trict the day previous to the election, obtain his
Tote in the third district. So a voter residing in
the twelfth ward of the city of Baltimore, and
entitled to vote in the third district, may by re-
moving into the eleventh ward, over night, claim
his vote next day in the fourth district. It is
therefore obvious that these persons have advan-
tages and privileges not common to other citi-
zens, and it is admitted that a remedy is neces-
sary to produce equality. The amendment now
offered, simply proposes that in all cases a voter
shall have resided in his Congressional district
or the district for which any officer is to be cho-
sen, for six months previous to the election.
An erroneous opinion seemed to prevail, that
he desired to restrain or restrict the right of
suffrage. It was not so. His sole object was to
secure to legal, honest, fair voters, the just ef-
fect of their votes, by preventing false and fraud-
ulent votes.
The amendment he now offered, had a further
provision, which would extend the right of suf-
frage to a considerable class of persons, who had
never, before enjoyed it, but as he thought ought
to have it. Where a citizen now removes from
one county to another, although all the time in
the same district, he cannot vote unless he has re-
sided six months to the county to which he last
removed.
By his amendment, he would have the privi-
lege of voting always in some part of that dis-
trict, if he had not removed entirely beyond it.
This provision would not only remedy the evils
which had been suggested as likely to be felt by
men in humble life, whose necessities required
them frequently to change their place of residence,
but would extend the right to quite a considera-
ble number of persons now disfranchised.
Mr PRESSTMAN said he had a much stronger
objection to this amendment than to the five days
restriction, as applicable to Baltimore. The
ground taken by the Baltimore delegation, was
that Baltimore had a population much greater in
amount, than other counties; and the hardship
of the proposition bore more hardly on them
than others. He instanced the operation of the
restriction on the residents of Baltimore, to show
the effect of the restrictions. He did not wish
to encourage or countenance any frauds; and
concluded with expressing a hope that the right
of a legal voter might not be infringed, lest an
illegal vote should be admitted.
Mr. MERRICK could not believe it possible,
that this body could put all the counties of Mary-
land on the same footing. He instanced the ine-
quality to which this would give rise, and con-
tended that laws should not be so made as to have
a partial operation. The amendment now offer-
ed secured equal rights to all.
Mr. RIDGELY stated that he had voted against
the five days restriction; but his difficulty was
entirely obviated by this amendment, which
broke up colonizatson, and gave sufficient pro-
tection to the legal voters. He would go for it.
The question was then taken on the substitute
amendment of Mr, CHAMBERS, and it was agreed
to. |
Mr. CHAMBER; then offered the following
amendment:
"And in case any county or city shall be so
divided as to form portions of different electoral
districts for the election of Congressmen, Sena-
tor, Delegate or other officer or officers, then to
entitle a person to vote for such officer, he must
have been a resident of that part of the county or
city which shall form a part of the electoral dis-
trict, in which he offers to vote, for six months
next preceding the election, but a person who
shall have acquired a residence in such county or
city, entitling him to vote at such election, shall
be entitled to vote in the election district from
which he removed until he shall have acquired
a residence in the part of the county or city to
which he has removed. "
Which was twice read.
Mr. SELLMAN suggested that a delay of a day or
two should be allowed for the consideration of
this amendment, as he thought that some diffi-
culty might exist in relation to it. It was a pro-
position for which all gentlemen would be likely
to vote, if they could properly do so; and he
cited, in illustration; a case in which difficulty
might arise.
Mr. PARKE moved to strike out six months and
insert "one," but, on a suggestion from the Chair,
that the motion was not now in order, with-
drew it.
Mr. CHAMBERS modified his amendment by in-
serting the word "ward."
Mr. SPENCER said that the proposition of the
gentleman from Kent, struck him with great
force, but he thought it was not entirely exempt
from difficulties. Therefore, he asked a little
more time for its examination. As the gentle-
man from Kent desires to promote the object we
all desire in this proposition, it might be desira-
ble to let it lie over until Monday. He stated,
in brief, what were his objections, and as he
wished to vote for it, if on examination these
objections should he removed. He would vote
that the amendment might be laid on the table
and printed. It can be again offered in the
House; or, after we have voted on some other
amendments, might be brought up again in committee
of the whole.
The CHAIR intimated that the motion was not
now in order.
Mr. CHAMBERS made a further explanation, in
which he suggested that as in all laws for practical
purposes, hardships could lot be in every
case avoided. So it might possibly be in carry-
ing out this law. The proposition now offered
had been deliberated on, and the Committee had
come to the conclusion that if we cannot extend
the franchise to all, we may to some. He had
no desire to press the vote now. It might be
postponed until Monday, if the Convention
was not prepared to act on it.
Mr. SPENCER did not wish to be understood as
opposing the amendment. The gentleman from
Kent, had forcibly presented his reasons. But
his objections were not obviated. He hoped
the amendment would be printed, after which he |
