
might just as soon have passed the act
without that provision as with it. 1t did
not vitiate the act. 1t did not effectuate
any of it's provisions.
And if the insertion of the word free
holder had not been made it would have
been the same act.
And lie was therefore of opinion that far
ther, if he was wrong, and the word free
holder was forbidden by the Constitution,
and should be stricken out for that cause,
the act ought still to be allowed to stand
without it; that this view was supported by
the authorities, and if the Objectionable
word could be stricken out and the act be
then Ineligible, that that should be done,
and in this case, if the word freebooter was
stricken out it would still leave the act
complete in all its parts, and he therefore
dissented entirely from the opinion of the
court.
The aim of the patriotic statesman who
really LIDS tAO SOOl "a blS COuhuhiOy DIT
heart should be to foster unity of interests
among all who labor 1t is only by work
ing heartily together that the good of the
country at large can be accomplished. This
is true Democracy. 1t is opposed to the
Radical Republican methods, by which the
worst of dcmagogues seek only votes and
forget the voters altar the ballot ia loast-
What has the Republican party done for the
laboring class, whether the term be applied
to one set of workers in particular branch
Of industry or to all workers? That party
can show nothing-not one act of Congress
passed in the special interest of laborers.-
True, they can cite the declarations of their
platforms, but these declarations, looked at
by the light of subsequent events, have been
unfulflled.
These repeated promises, the repeated
recurrence of the term laboring man in the
inflated preambles to the series of resolu-
lions adopted by the Republican conven-
tons, and the absolute deception practiced
by this party upon the workingmen, have
become now at last notorious. Monopolies
are the workingman's most deadly enemies.
What party in any country or age has been
more the creature of monopolists than the
Republican party? 1t is to-day absolutely
under the rule of millionaires It's bone
and sinew are made up of the richest men
in the country.
William e. Vanderbilt, whose fortune of
two hundred million dollars makes him the
wealthiest man in the world is a Republi-
can. He is the prince of monopolists. So,
too, Jay Gould, who is next to him in
wealth. These men live on the wrecks of
the fortunes of the workingmen all over the
country AS they prosper so does the Re-
publican party prosper. AS they ara the
workingman's greatest enemies, so is the
Republican party .-Richmond State.