The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1921-02-24

ny Vic OouIC VI Appears should Cne
matter be carried to that body.
Upon the Attorney Generals opin-
ion being made public there was
| question in the minds of some law
yers as to the steps it will be nee
essary for women to take to hold
office, if the Armstrong opinion stlnds
Some contend that it would be nee
essary at the next session of the Leg
islature to comb every public general
law and every public local law on the
statute books and amend every one
creating offices where the masculine
pronoun is used. Others contend that
the same ends might be accomplished
by single general law, covering all
offices. Still others hold that, as the
masculine pronoun is used in offices
created by the Constitution, several
constitutional amendments will be nee
essary to open the way to women for
these offices.
Another theory advanced was that
the provision in the Declaration of
Rights, or common law, as embodied
in the State Constitution, which pro-
vides that women can hold only the
offices of queen and overseer of the
poor, except by special legislative
statute, might have to be amended to
clear up the whole matter. This
would require a Constitutional amend
ment which would have to be voted on
and which could not be made opera
tive before 1924. If this course
should be found necessary, women
would be barred from office until
then.
The opinion also gave an answer to
another point raised by the Montgom-
err county township. This was with
reference to provisions to the towns
charter that voters in municipal cleo
tions must be taxpayers or husbands
Of taxpayers" Mr.. Starratt wanted
to know if woman, not a taxpayer,
but the wife of a taxpayer, could vote.
ARMSTRONG EXPLAINS RULING
Saturday last while explaining the
true nearing and scope of his recent
opinion which. seemingly barred VIC
men from holding any State or Give
public office to which the holder is
elected, Attorney General Alexander
Armstrong stated that his opinion had
been misconstrued and stretched to
cover more ground than he intended.
What he really meant, he said, was
state statute specifically sets forth
that as a qualification for office the
candidate must be male, women are
barred ipso facto, from aspiring to or
holding such offices. Where the stat
utes do not contain this lettering
factor women may run for the office
and, if elected, hold it.
In the case of Legislative positions
in the House or Senate, neither the
Attorney General nor any of the State
courts are qualified under the law to
pass upon the eligibility of any can
didates or, if elected, the right of any
Senator or Assemblyman-elect to take
office. Both of the Legislative bodies
are the sole judges of the qualifica-
tions of their own members, those of
each body constituting the sole trib-
unal to pass upon the right of any
one to hold office in them, as it is
in the legislative branch of the Fed
eral Government.
But, according to the opinion of
the Attorney General, women are def
initely barred from holding Office
where the use of a masculine pronoun
; or other indications in the wording of
the statutes eliminate them as posi-
BILE candidates. Were woman to run
for and be elected to such an Office
) an interesting situation would arise,
one which would parallel in every
particularly the candidacy of Eugene
Debs, late Socialist candidate for the
Presidency. Debs, as a convicted fell
on incarcerated in Federal prison,
had lost his citizenship and, not being
citizen of the United States, could
not have served as it's President, had
he been elected. The Statutes elimi.
nate him as a possibility. We're a wo-
man to run for an Office barred to her
, by statutory law and be elected much
, legal machinery would have to move
before she could take her seat, if she
ever did, until the laws were changed
----O-
j DIR. u S Mright Sunerintendent of