going abroad. Take the case of a person
from the State of Maryland, in the naval ser-
vice of the United States, I agree that as a
general thing, the law would not regard him
as having lost his residence although he might
go the world over; but when he came back
he could vote here in Maryland. But if he
should go to some other part of the United
States and be stationed there, and should
there vote, then it would be wrong for him to
come here and vote. This section simply
provides for that case.
Mr. SANDS. "No person in the naval or
military service of the United States, shall
be considered as having acquired a residence
to vote because he has been employed at any
barracks, forts, or naval station,' '&c. What
has been the custom here?
Mr. MILLER. We have had different cus-
toms at different times, just as the judges of
elections happened to decide the one way or
the other. Sometimes the employees of the
government have been admitted to vote,
sometimes they have been rejected.
Mr. SANDS. Was it not the general prac-
tice in this town for them to be allowed to
vote?
Mr. MILLER. No, sir; those in the military
or naval service of the United States have not
been, under general rules, allowed to vote
here. But when the naval school was estab-
lished here, and officers came here to reside
permanently, although they were lodged
within the naval school buildings, they have
been allowed to vote,
Mr. SANDS Suppose an officer came here
expecting to remain, subject of course to
removal, and was here a year, would the
gentleman exclude him from voting?
Mr. MILLER. No, sir.
Mr. SANDS. Then it is a question of in-
tention of remaining?
Mr. MILLER. This section says that the
mere fact of his being here, shall not be held
to give him a residence, unless he swears it
was his intention to take up his residence
here.
Mr. RIDGELY. Is not that the law now?
Mr. MILLER, No, sir. Under the present
constitution we halve time after time, had
squabbles at our polls about that very thing,
residence said to be the living at the poll.
Mr. SANDS. I want to ask another ques-
tion. That which is most objectionable in
this proposed section is contained in the last
clause. Has it ever been held in Maryland
that a party even so unfortunate as to be de
tained in a public prison, except for an in-
famous crime, was not entitled to vote?
Mr. MILLER. Marylanders have been un-
fortunate enough to be in Fort Lafayette
Fort Warren, and other forts.
Mr. SANDS. Then after we have said in
this article, that those people who have
given aid and comfort to the enemy, should
not vote, the gentleman wants to allow them |
to vote. I have never heard that the putting
a man in prison deprived him of the right
to vote. And I can only conceive that this
last clause was intended for such cases as 1
have alluded to.
Mr. MILLER. If the gentleman has that
objection to it, then I will offer it without the
last clause.
Mr. SANDS, I have the objection to it that
I urged against the first part of it.
Mr. STOCKBRIDGE. There is no doubt that
leaving the State of Maryland without the
intention of remaining out of it, does not de-
prive a person of the right to vote. A per-
son must change his residence with the in-
tention of remaining. Then there are the
persons resident here as' professors in the
naval school, who come here because they
are ordered here by the government. Their
intention is to obey the orders of the gov-
ernment; they come with the expectation of
remaining; but they can hardly say that
they have any intention about it one way or
the other. They bring their families here,
making it their home; expecting it to be
their home, yet liable to be ordered away at
any time, and with the intention of going if
ordered. So that under the law as it now
stands, a little difficulty or doubt might
arise on that point. I suppose if a person
moved here, and brought his family with
him and made it his home—came with the
expectation of remaining here, it would be
construed by the court as if lie came here of
his own will, voluntarily. While the last
part of this section only declares and reiter-
ates what is now the law, it occurs to me
that the first part introduces a new element,
and might exclude those who otherwise
would be entitled to vote.
Mr, BERRY, of Prince George's. It is very
well known that any parties who come into
the State of Maryland, with the purpose or
making their residence here, and remain
twelve months in the State, and six months
prior to the election in the district where they
offer to vote, will be entitled to vote, no mat-
ter whence they come from. It is a question
of intention. If the person proposes to
make it apermanent residence, at the time he
comes here, and he becomes domiciliated
here, then he becomes a citizen of the State
under our election laws, and would beenti-
tled to vote.
The amendment of the gentleman from
Anne Arundel (Mr. Miller) is intended
to meet a particular set of circumstances
which may arise. I can illustrate it by
a circumstance which occurred at our
polls at the last election. A New York
company bad been stationed at Beltsville in
our county, for some" six or eight months.
They then removed from Beltsville to our
town, where they remained six or eight
months, and then claimed the right to vote.
As a matter of course their right to vote was |
