Staunton spectator and vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1896-1916, 1908-03-27
THE POLL TAX DECISION.

THE POLL TAX DECISION. =
The Court of Appeals last week, in
the case Of Tazewell, ct ais, against
Herman, treasurer, which went up on
appeal from the Law and Chancery
court of Norfolk, rendered decision of
the greatest Importance TO the people
of the whole State. The original pre-
ceeding was in the form of petition
for mandamus TO compel the treasur-
er to include in the list returnable to
the clerks office 10 serve as a guide 10
the judges of election only the names
of such citizens as had paid their capt.
tation tax Gin person." This prayer
was refused by Judge Martin of that
city and the Supreme Court reversed
his ruling in an elaborate opinion, in
which all the judges concurred. The
Norfolk VirginianPilot says:
"fhe reasoning by which the higher
tribunal sustains its judgment is based
on the specific requirement of the Con-
stitution that to establish the right to
vote al any given election the appli-
cant must have personally" made pre-
payment of the capitation tax not later
than a certain date prior TO the election
in which he offers to participate. The
conclusion is drawn that the intent Of
the trainers was to prevent the qualifi-
cation of voters through the interven-
ton of political organizations, candi-
dates for office or other interested par
ties and that the requirement, being
explicit and mandatory in providing
the way in which prerequisite to
suffrage shall be performed, must be
strictly construed.
$50 far it is difficult to see how the
court could have found otherwise. The
Constitution uses the word personal
ly" in every paragraph of the sections
referring to the prepayment of the head
tax as qualification for suffrage. And
that the lists to be supplied by the
Treasurer to the Clerk, and thereafter
to be posted by the Sheriff at each vot-
ing place, were designed to set forth
only the names of those who quOad hoe
had complied with the conditions pre-
cedent to casting ballot at the cleo
ton then pending, is shown by the
closing section, which, after STIMULATING
for the recording and preservation Of
such lists, grants to the General AS
sembly discretionary power to prescribe
by statute for the requirement of ''fur-
ther evidence" than such lists, "of the
prepayment of capitation taxes" as a
prerequisite to the right to register and
vote"
"But the dictum of the Supreme
Court, to the very respectful criticism
that, while settling the point that the
Constitution means what it says and
that the treasurers must make up the
list in question only of the names of
those who have paid personally or in
person, that it yet leaves open to set
Element by each individual Treasurer
the question of what constitutes pre-
payment personally or in person. and
until this basic feature of the legal
problem be authoritatively solved, it is
to be feared that the conflicting inter
probation by the local officials of their
duty in this respect will prevent any
thing like reasonably consistent adj
ministration of our electoral system.
sThat good will come from the decis-
ion is not to be doubted. A wholesome
check will be given the wholesale pay
ment of the qualifying tax by others
than those from whom it is due, and
the Treasurer, however latitudinOus his
view short of absolute contempt of the
purpose of the law, must exercise some
degree of saving care in making up his
list. Still the fact remains that the
Court must go further than it appears
to have done in order to ensure against
contrariety of practice i'll the differen-
cities and counties. The officials have
been told with sufficient clearness what
not to do, now they need to be instruct
ed where the line of discrimination is
to be drawn, so that they may know
with equal certainty what to do and
how to do it. With no guide whatever
to what constitutes personal payment,
it is not to be expected that one hun
dred and fifty financial agents of the
State will arrive at consensus of Opin-
ion in relation to a complicated legal
conundrum. The explanation just rem
dered, like some of the utterances of the
Delphian oracle, raises new puzzle;
and we respectfully suggest that the
Supreme Court has SO far only led us TO
the point where the real trouble lies.
More light from the only source of en-
lightenment is needed; and even when
that shall have been granted, there will
ramain an imperative obligation on the
General Assembly TO strengthen the
operation of the ascertained law of the
case by an enactment affixing an ade-
quate penalty to violation OF its spirit.
The prepayment by one person OF the
poll taxes of others is not now punish
able offence under the statutes OF Viz
ginia. and until it is made so the plain
purpose Of the Constitutional provisions
cannot be enforced"