The citizen. (Frederick City, Md.) 1895-1923, 1901-06-28
The Ubiquitous Bill.
MeSsrs. Editors

Since the fact became known
that it was the intention of the
Legislature to pass an election
law, many have been the cries
against such course, and varied
have been the reasons assigned
why the Legislature should have
refrained from passing the bill,
which has now become a law. So
much has been said against the
bill and so cunning and penitent
have been the arguments of its
opponents that even some who
rely upon reasons as their guide,
have been tempted from the path
of right. However, we have no
disposition to claim that all ar
guments. directed against the bill
have been insincere. SO vital is
the right Of suffrage to human
liberty, and SO relentless have
been the epithets hurled at the
bill by the impassioned orators of
the opposition, and so scathing
the editorials, that we are not
surprised to find many viewing
the bill at its inception, with Il
prejudiced mind. But whatever
may be the haSty arguments ad-
vanced by the opposition against
the bill, the fallacy of those argu-
mentS is to be traced to a miScOn
ception of the nature and theory
of our government, and to the
false propositions, first, that suf.
trage exists primarily for the ben,
eft of the individual, and, sec.
ondly, that suffrage is natural
and inherent right.
THE NATURE OF OUR GOVERN.
If the individual States. in de
telmining What are to be the
qualifications of their voters, had
only to consider their qualifica
tionS as voters in distinctly State
elections, a discussion of the ma.
ture Of our government, in this
connection, would be unneces.
sary, and in all probability the
present election law would never
have been spread on our statute
books. But such is not the case.
The government of citizen OF
the United States is dual in its
nature. A citizen of an individ.
ual State is likewise a citizen OF
the United States. (l4th Amend
mend to the Constitution of the
United States, sec. l. Texas VS..
White, Z Wallis, 700. Slaughter
House Cases, 1G Wallis SO. The
national government is a grant OF
powers. While these powers are
limited and enumerated, the Con
Stitution Of the United States is
the measure and test of those
powers conferred. (Cooley's Con
Stitutional Law Whatever is
not conferred is withheld, and be
longs to the several States or tC
the people thereof. Gibbons VS..
Ogden, 9 Wheaton, 1. Under
the Articles Of Confederation the
Individual States were practically
SO many sovereign States. Wool
sey'S International Law, 36
W hen the Constitution of the
United States was agreed upon.
the States granted to the national
government certain enumerated
| powers, but such powers, as were
not delegated to the United States
by the Constitution, nor prohib
tied by 1t to the States, are re
served to the States respectively
or to the people. 10th Amend
ment to the Constitution. The
relation which the national gov
ernment bears to the State gov.
ernmentS is set forth in the motto
of the United States, ''E plWibUs
mann" meaning one from many
Thus some of the common powers
were drawn from the States to
form national and controlling
government, the remaining ana
principally the domestic powers
were left to the States. Therefore.
the national government is a SOY
erelgn government, the govern
ments OF the individual States
are dependent. But the words
sovereign and dependent are no;
to be understood as having the
same meaning as given to those
terms by international law. The
national government is not strict
ly sovereign, nor the State gov.
ernments strictly dependent. BY
the scheme of our government
some rights are put beyond the
control of the national govern
ment, while other rights are
placed by the national beyond
the control of the States. Hence,
when we speak of "our govern
ment," we not only mean the gov
eminent of the individual State,
but also the government of the
United States. Thus the full and
complete powers, rights and priv