|
I wish everyone were here because I had
intended to tell a couple of jokes in the
absence of objection on the part of the
Chairman and with this small number
here, although we have a quorum, a joke
might fall flat on its face so early in the
day. I shall attempt it, nevertheless, in
the light of some jokes that have been told.
This one deals with farmers. It seems two
motorists driving along the highway ob-
served a farmer plowing, and they made a
bet with each other. One bet the other $20
that the farmer could guess his age. They
went over and approached the farmer and
asked him if he could guess the age of one
of the motorists, the one in question. The
farmer looked at him and told him, "that
is easy. You are forty-four years old."
So the man said, "how did you guess?" He
said, "well, I have a son who is twenty-two
and he is half crazy."
(Laughter.)
Maybe another farm joke is in order
since I possibly shall not use all of my
controlled time on this question. It seems
that one farmer sold a mule to another
farmer. I am a country boy too. I came
from the Magnolia State before I came
this far north — the State of Mississippi,
for those of you who do not know. It was
stated by the farmer who made the sale
that the only thing necessary in order to
get the best results on the part of this
mule was to feed him well, curry him, and
be kind to him. The farmer who made the
purchase did all these things. After sev-
eral days, he decided to put the mule to
work. He hitched him up to a plow and,
of course, those of you who have been on
the farm know, he told him to get up. He
said this to him several times but the
mule stood pat. In fact, that mule stood
as pat as some of the delegates I met at
this fine Convention. After a few moments
he decided he made a bad purchase. He
went to his neighbor and said, "give me my
money back, take the mule back." The
neighbor said, "no, he is a good mule, let's
go see what is wrong with him." He went
over and he reached down and grabbed a
two-by-four piece of wood and he hit the
mule between his eyes, and told the other
farmer, now go over there and say get up.
He went over, said get up, and the mule
moved off. He said this is a good mule but
before you can get him to do anything you
have to get his attention. Maybe I have
your attention by this time.
First, I shall read to you from a report
which you have on your desk. The minority
strongly recommends that municipal cor-
|
porations be denied the right to discrimi-
nate on account of property ownership, ex-
tending the right to vote to non-residents.
The majority attempts to distinguish be-
tween resident property ownership as a
qualification, and nonresident property
ownership. The minority contends that the
practice of nonresident property owner-
ship is the same in theory. It is nothing
less than the eighteenth century rotten
borough in modern dress.
It would be the only legal method of
buying votes. There can be no doubt that
property qualifications for voting have
existed for centuries. There were property
qualifications for voting in most of the
states of the United States at the time of
the Constitutional Convention and for some
time thereafter. Property qualifications,
however, are relics of a bygone pre-demo-
cratic era when the landed gentry and the
wealthy classes were attempting to main-
tain a restrictive franchise. The history of
the property franchise reveals very clearly
that this was based upon the notion that
only those who owned land had a stake in
the society. The minority does not wish to
debate whether this idea has had any basis
in fact at the time. It does wish to empha-
size two major points: one, economic con-
siderations for property qualifications have
no place in a largely democratic society
and, two, real estate, without question, no
longer is considered the basis of one's
stake in society.
It has been argued that it would be very
bad for certain communities if property
owners who did not live in the community
were denied the vote. Mr. Marcus Williams,
Solicitor of Ocean City, in response to a
question stated the following: "I do not
think there is any difference or any com-
petition or conflict or clash whatsoever be-
tween residents and non-residents. We are
all together, whether we live there or not.
I do not think the elections would be
chang-ed."
It should be noted that Ocean City per-
mits corporations to vote in municipal elec-
tions as well. The minority agrees with Mr.
Williams, that the residents of Ocean City
share the values of the non-resident prop-
erty owners. It is obvious that the residents
are at least partially dependent economi-
cally upon the non-resident property owners
and would exercise the franchise with that
relationship in mind. At present only a
few resort communities avail themselves
ol" this provision, but have we seen the
municipalities of the future? If Columbia
or some other new town were to become a
|
