Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1888-11-23

I n ' III
was omitted from the check list on Sa ur-
day would vote on Tuesday as many whose
names are on the list failed TO vote, and
it IL equally impossible to know for what
candidate such voter would cast his bal
lot. The only course a voter can take whose
name is imp operly omitted from the check
list and who wishes his vote to be counted
in case OF a contest ia, it is presumed, for
him to appear at the polls with his ballot
| in his hand and demand to be permitted
to vote. The committee are clearly of the
opinion that in the case of Theodore Sy-
munds no vote can be counted.
AS to the question of the involability Of
the cueck list which might arise in this con
test from the language of the statute Re
viaed Laws sec. II amended by sec 3, 1851 /;
"And the name Of no person whose
name is on the list shall be rejected, etc, -
t1e committee are of the opinion that no
statute can add to the qualifications re-
Quired tor voter by the constitution and
no tatute can take away any of the quail
ificatiUus demanded by the constitution.
| Thus a minor has no right to vote under
I the constitution. The presence OF his name
by accident or design upon the check list
cannot give him the right The statute
may be mandatory upon the election OIL
GERS, but it certainly cannot be upon this
House, or any tribunal finally reviewing
the case of a contested election.
The question of residence is the one
however upon which the voting right Of
most of these men, both those challenged
/ by The contestant aud also Oy claimant,
has turned and been determined And ~
| to that question the committee believe
the Jaw to be correctly, state rs follows ::
1t was held by the Supreme Court of
Massachusetts, in 1871 that person bav
ing permanent home in one town within
that State, and being q legal voter IN such
town Is not disqualified by temporary alb
senCe in another town, and being there
I ...As. f.l -f.I t...,
laid down in this case is doubtless correct
il person is clearly resident OF and n
legal voter in one place, and Is Improperly
. and illegally permitted 70 vote ut auot her
that tact alone Will not disqualify him
from continuing to vote at the place OF
his actual residence. But it is
| proper to observe in this connection that
/ II there Is any doubC as to which Of two
! places IS the home or residence Of a voter
| the fact that he has within a recent period
voted at one of such places would be very
strong evidence that he had decided FOR
MIN elf TO make MS home where he cast
his vOte,and if person is residing alta par
ticuler place and there is doubt as to
whether he is residing there temporarily,
and claiming another place "a mis- home
Ii he claims and exercises the right TO vote
at tbs place where Ee is Tor the time re
| siding, that fact ought 80 be regarded as
, evidence well nigh conclusive that he has
abandoned his former residence, aud de
| termined TO make his home where he
claims his vote. The question Of residence
or dOmicle Is question largely of lnten-
ton, and the facL of voting is very strong
evidence OF the vCter's intention to claim
Il domicile at the place of voting. Nc
Creary on Elections. Sec "a.
| The rule that every man Is presumed to
/ have liked dOmiclle somewhere applies
/ rs well to single as to married men, and
though the domicile of the former may be
| more difficult to lind and prove, yet the
! rules OF evidence by which it ls ascertain
ed, are the same as those applicable in
! determining the donlicile OF other per-
/ sons SEQ. II, ditto
| Reference is also made TO the report of
/ the committee of elections in the House of
/ Representatives of the 42nd Congress in
the case OF Cessna VS.. Myers for an eX
haustive discussion Oh the question of res
/ ideuce rs applied to voters
The rule ,tated BY Chief Justice Shaw
in Lyman vs. Fisk, >, Peckham, 81 de;
follows: IL IL difficult to give an exact
definition of habitaucy In general terms
one may be designated a. an inhAbitaut
! Of that place winch constitutes the pm
cipal seat of his residence, of his business
| pursuits, Connections, attachments and OF
| his political and municipal relations II is
manifest therefore that 1t embraces the
fact of residence at place with the intent
/ to regard 1t his home TIE act ana the in
ferred from declaration and couduct. ii
| often a question OF great difficulty DE
pending upon nitrate and complicated
circumstances, leaving the question in st
| much doubt that a slight circumstance
| may turn the balance. In such a case the
| mere declaration of the party made in
good faith, of his election to make the one
place rather than the other his home
| would be sufficient to turn the scale.
On the part Of the claimant the right o.
the following persons to vote ut the sale
election is questioned viz: Solomon Pap
ueau, Charles Myers, Joseph Chapel
Frank Premier, Lewis Dorey o. c. I'd
wards, A. p. Bicknell, +. S. Prior, a
kibbie, John Despay, Lewis Young
Thomas Murray and Martln Atchison
The committee find that the above named
persons were legally qualified voters, ex
cept as follows Thomas Murray, Levi.
Young and A. kibbie had not taken the
treeman's oath as the law requires ant
were not IL gal voters, Frank Premier wa;
not resident of Underhill on election day
within the meaning Of the law, and there
fore was not legal voter. II the case o
Joseph Chapel it appears that he was
naturalzed CITIZEN, but had not taken tn;
treemsn's oath. The committee are of the
opinion that the process of naturalization
is not superior 70 the process of birth, ant
that the alien who IL reborn by the pro
cess OF naturalization has no superiority
VI VA bh-llELl ONtl tllo luLlNt DOIIl CilIAtl
and is relieved of no obligation
imposed upon the latter. The oath
administered to an alien to max
HIM a citizen are not idepti ca
with the freeman's oath, and only plac
him before the law where ri full year
place a citizen Of native birth. We ar
therefore Of the opinion that Joseph Chap
pei also WAS not legal voter The com
Inttee further fluid that the said Thomas
Murray, Lewis Young, a. kibbe, Franl
Premier and Joseph Chapel voted 70
Thomas Reeves for town representative
and that their i've votes should be- deduct
ed from his l5s, leaving him 1873 legal Rnt
valid votes
Corrected in this manner, the result o
the ballot should be declared as follows;
Whole number OF votes @. ..........3}5
Necessary for a choice -......... ....lGS
! George W. " OOtwOrtn had .............. ... III
Thomas Reeves had .........................l u
George Benedict mad ,................... 10. ]
Therefore your committee recomment
the adoption OF the following resolution
, RosOtUCd That at the frcemrD's mectn
held in the town OF Underhill on the 4tn dA
o. September, lsSs, George ". Woodwork "a
ceiVcd a N iOrty OF All the legal votes cas-
for town representatives, of the town OF I'm
dGrhlll, and that his s, at in this House ar sue
representative is HEREBY confirmed.
: The committee have eudeavored to ar
ply the law rs they understood it, to tn
facts in each individual case, and hav