Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1890-10-07
QUALIFYING VOTERS.
AN IMPORTANT INTERPRETATION OF THE
ELECTION LAWS.

Citizens Need be Only Reasonably Certain
of Where They Were Born-No Hope
for "a Murderer-Other Opinions Handed
Down by the Supreme Court.
Eighty-two decisions were handed down
by the Supreme Court yesterday, which are
given below. Possibly the most important
is Chief Justice Paxson's opinion on the ap-
peal of Owen Cusick from the Quarter Ses-
sions Court Of Lackawanna county in the
matter of the contested election of the of6celof
Clerk of Courts. The case involved questions
concerning the right of citizen to vote at cleo
tions, and the constitutionality of the act Of
January 30, 1874, a supplement to the act regu-
lating elections The tenth section OF the act
it was claimed, prescribed certain regulations
which, if they do not deny the right to vote, at
least clog its exercise with such conditions as
to render it unreasonably inconvenient
In his opinion Chief Justice Paxson states
that the most imporrantSuestion was the ale
cation that the lower covtt erred. in declining
to allow the respondents motion to strike from
the examiners report of illegal voters the
names of all unregistered voters possessing
certain qualifications. to-wit: having nled am
davits covering the constitutional requirements
of legal voters.
"The affidavit of the witness" he says, ''does
not comply with the statute In this, that 1t
merely AYERS generally that the voter has re-
at least two months immediately preceding the
9th of November, 1855 instead of stating, as re-
quired by the act, where the residence is OF the
person so claiming 10 be voter in said elec-
tion district.
at was urged on behalf of the appellant that
at least some of the requirements are in excess
of the legislative authority conferred by section
Z. article VIII. We are unable to see anything
in these requirements of the act of 1877 which,
properly construed, are unreasonable or in con-
6ict with the Constitution. 1t certainly i'm
poses no hardship on the voter to require him
to swear to the best of his knowledge and be-
lief when and where he was born
In regard to the more serious objection that
the affidavit does not state when and where the
tax claimed to be paid by the affiant was
assessed, and where and to whom paid, Justice
Paxson says reasonable compliance with the
either the loss of his vote, on the one hand. or
of charge of perjury on the other.
A reasonable certainty in these matters
is all that is required by the act as identified
ton of the tax is the main object of the law.
We quite agree with the learned court below
that the blanks in use are furnished according
to the form prepared by the Secretary of the
under the twenty-second Sec
tion of the act, In SO far as they require the
voter to give the day and month as well as the
year of the assessment exceed the demand of
the statute. Where, however. the tax is
claimed to have been paid within the current
year in which the election is held specific
date is necessary to show that the tax was as
Sessed at least two months prior to the day of
election. In regard to the details of such aff-
davits the law must be strictly complied with.
In this case the court below did not err in its
to the office of Clerk of Courts of Lackawanna
county.
The decree is affirmed and the appeal dis
missed at the costs of the appellant.