clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 1923   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

[Dec. 7] DEBATES 1923

DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
The Chair recognizes Delegate Cardin.

DELEGATE CARDIN: I believe the
answer, Delegate Fox, is, first of all, up to
the individual municipality but Ocean City
now has a minimum base of $25,000 for the
privilege of voting. The corporation must
be worth at least that $25,000 before they
are entitled to one vote.

DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Fox.

DELEGATE FOX: Am I correct though
that the corporation that owns $25,000
worth of property has only one vote?

DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Cardin.

DELEGATE CARDIN: That is correct.
It may own several pieces of property but
the value would have to be $25,000, and
they would have only one vote.

DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Fox.

DELEGATE FOX: So there is no danger
of all the stockholders in the corporation
being able to vote just because the cor-
poration owns land in a municipality?

DELEGATE WHITE: In just a moment
we will have the figures that will indicate
that they may have more than one vote
under certain conditions. The Chairman
has that.

DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Clagett.

DELEGATE CLAGETT: Delegate
White, wherein does this section 2 discrimi-
nate among the class of persons who would
constitute or make up the non-residents
entitled to vote by reason of owning tax-
able property?

DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate White.

DELEGATE WHITE: Your question is
not clear. Are you asking where does it
discriminate?

DELEGATE CLAGETT: Yes, where
does it discriminate?

DELEGATE WPIITE : The extension of
the right to vote to non-residents discrimi-
nates against the local inhabitants of a
municipality by way of diluting their vote.
For example, if 50 people reside in Ocean
City or whatever the city is and they vote,
there are 50 votes that have full value, one
for one person. But if 50 people vote along

with 900 who own property, it means that
their 50 are diluted by 900 and, therefore,
do not have the same value. That is dis-
crimination and is not one vote for one
person.

DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Clagett.

DELEGATE CLAGETT: If we followed
the principle which you are here asking us
to follow, would we not be getting into
serious trouble with respect to the classifi-
cations with respect to taxation, for ex-
ample, where it has been recognized that
so long as the class is a proper one and
there is no discrimination among the per-
sons within that class then it is a proper
legal standard.

With respect to this particular section,
as I understand it, in the language here
set forth, non-residents would be equally
entitled to the exercise of the right of vote
provided they simply own taxable property
in that municipality, is that not correct?

DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate White.

DELEGATE WHITE: My answer is no,
they do not have the right to vote. They
should not have the right to vote and prop-
erty as such should not be a qualification.
You as a Maryland citizen who has $10,000
worth of property in Ocean Ctiy have no
more right to vote in Ocean City than I do
if I have $10. If we are going to extend
the right to vote to non-residents, all
Americans should be able to vote in all mu-
nicipalities or no American should be able
to vote in a municipality in which they do
not reside.

DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Clagett.

DELEGATE CLAGETT: Again I ask
you how far are we going to accept that
principle? We have determined that there
must be a qualification of age, for example,
and we have arbitrarily now set that age
at nineteen. The principle that you are ad-
vocating would be in violation of that prin-
ciple or any other simple qualification of
the right to exercise the vote.

DELEGATE WHITE: No, sir, I suggest
the long history of America where there
have been other qualifications for the right
to vote than just being an American citizen.
Age is a factor. If there is an inconsis-
tency, it has been twenty-one. We heard
that last night. We said that. It is a human
value which has nothing to do with eco-
nomics. Residence as such — the home is
where the heart is, this is where you live —



 

clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 1923   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  Cannot perform flastmod(): Win32 Error Code = 2

Maryland State Archives