People's voice. [volume] (Wellington, Sumner County, Kansas) 1890-1917, 1893-09-29
STRIpPERS CAN'T VOTE.
Opinion of the Attorney-Generai as
to the Rights of Suffrage of
Strip Settlers.

Topeka, Kan, Sept. q, 1893.
Lyman Naugle, Probate Judge. Wellington,
Kan; Dear Sir:
In reply TO your communication Of
the 18th inst. in regard to the right
of suffrage of those taking claims in
the Strip, | enclose herewith a copy
of an opinion written on this subject.
which we think fully answers your
questions:
II have within the last few days re-
ceived many letters of inquiry of the
same purport and will try to embrace
all such in this answer. Ihave exam
ined the presidents proclamation and
with few exceptions find that the
homestead law generally is applicable
to the lands to be hOmesteaded under
this proclamation. While it is tr4e
that no person could enter into this
territory without first making a GER
tain declaration and receiving a GER
tiflcate so to do, yet this certificate
operates as a mere license to home
stead the land and no one had the
right to homestead unless he held this
certificate. Now, there is nothing in
this first declaration and certificate
which makes the holder a resident of
the territory, nor fOrfeits his resi-
dence. After receiving this certifl-
cate he may not enter the territory
at all, or conclude not to homestead
any of the land. If he or she con-
cludes to homestead, they can do so
in two ways; they can enter upon the
land and remain there three mon tbs
without filing thereon, at the end of
which time they must file their
claims and continue to reside thereon,
or they can file their claim immedi-
ately and after such filing, have six
luopths to commence their residence
and occupancy. When the party has
filed on the land in the first instance,
he then gains a residence in the terri
tory and loses the same in the state,
depending upon his intention to make
the land so filed on, his residence. IL
from the hour he files on the land or
enters the same without filing he in
tends to make it his residence and to
homestead the same, then his resi-
dence In this state is lost. From the
hour Of filing or entering the land his
intention governs. II, after filing or
settling on the land, he comes to this
state and votes, at the same time in
tending to return to the Strip, after
voting, such vote is fraudulent and
void and the voter subjects himself to
a criminal prosecution. The supreme
court OF Kansas in the case of the
State Of Kansas on the relation OF II.
o. Smith, County Attorney, VS.. John
|. Deniston, 46 Kansas, 359, is so clear
and explicit, the syllabi Of which is
as follows:
l. Election-NOt a legal voter. A man
who filed homestead claim on land In Okla
homa Territory, and made q settlement and
improvements thereon. In and after the
month Of June. lss9, and intended TO make
said claim his home, and who returned to
his former residence IN Comanche county, In
this state: for temporary purpose. intend
ing TO go back TO his claim In Oklahoma, was
not legal voter at an election held in Co
manche county on the fifth day Of Noyem-
Der, l6so.
9. Not legal voters. Persons who fled
homestead claims on land In Oklahoma Ter
rit0ry, and made settlement and improve
ments thereon. during and after the month
OF June, lssg and who intended 10 make said
homestead claims their homes. and who re-
turned 70 their former residences in Conan
che county, in this state, for temporary
purpose. and agreed 20 stay and vote at an
approaching election II paid for their time
and who voted at said election. and left CO.
manchc county the next day, and have ever
since resided In Oklahoma, were not legal
voters at On election held in Comanche coun-
ty on the 9Th day OF November. lss9.
In view Of the fact that residence
as matter OF intention, ifa person
who has located claim in the Strlpor
elsewhere, intends to return and has
intended to return after the election
and complete the title TO his land, he
is not legal voter and may be rror-