The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1894-01-10
TO REGISTER.
xfitutionality of the Law
Argued in Court.
ossuan's SUIT NoN-suiTED.
Guards Were Not Acting for the
'~...y-CharIes r. Repsth Still .
Thorn in stfnson's Side.

=. eoustitutionaiIty of the registration
- vss argued yesterday before Judge
s s-.s~v by Attorney John Fairfield and
s.-so-st.on Counsel Donworth IN the sui.
= Vat Brannagan for q writ Of man
s.rn, 70 compel City Clerk George J.
s.cnsnan 10 put bis name upon the regis
.-,soe Iis.. Acting under the require
-..sts az the Law, S;oneman had refused TO
g, grsnpazan's name on the list because
IL n foreign birth and could not pro-
asoe the naturalization papers OF himself
!, hose OF his father, as they had been
.,ss 70 Washington City TO be used in per-
tx1ng title TO land.
M Fairfield took the position that the
( ,sv made an unjust discrimination be-
sseer rasive-born citizens and those OF
s,rsirn birth that IL Disseminated be-
sssn those foreign-born citizens living in
eti<s and those living in villages or in the
scunsry; that the legislature could not
;reose a regulation that would deny an
doctor the privilege Of exescising his con-
efsutlonaI right Of suffrage: that the
sferys Of registration are not invested
vish The robes OF authority 10 judge of the
Qualifications Of an applicant for rcgistra-
flcs: that his oath "a TO his qualification
vss aII-suffcient. and should he be guilty
al transgression of the registration laws
he would be subject to heavy punishment
for the same. He took the position that
msa who we're voters At the time the terri
tory was admitted a. state we're voters
soaay and the state legislature had no con-
ss.tutional right to deprive them of that
pgisiIege He read many authorities,
prominent among which was decision
rom the supreme court Of Michigan In a
similar case. The closing paragraph of
sass decision reads:
sIn my opinion no register law is valid
which deprives an elector OF his constitu-
tonal right TO vote by any regulation
sith which il Is impossible tor him To
comply No eiecsor can lose his right 20
vote. the highest exercise Of the frcem ans
viii. except by his own fault or negii-
vnee. II the legislature. under the pre-
text OF regulation, can destroy this consti-
iaiional right by annexing an additional
qualification as to the number Of days
such voter must reside In a precinct be-
fore he can vote therein. or any other
requisite, In direct opposition TO any of
the constitutional requirements, then Ii
can AZ we'll require of the elector entirely
new qualifications. independent Of the con-
s;ilution. before the right of suffrage can
be exercised.
Mr. Fairfield stated that Brannagan had
voted here for ten years, that many
reputable citizens had seen him vote and
had seen his naturalization papers. But
no matter what weight of evidence might
he addueed TO show that no was citizen,
nothing but the papers themselves would
avail to secure him the right TO vote. III
the object of the law was to protect the
purity OF the ballot the penalties attach
ing 10 perjury and violation of the law
would surely be ms effective against for
sIgn-born as against native citizen. lie
quoted from the Michigan decision above
alluded to, which said:
THE act seems to be one designed TO dis
franchise foreign born citizens. Its cs-
snee is that the citizen is presumed 10 be
unable TO tell the truth ii he be foreign
born. It's tendency IL to disfranchise
honest men aud TO induce dishonest men
to per lure themselves"
Corporation Counsel Donworth made a
strong argument 10 show the power Of the
legislature TO prescribe the conditions
under which citizens may exercise the snf-
frage. He conceded that the most serious
question for the court TO determine was
the fail ure of the law TO provide for sccon-
Diary evidence "a to naturalization. and he
ihstsnced supposititious cases where that
was the only kind OF evidence the citizen
could furnish. man may have, by the
great LAPSE OF time or disease. forgotten
when and where he was naturaliEed, or he
nav have known very well that his father
was citizen but not know when and
where he was naturaiixed. or have resided
In the northern portion of Maine, whore
foreign-horn residents were made citizens
BY the Warburton treaty. Stili. he con-
tended. while this failure may work hard
ship in rare cases the only kind of evil
dence admissible in naturalization cases is
record evidence. either the papers them
selves or certified copies thereof. He then
made an argument To- show that the legis-
latare had the power to prescribe rules of
evidence. unless the exercise of such power
shoud amount to a deprivation of consti-
tational right.
Judge Langley announced that he would
take the matter under consideration and
announce his decision by Friday, so that
the case might be taken before the supreme
eonFt on that day. and If that body would
advance the case IL might he heard on the
Believing Friday