Year: 1866

Editors of Register;


In my last letter TO you / revieweC
the third section of the Registration Act
and arrived at the conclusion that any
person who is qualified TO vote under
the provisions of the constitution of thi:
State, who has faithfully supported the
constitution and laws of the United
States for twelve months, (or during the
time he has lived under their protec-
ten, and taken the benefit of the Am
pesty Proclamation of the President, is
entitled to have his name registered as
| a qualified voter under the provisions OF
the Registration Act


la connection with this conclusion,
| wish to consider, briefly, the sec
ond paragraph of the eighth section of
the Act which reads thus: 1t shall be
the duty Of the county Board of Regis
tratioQ to examine such book, (that is
the list of persons registered by the reg
trars,) and if they are satisfied that any
person has been registered who has been
guilty of any of the acts enumerated in
the affidavit contained in the third sec
tion of this act, or is in any way dis
qualified TO vote, under the provisions,
thereof, it shall be the duty of the said
Board, upon proof of any such act or dis
qualification, to exclude the name OF
such person from the list of registered
voters But the party whose name is
proposed TO be excluded, shall hare due
notice of the time and place Of taking the
eridencp 10 prOrP has disgualifcations, lrhich
eridesee he shall hare the right to rebIh, and
shall have his name restored to snch list
Improperly stricken therefrom,


Without proper understanding and
legitimate construction of this para,
graph. il may be interpreted so as TO
conflict with my construction of the
third section, while in fact there is no
collision whatever The third section
refers 10 the duties of the Registrars,
and this To the duties OF the county
Board The Registrar, il he has no
donbt of the present IOydIty ofthe person
who offers tn REGISTER, and there is no
disqualification. is in duty and Jg hiS
oath bound To register such person, al
though he may be satisfied in his own
mind that the person * guilty of all
the "acts enumerated IN the affidavit
Ii is not his province To usurp the iuris
diction Of the comfy Board, and WithOm
ana eridepcp exclude loyal persORs who
may have at some past time aided the
rebellion, or who, from conscien
tious sCruples, arising from the
uncOustitutiOnality OF the act, re
fuse to take the oath speci
fed To allow this discretion or author
ity, wonld be to give him more power
than the county Board. For that body
can exclude no one except upon strict
proof aIiHndp, the oath o. the party him
self The powers and duties Of the Reg
istrar are lucidly and imperatively laid
down in the third section, and he eau
not, without incnrring the penalty en.
acted in the eleventh section, deviate
from them whatever may be the duties
of other officers under other sections Of
the act. The county Board, il they prorS
the party guilty of any of the acts
named in the affidavit, may exclude his
name from the list. Now if this power
of excluding persons wjthOm proof be
vested in the Registrar, il was certainly
great stoidity in the Legislature to
vest the same power IN the county
Board, aud when it is recollected that
that Board canuOt exclude except upon
proof, the whole thing becomes absurd
in the extreme.


In this review, have given an hon
est, candid aud, what | conceive to be,
the only true aud just Interpretation OF
the act in reference to the duties of Reg.
istrars II have erred have done so
in sincerity and, | hope, on the side OF
Justice anl right Yours, &c,


"GREFNBRIER