Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]

certain portion of the ladies ought to be allowed this right. Man, however, being the "stronger vessel," possessing the power, physical and numerical, has deprived them of this privilege in every State of the Union.

In a state of nature, every man is a sovereign. He is the sole regulator of his own actions. No man can bind him: no one has a right to interfere with him. But when he enters into society, he surrenders a portion of his uatural rights, and submits himself, in a certain degree, to the control of others. The manner in which such control must be exercised, is pointed out with precision in the constitution and the laws; and, to be effective, it must conform, in every important particular, to the rules which are thus prescribed. If you attempt to exercise it in any other mode, your acts are void, and impose no obligation whatever. This proposition is perfectly indisputable: it is as true as revelation itself.

[H. OF R.

majority and minority arrive at the same conclusion; and in that conclusion all the gentlemen who have addressed the House concur, without hesitation. The first is, that there has been an election; and the second, that a part of the votes given are to be stricken from the polls. Upon these two points we all agree. But when we come to judge of the particular votes to be rejected, then we disagree. And in determining the various points which arise, it has been well remarked by a gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. HARDIN] that this is a case sui generis; that it ought to be decided by the constitution and laws of Kentucky, and the practice under them, and not by precedent. If to these he had added the constitution of the United States, I should have been satisfied with the rule he proposed.

Notwithstanding the merits of the whole controversy are properly before the House, yet the votes more immediately under consideration are those given at Lancaster, One gentleman [Mr. MARSHALL] has informed us that in the county-of Garrard, whilst Moses V. Grant, Esq. it is sufficient, upon the present occasion, to advert to was presiding as judge on Monday morning, and the votes the constitution of Kentucky; that it alone furnishes a given at the same place on Tuesday, in the absence of sufficient rule to guide this House in its determination. the sheriff. Here I must be allowed to notice a position No proposition, in my opinion, could be more erroneous. advanced in the minority report, and in the arguments of We must first turn to the constitution of the United several gentlemen who have discussed this subject. It is States; we may then examine the constitution of Ken- said that the majority of the committee admit that the tucky; and, lastly, explore the laws of that commonwealth. votes given on Monday morning, before ten o'clock, would From these three sources we can obtain the rules by have been good, if Mr. Grant had remained upon the which we should be governed. By the first, we are bench throughout the election. Now, sir, the report of empowered to judge of the elections and qualifications the committee contains no such admission, nor have I heard of our own members. By the second and third, the a single member of the committee advocate that doctrine. qualifications of voters, and the time, place, and manner In the report it is, in so many words, left undecided. It of holding elections, are particularly pointed out. Under is remarked that the committee might not have rejected the constitution of Kentucky alone, no election could be the votes, if Grant had continued to act, thus leaving it held. The gentleman stated a case in which he sup. wholly undetermined. For my own part, I expressly disposed the people of a district to meet, and, in some way, claim having made any such admission. to manifest their choice (without any law) for a parti- With respect to the legality of the votes taken on Moncular person, as a representative in this body; that individ- day morning, it has been repeatedly asserted that the true al arrives here with proof, by affidavits, or otherwise, question is, Has a sheriff the right to open the polls beof such choice, and demands his seat; and the gentle- fore ten o'clock? Upon this hinge, it is insisted, the man declares it to be his opinion that we would yield whole case turns. In this matter, I am compelled to disto the demand. But suppose that one-half, one-third, sent altogether from the gentlemen. Whether a sheriff or even a less number of voters in that district should could, or could not, under ordinary circumstances, all the remonstrate against his right to a seat here: would this officers appointed by the county court being present, House disregard their complaint? I tell the gentleman proceed to open the polls before ten o'clock, is not the that, under no circumstances, as I conceive, could such true issue. In fact, it has little or nothing to do with the a title be recognised here. Sir, the constitution of the point under consideration. The true issue is, Can a sheriff, United States presents an insuperable objection to it. before ten o'clock, which is the usual hour of opening the It declares (art. 1st, sec. 4th,) that "the times, places, polls throughout the State of Kentucky, declare the office and manner of holding elections for Senators and Rep- of a judge vacant, and appoint whom he pleases to fill resentatives shall be prescribed in each State by the Le- the vacancy, when the judge himself is on his way to the gislature thereof." This constitution is the paramount place of holding the election-is in sight of the town, if law of the land; and no valid election can be held until you please—and actually arrives there before ten o'clock? the State Legislature has prescribed the rules by which it Or, in other words, can the sheriff create a vacancy, by is to be governed. True, Congress have power to alter his own arbitrary will, where there is none, either in fact these rules; but it must be done by law. This House or in law, and thereby thrust from the bench the judge cannot do it. And until a law is passed by Congress upon appointed by the court, filling the place with an indithe subject, the law of the State must prevail. It is invidual of his own selection? Can this judge occupy the vain to msist that, if the officers appointed by the consti-seat for an hour, until the usual time of opening the polls, tuted authorities refuse to serve, any unauthorized per- and then give place to the true judge? and shall the acts on may take their places; that, if the law requires thirty of the former be deemed legal, and receive our approbadays' notice, two days would be sufficient. It is in vain tion? The constitution says that the election shall be for gentlemen to say, in reply to the able argument of my held on the first Monday in August; the law provides that friend from Georgia, who made this report, that he is ad- the county court shall appoint two judges, and a clerk of hering to the letter of the law, and disregarding its spirit; the election, and that the sheriff shall open the polls by that this is an age of "liberal principles." Sir, these ten o'clock. If the judges or clerk do not attend, the principles are truly liberal! They lead to the overthrow sheriff is required to fill the vacancy. They are each to of all order; of all government. Instead of a Govern- take an oath of office, and to attend to receiving the votes, ment of laws, which is the pride and the boast of every until the election is completed, and a fair statement made American, they offer us the most wild and lawless anar- of the whole amount thereof. The practice under this chy. They would prostrate the valued and established institutions of the country, and transform our whole systera into a "mobocracy."

In this contest two things are admitted, on all hands. There is no difference of opinion with regard to them. The

law, in Garrard, is proven to be, to open the polls at ten o'clock; and this construction, it is believed, has been given to the law throughout the whole State. But, as the phrase "by ten o'clock" is used, the gentlemen contend that the sheriff may open the polls at any time between

H. OF R.]

Kentucky Election.

[MAY 22, 1834.

None, whatever. Was he sworn? Not at all; yet the law requires that he should be. Was he requested to do an official act? No; the gentleman informs us that the law does not require votes to be cried; that it is only a practice that has grown up in the State. The only act which the sheriff asked Spillman to perform was, to cry the votes. Yet the gentleman says that he was a deputy. No certificate--no oath-not even required to do an official act; and yet a deputy sheriff of Garrard county! Sir, the gentleman complained of the "sophistical reasoning" of those who differed with him in opinion; but if this be sound reasoning, then I confess that all the rules which I have been taught, for the purpose of distinguishing true from false reasoning, are utterly delusive and erroneous.

Mr. Speaker, there is but one safe ground to occupy, in relation to this whole subject. The constitution and laws of society have prescribed certain rules by which elections shall be conducted. To these we must look in every contest: by these we must abide in all our decisions. An election which has not been held in accordance with them is absolutely void.

midnight and that hour. Here they are strict construc- valid and deserves our unqualified sanction. So bold did tionists. They would hold us to the very letter itself. this position appear to the gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. Upon another branch of the subject, we were told by the HARDIN,] who last addressed the House, that he endeavorgentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. BANKS] that the pow-ed to avoid it by a more circuitous route. He contended ers of the sheriff must not be enlarged "by construction." that Mr. Spillman, who cried the votes in the absence of Let us apply that principle here. Let us look a little to the sheriff, was a deputy, and his acts were therefore legal. the consequences that flow legitimately from the argu- Let us examine this ground. How was he appointed a ment. It will not be denied that the law, in requiring deputy? Had he a warrant, or certificate of appointment? the county court to select two of their own body to act as judges of the election, intended that, under all ordinary circumstances, the judges who presided should be individuals selected by that respectable body of men; and that it was only in the event of certain contingencies that the sheriff should be permitted to select either judges or clerk. The practice under the law has been in entire conformity to this supposition. But if, as gentlemen contend, the sheriff can, at any time before the hour of ten, open the polls, and fill all the vacancies that exist at the time of opening them; and if the mere fact of the judge and clerk not being present at the moment constitutes a vacancy, then is the whole object of the law defeated. The sheriff may, at every election, supersede the officers appointed by the court, by his own friends, or the friends and creatures of one of the candidates. He can attend at any moment after midnight-open the polls, and, having the persons he wishes on the spot, proceed to fill all the offices! It is said they may resign. True. But suppose they do not choose to resign, as they would not in party times, or when a particular object was to be accomplished by their appointment: the judges and clerk appointed in pursu What is the object of these rules? Is it not to secure ance of the law might attend at the usual hour, and de- to us a good Government? to give order, stability, and mand their seats; but it would be mere mockery to do so. security to the body politic? It is, sir. Those who The individuals selected by the sheriff, and who, probably, framed them intended to protect us equally from the would never have been chosen for any purpose by the iron tyranny of a despot, and from the uncertain, capricourt, will remain upon the bench, and control and man- cious sway of an uncontrollable mob. This can never be age the people of the county, in open defiance of their accomplished, but by adhering to the rules, as they have will, and of the plain and palpable meaning of the law. Sir, been established. Yet gentlemen contend that the peothis doctrine constitutes the sheriff of the county a mon- ple are not bound to know the rules; they are not required arch! It clothes him with the most alarming powers--to know the law! 1s not this a strange doctrine to be adpowers that were never designed to be given him, and vocated by legal gentlemen; to be advocated by lawyers which can only be claimed by a most labored and far- of long practice, and of high eminence in their profession? fetched construction of the law. When gentlemen talk Sir, one of the first lessons taught in the legal science— of absurd consequences resulting from the construction one of the fundamental principles upon which all judicial which the committee have given to the statute, it would proceedings are predicated-is, that every man is bound be well for them to follow out the consequences of their to know the law. What would be thought of an inown principles. dividual, arraigned in court for an offence, who should plead that he did not know the law, and was not bound to know it? What would be said to a party, in a civil case, who would attempt to set up such a defence? They would both be silenced by the court; and that, too, with the approbation of every lawyer in the country.

For what do we contend? Why, that as ten o'clock is the usual hour of opening the polls-the only time named in the law-and as the court have the power to appoint the judges and a clerk, and the sheriff only a power to fill vacancies, the manifest intention of all this is, that the sheriff shall wait until ten before he declares the offi- Again, we are told that we ought to decide this ques ces vacant, and proceeds to fill them by new appoint- tion upon principles of equity; that we must not be techments. This is no labored construction. It is a fair, anical, but must be guided by the justice of the case. reasonable construction. It establishes a safe rule, that will protect the rights of all concerned. It gives effect to all the provisions of the law, and so construes the various clauses as that the whole statute may stand unimpaired.

I

have more than once heard very much such arguments in court. An advocate, finding all the principles of law against him, appeals to what he calls equity and justice. He implores the court and jury to remember that it is a hard case, and that it is their duty to do what is right beIt is amusing, sir, to hear the gentlemen who call this tween the parties. Do we not all know to what this ara labored construction, and who insist so strenuously gument leads? It has been well remarked by an eminent upon our adherence to the language, to the plain letter writer, that if even a court of equity should disregard cerof the law, in this instance, when they arrive at another tain general rules and principles, all our rights would point, attempt to show that the presence of the sheriff depend upon the arbitrary will of the court; upon the is not necessary during the progress of the election. They notions entertained by the judge of what was right and admit that the law says the votes shall be given in the what was wrong. One judge would decide a cause one presence of the judges and the sheriff, and yet contend way, and another would decide a similar cause differently. that the sheriff need not be present; that he may leave We should have no rule but the dictates of the chancelthe town, and call some one of the neighbors to cry the lor's conscience, or the length of his foot! The laws furvotes and discharge the various dutics of the presiding nish a certain criterion by which all our rights can be deofficer. He may ride through the county electioneering termined. Disregard these, and you set up in their place for one of the candidates, or employ himself in any man- the opinions, notions, and feelings of the court and jury, ner he pleases; and yet, all that is done in his absence is in every case that comes before them. Are gentlemen

MAY 22, 1834.]

=

Kentucky Election.

[H. OF R.

prepared for this? Are they willing to set aside the elec-ments that the most fertile imagination can bestow. They tion laws of the States, and be governed by the opinions cling to it with the violence of a shipwrecked mariner of the honorable members of this House? For my part, I can never sanction such a state of things; nor can countenance principles that must inevitably lead to such a revolution. In the language of the Pittsburg memorial, read here the other day, I go "for the supremacy of the laws and constitution of my country.'

[ocr errors]

who feels that his only hope is the plank in his grasp, and that some more powerful arm is tearing even that plank from his possession. We are urged to concede the point, with a degree of earnestness and eloquence that requires the utmost strength and resolution to resist the overpowering influence.

Nearly allied to the argument which I have just con- For one, sir, I beg to be excused. The position itself sidered, is another one equally fallacious, when applied is wholly defenceless; and I cannot but believe that gento this election. The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr.tlemen will find it so upon a closer examination. What BANKS] insists that Grant was acting under color of au- is an election? One gentleman [Mr. MARSHALL] informed thority, and that his acts were therefore good; that he sat us that it was an expression of the choice of a majority of in the place of a judge; that he had all the emblems of the voters. This is a sound definition, so far as it goes. authority about him, and the people were not bound to It is the truth; but it is not the whole truth. An election inquire whether he was legally authorized to receive votes is an expression of the will of a majority of the voters, or not. Apply this doctrine to the practical concerns of manifested according to the provisions of the constitution life. Suppose a person comes to your house claiming to and laws. Unless their choice is made known in the be the tax-gatherer of the county; he has a book contain-mode prescribed by these, the act is void; it is no elecing the names of yourself and neighbors, with an amount tion; it binds no one; it confers no privilege whatever. of chattel and land tax against each one; he is a decent, What do these instruments require? They not only degentlemanly looking personage, and you have no reason fine, particularly, who may vote, but they point out, speto doubt his being fully authorized to receive your taxes; cifically, the time, place, and manner of voting. They you pay him, and take his receipt. But, to your utter not only declare who may give votes, but they are equally astonishment, on the next day the proper officer appoint-precise in declaring who shall receive the votes so given. ed by the Government to collect the revenue appears There must be both givers and receivers. at your door and demands the payment of your quota of more have an election without some tribunal to receive the public levy! Will your receipt protect you?--will it and record the votes, than we can without some person do to talk about the stranger's having the color of author-to give the votes which the law requires to be recorded. ity or of office? Why, we all know it would not. Sup- Is there a doubt about this? Is not one as necessary, both pose, again, that there is a judgment against you in court by the law, and from the very nature of things, as the for a sum of money; an individual, professing to be a other? Does not the truth of this proposition strike sheriff or deputy sheriff, but who is not so, calls upon you every mind with irresistible force? It does, sir. And and demands payment of the amount; you discharge the you might as well wage war with the tempest in its mad debt, and take a receipt; will it protect you when the true career, as undertake to combat a principle so far beyond officer appears? Sir, it would be worse than idle to talk the reach of refutation. to him about the color of office or authority. The money would have to be paid again.

We can no

By an election, a part of the community appoint public agents or servants, whose acts are obligatory upon all. The answer to all that has been advanced upon this Yes, sir, I repeat it, they appoint public servants; for, point is, that there is a wide difference between acts that democrats as we are, republicans as we may profess to be, are void, and those that are only voidable. Every lawyer or "whigs" as we may have recently become, we are too is aware of this. When a man undertakes to discharge apt to forget "the rock from which we have been hewn;" the duties of a public officer by virtue of an appointment and it is well for us to be reminded that we are but seror authority that is merely defective, or informal in some vants to the great mass of our fellow-citizens, bound by particular, but which has been conferred by the proper their will, and responsible to them for all our conduct. tribunal, then his acts are not to prejudice third persons. But the acts of the agents are not, and ought not to be, Individuals are allowed to recognise him as a public offi- binding upon all, unless made according to law. A more cer, without inquiring into all the merits of his title to obvious truism could scarcely be presented to the human such distinction. As, for instance, if an office becomes understanding. Yet the minority of the committee boldly vacant, and the persons authorized to fill the vacancy avow the doctrine, and are sustained by the arguments make an appointment, which is not made, however, in advanced upon this floor, that if persons, having no auexact conformity to law-which is defective in its form--thority whatever, should drag the judges from the bench, here individuals might be protected by his acts. But and usurp the authority to preside over the election, when an appointment is wholly nugatory in its inception; their acts would be legal, the election would be valid, when it is void in the first instance, as in the case of this and the candidate having a majority of votes, thus bejudge; when it is made to fill a vacancy that has not hap-stowed, would be entitled to a seat in this House. I conpened--that does not exist--then all his acts are totally fess, sir, that I am startled when I hear such principles void; they neither protect himself nor any one else. They can neither be recognised in a court of justice, nor before any other tribunal that pretends to be governed by

law.

avowed in the House of Representatives of the United States. I am the more amazed, when these disorganizing theories are put forth by honorable members, who have been so loud and so velement against the President and Throughout this discussion, as well as in the report of the Secretary of the Treasury, for alleged usurpations the minority, there is one point to which our attention is and violations of law with regard to the United States earnestly called. It is said, sir, that the chief, if not the Bank and the public revenues of the country. Why have only inquiry should be, were the persons who voted they so suddenly become the advocates of " "usurpers?" properly qualified to do so, according to the constitution? Is not usurpation the same in every department of the If so, it is but of little consequence who presided. To Government? Sir, I am against it, let it come in what this proposition we are constantly referred. Of its pecu- shape, or from what quarter it may. I oppose it in judges Early important character we are perpetually reminded. of an election; I oppose it in this House; I denounce it It seems, from the arguments of honorable members, to in the Senate; and convince me that the Executive has possess a paramount interest over every other considera- been guilty of it, and I will condemn him as freely and tion that has been named. They present it in every va- cordially as I now support him. The gentleman from riety of shape and surface; it is decorated with all the orna-Kentucky [Mr. MARSHALL] insisted that the sheriff' could

H. OF R.]

Kentucky Election.

[MAY 22, 1834.

make a temporary appointment of judges. This he in- of the judges, an oath is administered by the clerk as to ferred from the facts, that the judges and clerk hold their his right of voting. If the judges are divided in opinion, offices for a year; and as there might be more than one the sheriff gives the casting voice, and settles the right of election during that period, and they might be absent the voter. from one and present at the others, it would be necessary When the vote is given he cries it; when the election for the sheriff to appoint officers to serve during their is over he closes the polls, takes charge of the poll-books, absence. Suppose this to be so, does it legalize Grant's and carries them to the place of meeting, where all the appointment? Clearly not. For he was appointed before sheriffs in the district convene to compare and add the the vacancy occurred; and he left the bench at ten o'clock; whole number of votes, and give a certificate to the canwhen the law declares that the judges and clerk ap- didate elected. In addition to this, the law expressly pointed shall attend to receiving votes until the election requires that the votes shall be given in the presence of is completed, and shall then certify the same. Here the the judges and the sheriff. One would suppose that lanjudge leaves the bench before the election is closed; he guage could not well be made plainer, and that there does not count the votes taken whilst he was presiding; could be but one opinion about the true construction of and he makes no certificate at all of what was done du- this law. Yet, strange to tell, our opinions differ as ring the time he officiated. Mr. Wheeler, who suc- widely as the poles. The same gentlemen who are for ceeded him, could not certify to what was done before conferring such alarming powers upon this officer, with he came to town; and so far as his certificate purports to regard to opening the polls, filling vacancies, &c., would cover Grant's doings, it is a nullity. If, therefore, the have us believe, upon this branch of the subject, that his sheriff could appoint a judge to preside during one elec-powers and duties are almost nominal. They inform us tion in the year, it by no means follows that he can ap- that he merely keeps order, that he only cries the votes point one to officiate for an hour or two, and then absent by custom, that he gives all the information to the judges himself without leaving behind him the slightest traces of which he can, and has no voice, except as a witness, in his official existence. controlling the rights of the electors! In attempting to explain away the law, and make it wholly inoperative so far as it requires the sheriff to be present when the votes are given, the gentlemen have insisted that he is not a judge of the election; that he does not decide upon the rights of the voters, (although the proof is exactly the reverse in this case,) and that, therefore, his absence is an immaterial circumstance.

We have heard, sir, that Mr. Grant was sworn as a judge. By reference to the depositions, it will be seen that this is very doubtful. The sheriff testifies that he believes Mr. Grant was sworn, and that H. McKee, Esq. administered the oath. But in another part of his deposition, he states that he appointed Grant, because there was no other justice in town. How, then, could Esquire McKee be there to swear the persons appointed? It is extremely probable that the sheriff is mistaken, and that they were not sworn at all.

To establish this position much stress has been laid upon the fact that the judges selected by the county court are compelled to take an oath of office, as judges of the Somewhat akin to this, is another argument of a gen-election, but the sheriff is not. They are justices of the tleman from Kentucky, [Mr. HARDIN,] who, in order to peace, selected from among the members of the county connect and legalize the acts of Grant and Wheeler, con- court; they have, of course, taken an oath of office before tended that Grant resigned at ten o'clock. Yes, sir, the they are called upon to act as judges of the election. Yet sheriff appointed Grant at nine o'clock, to fill the vacancy the law requires them to be sworn again. So of the occasioned by the absence of Wheeler; Grant took his sheriff; he is a high officer, well known to the law. He seat; he had no written appointment; there is no record too has taken an oath of office. But when he is called or entry made of it; it is uncertain whether he was even upon to preside at the election, he is not required to be sworn. He remains at the bench till ten, the usual hour sworn as a judge. Here the honorable gentlemen seemof opening the polls, when Mr. Wheeler arrives and takes ed to congratulate themselves upon the discovery of what Grant's place; or, according to the gentleman, Grant they are pleased to call "a marked distinction" between "resigns," and, I suppose, Wheeler was appointed to fill the sheriff and the judges. They pause at this point the vacancy occasioned by Grant's resignation. No entry and inquire, exultingly, why this marked distinction" is made of the resignation; none of the new appointment between the provisions of the law relating to these respecof Wheeler. Yet we are told that this is all legal; and tive officers, if it were intended that he should perform, that, too, by an honorable member who charges others in any respect, the functions of a judge? Here they apwith resorting to "sophistical" reasoning and "cob-web pear to think that the committee is completely hemmed technicalities." Such arguments as these may be very up, without the possibility of escape.

cogent and conclusive. To me, however, they appear It is strange how we often delude ourselves and others but bubbles, floating upon the surface of the stream. by looking only at one side of a question, or by deciding Gilded by the sunbeams, they reflect all the gaudy color-upon it without taking time for reflection. The difficulty ing of the rainbow; touched by the spear of truth, they which gentlemen have conjured up is readily removed. burst without either noise or resistance. It is a problem that may be solved with the utmost facilHaving shown, I trust, that the votes taken on Monday ity. I will tell the honorable members why this distincbefore ten o'clock, whilst Moses Grant acted as judge, tion is made. The sheriff holds his office for two years; were not received according to law, that the whole pro- it is a part of his official duty to preside at every election cedure was illegal and void, and that the votes so taken which is held in the county during that period. Hence, must be rejected, I shall now ask the attention of the when he takes an oath of office, the obligation to preside House whilst I submit a few observations relative to the at elections is included in the oath, just as much so as any votes taken in the absence of the sheriff on Tuesday. other part of his official duty. Nothing is clearer than These, I am satisfied, are illegal also, and ought not to this. be counted in deciding upon the claims of the candidates.

But it is not so with the justices; a man may be a justice of the peace for fifty years, and never act as a judge The sheriff in Kentucky possesses very important of the election. The county court is composed of all the powers with respect to the elections, but they are not justices in the county, and meets monthly. At their anquite so extensive as the gentlemen have supposed. He nual meeting, preceding the August election, they are to is required by law to open the polls; he presides and keeps order; he scrutinizes the qualifications of the electors; unless the individual is known to him, or to one

select two members from their own body, to act as judges at the election. They may select the same two persons year after year, if they choose, for a quarter of a century.

MAY 22, 1834.]

Kentucky Election.

[H. OF R.

Where there are from twenty to a hundred justices in the the central Government and the rights and powers of the county, many of them may never act as judges of an several States of this Union, and would in the end lead to election during their lives. Still they are going on dis- a tyranny as odious as the most absolute despotism. charging all their duties as justices of the peace, both as Having shown, I think, that the twenty-five votes given single magistrates and as members of the county court. at Lancaster on Monday, whilst M. Grant, Esq. was preTo ensure the faithful performance of these, an oath of siding, and the forty-five given on Tuesday at the same office is administered to them when they are first commis-place, in the absence of the sheriff, ought not to be resioned. But should they, in the course of their lives, be ceived, I will very briefly notice some other points that appointed by the court as judges of the election, which have been touched in this discussion. is a separate and distinct office, then they are sworn faithfully to discharge the duties appertaining to their new appointment. Is not this a solution of the problem? It appears so to me; and I hope the gentlemen are satisfactorily answered.

The gentleman last up [Mr. HARDIN] spoke of the students of Danville College, whose votes have been stricken from the polls. The constitution of Kentucky gives the right of suffrage to individuals who reside in the State two years, or in the county one year; and requires them The law peremptorily requires the votes to be given in to vote in the county or precinct where they actually rethe presence of the sheriff. The fact is in proof that side at the time of the election. The majority of the they were not so given. He was absent from the place committee believed that the constitution did not intend of holding the election during the greater part of the day, that residence alone, in the most unlimited sense of that and at the time these votes were given he had no deputy word, should bestow the right of suffrage. If this were there. The evidence upon these points is unquestiona-so, aliens who might reside a year in any one county ble, unless we adopt the theory of the gentleman from would thereby entitle themselves to this high immunity. Kentucky, [Mr. HARDIN,] that Spillman became a deputy We believed that this clause deserved a fair and reasonsby a bare request that he would cry the votes given. I ble construction, and that the residence intended was a have already expressed my opinion with regard to this permanent residence for the time, an actual home or domproposition, and do not think it possible to add any thing icil in the State. In this view of the question we found to the argument of my friend from Georgia [Mr. JONES] upon this subject. He totally demolished the whole superstructure.

ourselves sustained by a decision of the Senate of that
Commonwealth, in a contested election between Williams
and Mason. Upon that occasion it was determined that
a citizen of Kentucky, who had been out of the State for
five years, had not lost the right of suffrage. There was
no proof that he left the State permanently to reside else-
where. This was undoubtedly a correct decision. In
ascertaining the home of an individual, almost the whole
inquiry turns upon the intention of the voter.
leave the State with an intention not to return?
absent on a visit or on business, or did he abandon the
country?

Did he Was he

If, then, the law and the facts are as I have stated them to be, how can any one pretend that these votes are valid, and ought to be counted upon the present occasion? Will any one insist, in this instance also, that it is a hard case; that the sheriff was necessarily absent; that this is a mere informality? Sir, we must either conduct the election according to law, or not. If we can dispense with the sheriff, we can upon the same principle excuse one of the judges from attendance; if we can allow one to go, we can spare both, and the clerk with them! Where Now, we have only to reverse this rule, that it may aid will it end? That is the question. Can you place bounds us in deciding the rights of students at a college, or tranto this principle? If so, where are they to be found? sient persons of any description. What is their business The moment we abandon the law, we are afloat upon the in Danville, having come there from other States and broad ocean of uncertainty, where we shall be drifted by counties, and remained in that place for two or three the wind and tide among the rocks and whirlpools where years? Is it to become citizens of that county or of the nothing but the arm of Omnipotence can save us from destruction.

State? Is it to reside permanently, and to amalgamate with the people there; or is it to obtain an education, and I cannot see how any friend of State rights can think then leave the place? Are they in the town as citizens, of adopting the doctrines contended for upon the other having selected it as a home; or are they only there for a side. The States have the power to regulate the time, temporary purpose, the time of their stay being necessa place, and manner of holding the elections. It is ex- rily limited? These were questions which the committee pressly recognised in the federal constitution, as I have had to consider for themselves; and the conclusion at already observed. The State of Kentucky, as well as all which they arrived was, that the residence of a young others in the Union, has exercised this right, and fixed man at school or college, for the sole purpose of pursuing the manner of holding the election. Without a substan-his studies, is not such a residence as confers the right of tial conformity to the rule she has adopted, the election suffrage. is void just so far as it is contrary to the law. The cases

In this opinion they were not only confirmed by the of Jackson and Wayne, and Scott and Easton, both deci-authorities which they consulted, but by the general unded in this flouse, have settled that principle. To disre-derstanding of the community. No father believes, when gard the law of the State, and confirm an election merely he sends his son from Ohio to Kentucky to obtain an eduupon our own ideas of justice, would be a most flagrant cation, that by such removal the son ceases to be an act of usurpation. We may talk of State rights as much Ohioan, and becomes a citizen of Kentucky? Does the as we please; we may be friendly to the doctrine whilst son expect that, when he returns to his former residence, it is our interest to be so; we may deprecate, in the most he will be treated as a foreigner, and be compelled to vehement and eloquent language, the tendency of this undergo a quarantine in his native county before he can Federal Government to absorb all the reserved rights of exercise the rights of citizenship? Surely this is not the the people and of the States; but if we disregard the laws doctrine which prevails among the citizens of the several of the States, enacted upon a subject expressly reserved States who send their sons from home to be educated. for their legislation, and substitute our own will for their Yet to such results must we come if we permit students solemn statutes, I boldly assert that we shall have estab-to exercise the right of suffrage merely on the ground of Tished a principle which will destroy the last vestige of their residence at college. It will hardly be pretended liberty reserved to the members of this confederacy. that they possess this right in two or three States at the Such a principle, carried out, must lead to the concentra- same time. tion of all power in the General Government. It would

Whilst upon this subject I will remark that we decided overleap the barriers erected between the authority of two cases with great facility and unanimity. They were

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »