The free lance. (Fredericksburg, Va.) 1885-1926, 1908-08-08

p.ac" tht PROVISIONS of this Scheduh. be
/, snnd the control 30 the Legislature and
' . make it a. tll-ctual aud binding as n
i- were eut oii,d I'm the Constitution it.
-'li. seq judge Npucure's opinion in Rich
! mnni mRyora.ty case. 10 GRAFT 112.3
See also Sanis case, 20 Graft $40. in
/ which Judge Chr -rian delivered the opin-
/ ION oi the court (and in that opinion
/ judge MOncur- cuncurred). and among
l other things aid; But the Schedule
Z which l. a part of the Constitution etc. q"
/ " herein be- decides that the Schedule to
| the CONSTITUTION % 1869 was "a part of
/ that Constitution. just here will quote
| briefly some decisions Of other courts I'm
| the matter O' rhe-e Schedules.
| Arkansas. 1870 A Schedule annexed
| % a state Constitution. requiring an Of
/ iicia 10 qualify within certain time
/ alter they have been notified Of their
election. IL mandatory. has all the force
ui "a Constitutional provision, and should
be construed by the same rules" state
". Johnson. 26 Ark. 26l.
Texas, 1870; The ordinance append
ed 70 the Constitution, is part ofthe iun-
/ damental law of the land. and # equal
authority upon the executive. Legislative
and judicial part Of the State as il It
formed "a comp nnent part Of the Consti-
tuition Stuart W. Crosby, - Texas
J4G.
There j. also a great difference between
this and the previous Schedules. in that
/ the present Scedule not only provides Tor
/ carrying into operation the Constitution
Itself, but Tor permanent organic laws as
well. which no Legislature Is authorized
/ 20 change. Article ? 90 the eCon-titution.
referred to in Schedule 5. fixes the qunli-
heaton oi voters as to registration and
prepayment OF the p0ll-tax, and If the
Iu-nal aud accepted definition il given TO
the words in Schedule. Section Is In
al el-ctipns held after this Constitution
goes INTO ene,t, t,' those qualifications, in
order % vote IN special aud local option
elections. must exist. n not. then what
was the need. what was the necessity Of
adopting Section - at ali. for th. quail
h,ations ot voters at all elections for
oihcers elective 10y the people had already
bven met And fully, completely aud ex-
| hausuvely enumerated and fixed in Article
:. Aud IN all debates of the convention.
Ia its long-drawn-uut effort to frame this
| Constitution, not one word il found
showing any Intention to draw any dis
function between general and special elec-
tons. but the word election l. u-ed IN
its broad and comprehensive seuse. On
page GOO OF the journal of the Conven-
ton the majority of the committee on
this election franchise matter SAN. "The
committee, therefore, recommends that
there shall be embraced as "a On -requis.
tie to voting on all persons embraced in
the classes upon which the privilege Of
suffrage Il conferred. except upon the
| niltary and naval classes. a poll tax OF
u % which must be paid six months
before the election in which the voter
oilers To participate The conclusion Is
irresistible II seems to me. that Section
;, OF the Schedule, was manifestlv in
tended tu meet such elections as had not
been included in Article >, and To REQUIRE
Tor the electors at those elections the
same qualifications IN order to vote as
are provided for in Article for mem
ners ot the General Assembly and all
"ihcers elective by the people" thereby
providing for only one electorate for all
Glasses of elections, whether general
special, or local option, with the same
qualifications Tor electors in all elections.
he word election" II defined in he case
oi State W. Board OF Canvassers Is. c.
| ~ >. =. do in which the court. in "A
very analogous case of this, said: AN
election Is the expression OF a choice by
the voters OF IA body polite. and it seems
| 10 us, whether IL be for a particular in
dividual, or Ia favor Of "A stated propo-i-
uOn, Is, nevertheless, an election" Article
>. N my opinion, is referred to in Section
Is, of the Schedule, in order TO describe
and determine the qualification of all
voters, all electors, for all elections held
alter the Constitution went into effect.
In order To limit the scope of Section Is
/ should have 10 decide that the usual
and accepted definition" of the word
all does NOT apply, and that it only
meant 'in all elections held after this
Constitution goes into effect for officers
elective by the people In other words.
that II does not mean ell elections as we
usually understand and define these
words. Such, however, is not the accept
cd construction Of language-plain Ian
guage found in the lawson the con-
trary, we are bound to define the mean
ing OF the Sc worde, "in their usual and
accepted way"
In this deciding am not unmindful of
the fact that the construction placed on
the Constitution by the Legislature is
.ntitled TO great weight and that every
doubt should be resolved in favor OF it's
validity, and fully realize the delicacy
oil de cision to the contrary, but the
"plain language" of the present Consti-
tuition, ss | read it, leaves me with no
alternative. In Day VS. Robsrts. lOl
Va. p. 24S, our Court of Appeals tays:
The construction placed upon the Con-
stitution of the State by the Legislature
Is entitled to consideration and in case
OF doubt ehOuid be influential in its con-
struetion; but cannot be permitted to
overturn plain language" Ii is worthy
OF note that while the suffrage clause OF
the Constitution OF 500 referred only to
members OF the General Assembly and
ali ofticsrs elected by the people," there
was never any contention raised that it's
provisions did not likewise apply TO
those elections not specifically mentioned
therein, and there is no record, so far as
} J am advised, Of any legislative effort to
prescribe different qualification for any
class OF electors at any elections than
those prescribed by the Constitution. Ii
is further worthy Ofnote that the General
Assembly OF 1902-3 1, and that of 1904
seems TO have acted on the theory that
the suffrage article and Section Is of the
Schedule OF the Constitution OF 1902
covered all kinds ofeections in this State.
See Acts of the General Assembly, De-
cember =, 1903, Acts of 19O2-3-4 and
Acts approved March II, 1904
III, therefore. Section Is OF the Schedule
has the same force and effect as the Con-
stitution, and 1t Is so ordained, then CIV
ing the language of that Section its usual
and accepted definition, am reluctantly
constrained TO the conclusion that the
Act approved February 2S, 1908, known
as the Ward Act, is in plain conflict
with the Constitution. IL Is also con-
! tended by contestees that under Section
62 oil the Consultation the Legislature Is