Tazewell Republican. [volume] (Tazewell, Va.) 1892-1919, 1902-07-31
THURSDAY. JULY 81, 1902.
WAS 1T INTENTIONAL 2

I With the closing hours of the late Con-
stitutional Convention probably one of
the greatest wrongs that reckless and partl'
san body inflicted upon the people was
perpetrated. Section /. of the ordinance
providing for the appointment and quail
flying of registrars in the various counties
aud cities of the State reads as follows:
Registration shall be conducted in
each magisterial district of every county,
and in each ward of every city, by board
of registrars, composed of competent citi-
zens, residents in such district or ward,
appointed as hereinafter provided, each of
whom shall qualify by signing and filing
with the clerk of the county court Of their
respective counties, or the corporation
court Of their respective cities, as the case
may be, a paper, signifying their acceptance
of their appointment, and who shall hold Of
fee until the fret day of January, 1904. ="
1t has already been asserted by some of
the registrars appointed by the ordinance
that they are relieved, by the above quot
ed section. from taking any oath of Office
and that they Will take no oath. If these
registrars have rightly interpreted the
meaning of this section of the ordinance.
what was the intention of the Convention
when it framed and enacted the law
Was it an accident, or was it done inten.
tionally? If an accident, it was inexcusa.
bic carelessness on the part of those who
have been so boastful of their superior
qualifications for making new Constitu.
ton for Virginia, and proves their abso-
lutte unfitness for such task. On the
other hand, If it was done Intentionally
and to relieve the registrars from tax.
ing an oath, it is a crime so foul that it
will bring upon its authors the undying
contempt of all right-thinklng people.
Is 1t true that the registrars will not be
required to take an oath to support the
Constitution of tie United States, and the
ordinance so provides Intentionally If so
it places the Convention in the attitude Of
saying to these registrars, 'you are re-
lieved from taking all oath, for the pur
pose Of giving you full opportunity to vio-
late supreme law and outrage the rights of
your fellow-citizens." 1t is equivalent to
giving registrars instructions, by sugges
ton, to commit crimes against the suffrage
rights of the people.
Just think of it! The registrar Is cloth
ed with the most important judicial func-
tons. He is not only judge but q jury
with authority to pass upon one of the
most sacred and valued rights of citizen.
ship. What would be thought Of a con.
ttituiion which provided for the Judges of
our civil and criminal courts entering up
on the discharge of their duties without
taking an oath of Office? Sucii an idea Is
simply revolving. The men who placed
such provision in the organic law of a
state would be degraded in the eyes of hon.
est men; and the judges who would accept
trust under such conditions would, at
every Mage of their official existence, have
their iSs&Fity called in question. Is it
saying too much to assert that the ap.
pointment of registrars without requiring
them to take an oath is Just as vicious as
to provide for judges holding Office with
cut subscribing to an oath to honestly and
Justly admipster the law? The right to
vote is the right preventative of all rights,
is more important than to hold property,
and is SO intimately associated with the
enjoyment of life and liberty that it is sec.
ond only in importah nee to those two in.
herent rights-the first mentioned in the
"Blll of Rights" aTd made paramount
to the right of acquiring and hold
ing property. If fhe registrars are to be |
placed in POSITION to treat this sacred |
right as mere bapble or plaything, and
to have their conscfences deluded into the
belief that thVR are acquitted of doing
Wrong becassStlbey have taken no oath,
the people ought to be so informed.
We call upon our Democratic contem-
poraries to help US ascertain the intention
of the Convention in framing "Section l."
of the Ordinance, which provides for regis
tration under the new Constitution, prior
to the year nineteen hundred and four.
We would like for the Attorney General
of Virginia, who was member of the
Convention, to give his opinion as to
whether the section relieves registrars
from taking the oath and was SO intended.
SHALL THERE BE A C0NTESTP