Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1884-10-29
A STUDIED INSULT
Offered by the lntelligencer to For
eign Born Citizens.
Indignation Aroused by an Opinion Inspired
by the Old Know Nothingism---The
Oath Must be Accepted by
Commissioners Of
Election.
IN Pr. E;l...,r Of ,h. E,,.niu.r.rr.

To ne Editor Of ne Es!,HigsRtcT.
Sir Is il legal for Judge Of election to
swear a voter and take his oath to the fact
that he has been naturalized?
il is not legal The laws of evidence re,
uuirc hat the best proof of which the case
from It's nature IS susceptible shall be pro-
duccd The best evidence il this case Is
the production Of the papers These must
be produced for the inspection of the Judges.
We are informed that some judges at the
recent election allowed men to vote who
made oath that they had their papers,
when in fact they had only their. first pa
pers. If the papers had been presented as
the law requires, the judges could have pre-
vented the wrong. We are about TO have
another election. Look out for voters and
their papers.
This question and the subjoined answer
appeared in the Intelligencer of yesterday
morning 1t created very much of stir
about the city and was generally regarded
as a political trick to drive naturalized Dem
ocratic citizens from the polls. When
known it created much feeling and indigna
ton, even among certain Republicans, and
was generally denounced as unfair, untrue
and misleading There are many natural
lied citizens in Wheeling who lost their pa
pers in thehood and who cannot now re-
place them and a popular cry ofindignation
went up from them yesterday when they
learned the Republicans were preparing to
prevent them from voting on this account.
A REGISTER reporter called on number OF
LAWYERS YESTERDAY for their views and was
given their unanimous opinion that the ln-
teligencer was mistaken-f not wiltully
mistaken.
AN ABSURD PROPOSITION.
The law contemplates,' said one, that
every man entitled to vote shall be permit
ted 10 deposit his ballot and the Judges Of
election must only be satisfied that he is en-
titled to vote. The laws OF this State pro
vide that man may testify in his own be
half and when he swears his papers had
beea secured, but have been lost or mis-.
laid, and no one can swear to the contrary,
who shall say he is not entitled to vote?
The Intelligencer attempts to say the best |
proof shall be given. Do not the election
comm ssionerS accept mans OATH as 10
his age? Why do they not compel him &
produce his mother testimony to the fAc;.
The Irtelligeucers position Is absurd and II |
NAV plainly be seen there is some animuS
IN il. The law gives certain space to the
commissioner and provides that he must be
satisfied lfa perfect stranger, with no one
20 vouch for him, should present himself
there might be grounds for refusing his bal
lot But suppose John G. Hoffman Iihos
O'Brien OF Michael Reilly should present
themselves to vote and had not their papers
does the Intelligencer mean to say they
must be insulted and driven from the polls
with their oaths good for nothing? The
proposition is simply preposterOus.
An ArrEAL TO THE STATUTES.
Another attorney whose opinion stands
Ior itself quoted the following from the
statutes of West Virginia:
Section l6, chapter l55, Acts of 1882,
entitled Elections by the People is as
follows
10 The commissioners holding the
election at each place of voting shall per
nit all persons to vote entitled to do so,
and reject the votes of all persons not en-
titled to vote at said election, and shall in
all respects, have the poll taken fairly &C
cording TO law. They may swear and eX
anime any person touching his right to
vote at said election, whenever such right is
questioned by said commissioners or any of
them, or by any other person. If the vote
of person Offering TO vote be rejected, his |
name, if required by him, or by any candi,
date at said election, shall be enter
81 hrt hn
for that purpose; and if any person be per
mitted to vote whose vote is challenged, the
word challenged shall be written on the
poll book opposite his name
IF person" said he who claims to
have been naturalized offers to vote and is
challenged, one of two courses is open to
him-lst, produce his papers; I'd, if lost, |
make affidavit to that effect, because that is |
The only evidence of the fact If otherwise, |
then the above statute would be violated, in |
hat the officers would not swear the person
if his right to vote was based upon lost |
papers
ATTORNEYGENERAL O'BRIENS DECISION.
Attorney General o Brien, of New York, |
IN answer TO the questions asked, has rem.
Gered the following opinion: First, as to
The right OF Inspectors to require a person |
"ferirg TO vote to exhibit his naturalization |
papers before they receive his vote, the At.
Eey-General said the Inspectors Of Elec. |
lions have the right to challenge any per |
son offering 70 vote, as also has any citizen |
f the person persist in voting after such |
challenge, the Inspector must administer |
he oath prescribed by the statute as To |
his qualifications and residence. The qucs
tons the Inspectors are permitted to ask are |
specified in the statute. If the voter answers |
the questions in Sucn 8 manner that he is |
qualified voter the Inspectors have no |
right whatever to require him 70 produce |
naturalization papers to prove his citizen
ship. If the person Offering to vote swearS |
falsely, he is amenable to the law for the |
crime of perjury. 1t is the duty Of the In |
spector TO receive the vote, in any event |
after the person wishing TO vote has takeL |
the oath. As to residence, fla voter has |
not taken up his residence in another town |
it is clearly his intention to retain his resi-
dence in the one where he has resided, and |
be has the right to do this and 10 vote even
If his family have removed He has the |
right 10 retain his residence until after cleo |
ton and to vote by continuing to reside |
where he has hithsrto voted.
A CORRESPONDENT CENSURE.
kmong the several indignant letters
which came to this Office yesterday was the |
following;
Tsthe Editor Of tie Register.
SIR: | see by to-days Inteligencer that
the editor Of that paper has set himself up |
as Judge. jury and final srbiter in INSTRUCT
ing Judges of election as to their duties as
to what is competent testimony in case Of
any OF our foreign citizens who have been
unfortunate and lost their papers by fire, food |
or from being worn out from long use, &c,
He tells his enquirer who is, getting up
movement to drive foreigners from the polls
that the papers must be produced and that
their oaths will not be taken &c, &c
l am not a lawyer but l set my
opinion mp as against this glondam editor,
judge jury etc, that his opinion is not worth