The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1901-02-28

tlon when would prevent q man s
registering i'll the place where he is
entitled to vote for both the candi-
dates for the House of Delegates and
for member of Congress, said.
Now if he (the voter cannot vote
for both these offices in the ward OF
election district where he resides. his
right of suffrage is to a great extent
defeated He is deprived of one of
the primal privileges of citizenship.
Suppose that a literal and verbal in
depreciation of the language which
we have quoted from the first section
of the first article of the State Con
stitutiOn would impair the rights of
| the voter, which are declared in the
previous part of the same section, or
would impair any of his rights under
the Constitution of the United States:
or would impede and embarrass the
actual enjoyment of them to such an
extent as virtually to defeat them:
| then most unquestionablv such in
/ depreciation ought to be rejected
And construction ought TO be adopt
ed which would give effect to the OBJ
vious purpose and intent of the whole
section. The elective franchise is the
! highest right of the citizen, and the
! spirit of our institutions requires that
every opportunity should be afforded
for its fair and free exercise.
No one has ever doubted that the
Legislature has the power 10 pass
statutes making reasonable regula-
tions of the manner in which elections
shall be held and prescribing reason
able regulations as to the manner in
which the voters shall exercise the
right of suffrage. This right to reg
ulate the manner in which the vot-
ing shall be done does not empower
the Legislature to defeat the right al
together under color of regulating its
exercise. This principle is very clearly
stated by Judge McSherry in deliver
ing the opinion of the Court of APP
peals in Hooper vs. Creager, "a Md.
PAT. He there, after stating that the
power to regulate the manner of ex-
ercising power could not take away
the power itself, said:
1t could only do this upon the as
sumption that the power to regulate
means the power to destroy. That
such is not the meaning of the term
in Maryland has been determined
more than once. In State VS.. Mott,
81 Md, 297, an ordinance of the city
of Baltimore, whereby the burning of
| lime within the city limits was pro
hibited, was sought to be upheld I'M
der that provision of the charter
which gave the city authority to reg
ulate the places for manufacturing
soap and candles, etc, and where
every other offensive trade is carried
on. This court said: THE power
delegated is simply to regulate the
places where they are carried on, and
not to forbid their being carried on,
or to destroy them altogether And
in State VS.. Whitman, so Md, 40, it
was held that a power to regulate the
| liquor traffic was not a power to de-
stroy the trade.
In speaking of the right of the Leg
islature to modify or change the rules
of evidence by which a mans resi-
dence is to be proved, the Court of
Appeals in Switzerland VS.. Norris, "A
Md, 1928 329, speaking through Judge
McSherry, said:
The qualifications of voter in this
State are prescribed by the first sec
ton of Article 1 of the Constitution
of Maryland. These qualifications
are that he shall be a citizen of the
| United States of the age of q wears
| or M r1 on1 fhat h. ,hou
| been resident of the State for one
year, and of the Legislative district
of Baltimore city or of the county in
which he offers to vote for six months
next preceding the election at which
| he offers to vote. Before he can ex-
ercise his right to vote he must be
duly registered. These qualifications,
| fixed by the organic law, can neither
be enlarged nor curtailed by the Gen
eral Assembly, but there is no pro-
vision of the Constitution, as there is
no principle of constitutional law,
that denies to the Legislature power
to enact rules of evidence by which
the facts establishing the right to
vote may be proved. The
right to haye ones controversies de-
termined by existing rules of evidence
is not a vested right These rules,
like other affecting remedies, must at
all times be subject to modification
and control by the Legislature. <
But the General Assembly has no
power to establish rules which under
pretense of regulating the presenta-
ton of evidence go so far as altogether
to preclude party from exhibiting
his rights.
Therefore, it is clear from our own
decisions that, while the Legislature
has the undoubted power to change
the form of ballot or to make any rea-
sonable regulations for the bona fide
purposes of preventing bribery, in
surfing secrecy and securing the fair
expression of the people under pre-.
text of doing either of these things to
adopt a law which will disfranchise
voters.
The fact that, in the law which Mr..
PEG suggests should be passed, pro.
vision is to be made for assistance to
cripples and blind persons and to be
denied illiterates would seem to rem
der it very clear that the thinly-veiled
purpose of the law is to disfranchise
illiterates under the pretext of regu.
lating the form of the ballot.