The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1893-10-22
A TAXPAYERS VIEW OF IT.
The Proposed Registration Law For
Chatham Exposed.

Chatham Exposed.
editor Morning News: Your editorial
remarks in yesterdays issue, on the pro-
posed registration bill for this county, ex-
posed clearly to view the design of our
present representatives for paying their
political debts. The voters of Chatham
county, in January last, voted their en-
phatic condemnation of all kinds OF par
tial and partisan legislation. This ex-
preston of public opinion was crys-
talliZed because of the enactment
by the last legislature of that indecent
and objectionable law whereby the super
vision of elections in this county was I'M
conditionally placed in the hands of rela-
tives and partisans of the lone man
! power''-a law indecent, because it re-
quired nephews to preside at the election
of an ncle-unpardonable, because it
enabled these nephewS tOGsupervise their
own elections TO Office.
A review of the proposed registra ton
bill may interest alike the taxpayers and
honest voters of this county.
Section proposes to remove the regis
| tration of voters from the control of the
| county commissioners to that of the or
binary, and for the faithful performance
of this work the sum of $1,000 is to be
paid him for clerical services, etc This
change is certainly not in the interest of
economy, for under the existing law, the
registration of voters has never cost our
taxpayers more than 800.
Is this bonus of $780, therefore, to be
used as political jack pot, or is it intended
My to increase the emoluments of an Of
tice whose perquisites are already ample.
Or is 1t proposed to suggest that political
pull" will have less influence with the
ordinary, a recognized partisan, than
with the five recently elected commits
sioners who individually and collectively
represent some of the material and i'm
portant interests of our community
Section 3 enacts some very serious
changes and a strictly legal interpreta-
ton of its requirements may lead to
many and annoy ing OmplicatiOns-viZ:
o. should a citizen lose his tax re-
ceipt, is he not ipso facto DISTINGUISHED
because of his failure to present to the
clerk
(2) Should citizen, over 60 years of
! age, owning no property and therefore
! having no taxes of any kind to pay, pre-
| sent himself at the Ordinary's Office for
! registration without a tax receipt, is he
not also debarred from the privilege of
! qualifying to vote, because he cannot pro
| duce a receipt for the cancellation of a
! debt which he does not owe?
Is not this section clearly in violation of
| the constitution of our state which pro
! NlueS GndU Il NOuci Sndu nave Ddlu all taxes
! due before enjoying the high privileges of
! the ballot! Is a receipt for any one years
| taxes proper, conclusive, or legal evidence
! of the payment of all taxes for all years
! due
Section is carefully and skillfully
worded. 1t forbids the registration books
| to be removed from the ordinary's office,
! but it provides no penalty for the violation
| of this ordinance. Nor does it prohibit
! him, for his own purpose or for the bene-
| fit of his political friends, from having full
| copies made for illegal uses at the polls,
| and thereby opening the gates for the en-
| enlargement of the very frauds which an
| honest registration is intended to prevent.
TAXPAYER