The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1890-10-16
MARYLAND'S MISTAKE.
A Most Ridiculously Foolish Law Lately
Passed There.

MOst states or the Union are anXl.
GUS to keep on their list of legal resi-
dents as great number of names as
can honestly be retained, and many
states shape their legislation so as to
offer inducements which will fairly
swell this list. The state derives its
advantage from this increase in its
better showing in the census, in the
larger congressional representation
which comes with increased popula-
ton, and in the taxes on personal
property which are collected by the
place of domicile. But Maryland
under her new registration law has
taken a long step in precisely the
opposite direction She deliberately
cuts off a portion of her population,
tax payers and voters. She will have
no legal residents unless they keep
within the limits of the state every
night of the year, or unless they sub
nit to various annoying require
ments in the case of temporary de-
parture, and they must b. living within
the state six months before the No
vem 'er election. When one has once
acquiring legal residence in other
states of the Union he does not lose it
unless he moves into another state
with the expressed intention of max
ing the latter his home, or under cir
cumstances which clearly indicate
that intention. He may be absent
from his state for long periods at a
time as soldier or sailor, or traveller
or visitor to other localities, or as the
representative of the republic in for
eign countries, or as the representa-
tive of his state at the national capt.
tai, or as an employe OF the federal
government at the capital, where no
new voting residence can be acquired,
and he is still citizen, legal resident,
taxpayer and voter in his state. But
Maryland citizen, no matter who he
is, no matter what the reason for his
temporary departure, do matter how
short his proposed absence, if he
makes his "abode" and "habitation"
for a single night outside OF the state
is in danger of losing his
legal residence, and unless he is
ar actual resident six months be.
fore the November election he does
lose it. Maryland enacted in April,
1890, that whoever prior to that time
had removed from his actual abode in
the state anu taken an abode out OF
the state should be conclusively pre-
sumed to have intended to abandon
his legal residence unless within
thirty days after the passage of the
act he made affidavit in person before
the clerk of the circuit court that he
did not so intend; and unless he also
returned and took up his abode in the
state six months before the Tuesday
after the first Monday in November
he should he conclusively presumed
to have lost his legal residence. By
this act Maryland cut off from her
sons, her soldiers and sailors outside
of the state, her travellers, her Wis
itors to neighboring localities,
her appointments in the foreign SER
vice OF the federal government, her
senators and representatives and her
appointments in the government SER
vice at Washington. No exceptions
whatever to the sweeping rule are
suggested. A law is passed in April
which requires the Marylander tenn
porarily in London, it may be, to re-
turn within thirty days from the pas
sage of the act and make affidavit
that he intends to return, and then
take up his actual abode in the state
during the first week in Mayor cease
to be a Maryland. 1t is intimated
that the law is democratic scheme
to disfranchise republican voters Of
Maryland who reside in the;District.
If so, it is a double-edged weapon,
cutting both parties and seriously
wounding, the state. The democrats
would regret exceedingly perhaps if
they should find that they had elected
from legal residence in Maryland their
senators and congressman. Senator
German, for instance, prior to the
passage of the act had taken up his
abode in his house in the city OF
Washington. He did not make the
required affidavit within thirty days.
He did not abandon his Washington
abode and take up his actual abode i'll
Maryland six months before the first
Tuesday in November. He has there
FIRE lost his legal residence in Mary
land and the state is represented in
the senate by one who is not Mary
lander. Will 1t be necessary for the
Democratic legislature to say apollo
getically to an exiled and disfran-
chised senator: 81 have shot my
arrow DER the house and hurt my
brother?" Was there ever more
absurd, unprogressive, unjust and
rt-sighted law than this, to say
nothing of its doubtful constitution,
ality?-Washington Star.