|
CITIII:NSIIII' 87 AND SUFFRAGE IN 11.1R1'LAND.
- APPENDIX.
While this work-w~hassing through the press and too late for insertion
in the text, several int~QSting all important decisions were made by. the
Courts, on the questions of residence and the rights of minurlty Supervsors
in the appointmlent of election officials.
Owing to the proximity of certain Dlarylancl counties to the City of
Washington, quite a nnmber of persons purchased residences in these counties
and lived there hart of tile year ; the rest of tile year they spent in
tile City
of Washington. On October 29, 1895, Judge Lynch, in tile Circuit Court fur
Montgomery Connt~T, cfiecided that two such summer residents-Messrs.
«'m. H. Allen and Frederick W. Ritter-who spent tile major part of each
year in that county, 'Were-entitled to he registered and to vote there.
On November I , 189; he made a still more important decision. Mr. I3. H.
Warner, a man engaged-in business in IVa.sliingtun City, had a county home
in MontgolTlery County. . At that residence he spent host of the year with
his
family, renlovin~:,' his faivily to W'a.shingtun for a. part of the winter.
On one
or two occasions, hefore_suc.h removal, he made oath before the Clerk of the
Court of Montgomery County that he did not intend to gain a residence else-
where, but that he intended to return to Montgomery County within a few
months. He had never=-lived fur twelve consecutive months in Maryland.
Judge Lynch promptly decided the question of residence in Warner's favor.
He stated that the intention of the law was lint to narrow the right of
suffrage
and entangle the bona--fide citizen in a number |
