|
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
The Chair recognizes Delegate Pascal.
DELEGATE PASCAL: Delegate White,
are you familiar with the Attorney Gen-
eral's letter to President Eney on Novem-
ber 10 indicating that this would not be a
constitutional issue and it was his opinion
it would not violate any constitutional pro-
vision?
DELEGATE WHITE: I am familiar
with and am aware of the information
which indicated that he did not think this
was a constitutional question from the
standpoint of what the Supreme Court
would do.
But I would suggest this is merely an
opinion as to what the Supreme Court
would do and if we pursue the history of
the poll tax, we know that over a long1
period of years the Supreme Court held
that the poll tax was constitutional.
In other words, if you did not pay a
certain amount of money, you could not
vote. Now finally in recent years, I under-
stand in a Virginia 'case, the Supreme
Court finally took the position that the poll
tax is unconstitutional and, of course, we
could guess one day they will do the same
thing here.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Pascal.
DELEGATE PASCAL: I recall that the
last paragraph of the letter said, in his
opinion, this would not be a constitutional
problem? Did he not state that in the
affirmative?
DELEGATE WHITE: He possibly did,
but that should not deter this Convention.
I recall one of the greatest judges of the
Supreme Court said that the Constitution
is what the Supreme Court says it is. We
do not know what they are going to say
tomorrow or next year. We only know
what they have said in the past.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
The Chair recognizes Delegate Key.
DELEGATE KEY: Mr. White, I do not
know whether you can answer that ques-
tion or not since I think it does g-et a bit
into law. My question and my concern are
with Baltimore City. I realize that our
constitution is setting down Baltimore City
as a county, which means we no longer
will say a state composed of twenty-three
counties and Baltimore City, but that we
have twenty-four counties, including Bal-
timore City.
|
However, I want to know how courts de-
cide matters of usage. Since we do call
Baltimore City elections municipal elec-
tions and we do have our business carried
on in a municipal building, will we some
day in the future be considered a munici-
pality because we are having many prob-
lems now with absenteeism in our city?
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate White.
DELEGATE WHITE: I do not know ex-
actly how to answer that.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Maybe you can answer it, yes or no.
DELEGATE WHITE: Yes.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Does that satisfy you, Mrs. Key? Delegate
Cardin.
DELEGATE CARDIN: Delegate White,
how many other states have this same ex-
tension of vote to non-resident property
holders in municipal or local elections?
DELEGATE WHITE: My vague recol-
lection — is of two, Delaware and Georgia.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Cardin.
DELEGATE CARDIN: I would like to
refresh your memory. I believe it is about
six. As I understand it, the Supreme Court
ruling on one man, one vote was for state
and county elections. Is it not true they
did not at all decide on municipal elections
believing that those should be left to the
local municipality?
DELEGATE WHITE: That may be true
but that should not deter this Convention
from doing its job.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Cardin.
DELEGATE CARDIN: I agree. But
since we followed Georgia last night, is it
not possible we may follow them today?
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
The Chair recognizes Delegate Dukes.
DELEGATE DUKES: Delegate White,
do I understand that the sense and thrust
of your proposal is to eliminate the last
couple of lines of section 2.
DELEGATE WHITE: That is right.
DELEGATE DUKES: Would it not then
be possible for any municipality to define
residence to include all these people any-
way?
|
