The comet. (Johnson City, Tenn.) 1884-1916, 1906-11-08
THE SUPREME COURT
Decides That the Inmates Of the Soldiers Home Cannot Vote
Full Opinion in Case Of State Of Tennessee on Relation
Of Cy. H. Lyle Et AL, VS.. G. w. WHlett Et AL,

Nv, ASA Vhe eoEeCtlOn OF t0ftP,
magazines, arsenals, dock yards and
other needful buildings"
We think the power to purchase a
place for a Soldiers Home was within
the intentand meaning of the section
quoted, and falls directly under the
clause "and other needful buildings.
AS said in the Ohio case referred to
such institutions are erected bv the
government under its war power.
since the wounding and disablement
OF Its soldiers are necessary incident
OF war and it is as proper an exercise
OF the functions of government to care
Tor such persons after they have been
disabled as to enlist them and place
them in the line Of duty in the service
OF the country where such results will
necessarily follow.
Consent was given by Tennessee un.
der the following statute:
section /. Be it enacted by the
General Assembly of the State az
Tennessee, That the consent of tbe
General Assembly he, and is herebv
given, to the acquisition by the Nation.
al Home for Disabled Volunteer Sol.
dlers by purchase, condemnation or
donation, of lands not exceeding two
(2,OOO) acres, in Washington county for
the establishment and maintenance of
branch OF said Home within five miles
OF johnson City.
Section 2 Be it further enacted.
That jurisdiction of the lands afore.
SAID, and their appurtenances, which
may be acquired by the managers of
the National Home for Disabled Vol.
unteer Soldiers for the use aud purpcs.
es OF said home, be. and is hereby. ced
ed to the United States of America:
provided, however, that all civil and
criminal process issued under the an.
thority OF the State of Tennessee, or
any officer thereof, may be executed on
said lands and in the buildings which
may be located thereon, in the same
manner as II jurisdiction had not been
ceded, as aforesaid and provided. fur-
ther, that nothing in this Act appear
ing shall be construed to deny to any
oihcer, employee, or inmate of said
Home, who shall be qualified voters of
the State, the right Of suffrage at All
town, comfy and state elections, in the
place where said Home is located, mp
on their complying with the REQUIRE
ments OF the laws that are now in oper-
alton, or that may be hereafter enact
ed, regulating state, county and town
elections in this state"
1t is insisted that the power to vote
reserved in the above statute protects
the rights claimed for the inmates of
the Home in the present case.
In order to determine this question,
we must ascertain the nature of the
right acquired by purchase for the pur-
poses of Home by the United States
with the consent of the state.
Upon this subject, in respect of pIae.
es purchased by the United States,
with the consent of state, in Fort
Leavenworth Railroad Company Va.
Lowe, ia U. S. 525, it is said "When
the title is acquired by purchase, by
consent of the legislatures of the states
the federal jurisdiction is exclusive OF
all state authority. This follows from
the declaration of the constitution that
congress shall have like authority
over such places as it has over the dis
trict, which is the seat of the govern
ment; that is, the power of exclusive
leg 'lation in all such cases whatsoev-
er. Broader or clearer language could
not be used to exclude all authority
than that of congress; aud that no 9TH
or authority can be exercised over them
has been the uniform opionion Of the
Federal and State tribunals and of the
attorneys general. The reservation
which has usually accompanied the
consent of the states, that civil and
criminal process of stste courts may be
served in the places purchased, is not
considered as interfering in any re-
spect with the supremacy of the Unit
ed States over them; but is admitted
to prevent them from becoming an as
sylum for fugitives from Justice. AT
ter citing and discussing authorities,
the opinion proceeds: "rhese author
tiles are su ufficient to support the prop
osition which follows naturally from
the language of the constitution, that
no other legislative power than that Of
congress can be exercised over lands
within state purchased by the United
States with her consent for one of the
purposes designated, and that snch
consent, under the constitution, oper-
ates to exclude all other legislative
authority" Among the authorities
cited and commented upon with ap-
proval is the case of Sinks VS.. Reese,
supra. In that case the supreme conrt
of Ohio, in considering q statute of
that state, substantially the same as
our own above set ont, held, in respect
of the stains of the inmates of the Sol
diers Home, as affecting their right to
exercise the elective franchise, the fol.
lowing: "After adverting to the prin-
ciple that the purchase of land, under
the circumstances stated, vested sn-
preme Legislative authority in the
United States, the opinion in that case
proceeds:
"rhis leads us to consider what is
the legal status of persons who kecome
residents upon the grounds, and with
in the limits Of the institution thus