just as it is the intention of the parent when
he punishes his child, to reform the child.
It has been urged that one hundred and
fifty convicts are turned loose from the peni-
tentiary every year, who will be allowed to
vote. They have fulfilled the requirement of
the law. They have had their punishment.
They have served out their time. Any argu-
ment which applies to refusing them the
privilege of voting, would be equally good
in favor of keeping these men in the peniten-
tiary forever. They are turned loose upon
society.
Mr. EDELEN. I would suggest to my friend
that under the constitution and laws of this
State, it has been the policy to deprive such
persons of the elective franchise.
Mr. PUGH. I have no doubt of it; but we
are here to reorganize the government of this
State. But I take the ground that it never
has been in the contemplation of the law to
punish a man eternally. I do not know what
arguments were urged when this idea was
first incorporated into the constitution. I
only look at the thing as I find it. I say
that there are then two objects always contem-
plated in punishment. One of them is simply
that a man having committed a wrong shall
be punished for the act against society; and
the other is, that be shall be reformed by that
punishment, just as the child is reformed by
the punishment inflicted by its parents. And
I say that object is utterly defeated by this
provision in the law which casts upon the
man for all time this ban, instead of admit-
ting him to the enjoyment of what was in-
tended by the law that he should enjoy, if he
reformed.
Mr. SANDS submitted the following amend-
ment to the section:
Amend by striking out all after the word
"crime," in the second line, and insert "shall
thereafter be entitled to vote at any election
in this State, unless he shall produce to the
judges of the election at which he shall offer
to vote, a certificate signed by six or more
lawful voters, that since his discharge from
the penitentiary, be has demeaned himself as
a sober, honest, and law-abiding citizen;
and no lunatic or person non compos mentis,
shall be entitled to vote."
Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. I would
suggest to the gentleman to strike out the
word "sober," it would be very unpopular
in his section of the State.
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. TODD submitted the following amend-
ment to the section:
insert after "executive," in the third line,
"or unless he be restored to the right of fran-
chise by act of the general assembly."
The amendment was rejected.
The question recurring upon the adoption
of the amendment submitted by Mr. CUSHING,
It was rejected. |
Mr. THURSTON submitted the following
amendment:
Strikeout the words "person under guar-
dianship as a," in the fourth line, and the
words 'as a," in the fifth line, so as to read,
"and no lunatic or person non compos mentis
shall be entitled to vote."
Mr. MAYHUGH. Who is to decide whether
a man is non compos mentis, or a lunatic?
Mr. THRUSTON. The judges of election.
Mr. MAYHUGH. I think that would be &
dangerous experiment.
Mr. THRUSTON. They have always done it.
Mr, MAYHUGH. They have never done it
in our county.
Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. If this
amendment is not adopted, all lunatics will
be entitled to vote who have not a guardian.
Mr. JONES, of Somerset. I hope it will not
be left to the judges of election to say that
any man is a lunatic and not entitled to vote.
Under this doctrine, I doubt whether a sane
man can be found in the State,
Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. In my
practice there has been no case of appointing
a guardian over a lunatic where he has no
property. Common reputation regards cer-
tain men as lunatics. If there is any doubt
upon the question, their friends may have a
jury of inquisition, and have it determined.
But as the section now stands, all lunatics
who have not guardians appointed by the
court under a writ de lunatico inquirendo,
would be entitled to vote.
Mr. JONES, of Somerset. To give the judges
of election the right to try the question of
lunacy, would be giving them an uncertain
and dangerous power.
Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. They have
the right to try the question of non-age or
non-residence, and all such questions equally
affecting the right of a party to vote.
Mr. THRUSTON. It has been the practice in
our part of the State) for the judges of elec-
tion to decide the matter upon common repu-
tation.
Mr. STIRLING. The words "under guardian-
ship" here, do not include persons non com-
pos mentis. It strikes me that we are laboring
under a mistake, and that the section as it
stands, is not liable to the objection urged
against it. It does not say that a person non
compos mentis under guardianship, but that
no person non compos mentis, whether under
guardianship or not, shall be entitled to vote.
A man may be a lunatic and have sane inter-
vals, and he is not allowed to be excluded
unless he is under guardianship; but if not
under guardianship, the judges of election
have no right to exclude him from voting.
Mr. STOCKBRIDGE. I think it was the in-
tention of the committee to copy the old con-
stitution, which reads precisely like this,
word for word, excepting that it says "or
as a person non compos mentis; ' ' which re-
moved it from all doubt. |
