| Volume 107, Page 1807 View pdf image (33K) |
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
11 In the twelfth paragraph of the memorial, the memo- rialist, after reciting by way of explanation the second section of the first article of the Constitution, " respectfully submits" that, if the Registry Law has not been legally carried into effect in any Election District, that then the Judges of Election in that district did right in not exclud- ing from voting any person on account, of not being regis- tered. In the opinion of this Committee, it is not necessary for it, or this House, to consider the question thus sub- mitted, in order to a proper decision of the case before them. There is nothing in the evidence before the Committee, which, cither regarding the instructions of the House, or equity, or fairness, or justice to the Officers of Registration, would sustain the intimation or statement that the registra- tion, admitted to have been made, was not an honest as well as legal compliance with the law, and binding on every one. The Committee finds in several of the books of registra- tion, some irregularities and some uncertainties in the dis- charge of their official duties by the registrars; but no instance of uncertainty or irregularity can be found, except in the discharge of a duty imposed in that part of the law, which is clearly directory only. We will proceed, however, to notice some of those acts of the registrars, which are averred to be uncertain and irreg- ular. The first of these, as averred, is that "they (the registrars) gave no notice any where in the said County, to which their' names were appended, of the time, place and object of their meeting. It is not averred, and. cannot be truth Sully, that the Regis- trars did not give such notice, perfect in all its parts, except, that the names of the Registrars were not appended thereto. The law docs not direct that the notice should he subscribed by the Registrars, and even if the law had so directed, a failure to subscribe their names to the notice, if it gave the proper information, would not have invalidated the notice or their proceedings under it. In the case of the People vs. Peck (11th Wend. 604,) it was held "that an election was good although the requirements of the statute in respect to the notice of the election had not been complied with, provided the election was fairly conducted, and the voters had information of the meeting. It is not here aver- red, nor can it be successfully, that every one interested in the registration had not, by the notice as given, full inform- ation or the time, place, and object of the meeting of the Registrars. And to sustain the authority previously cited on this point, the Committee would refer to the case of Merchant vs. Langworthy, (6th Hill, 646,) where it was |
| |||
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Proceedings and Acts of the General Assembly, 1866
| Volume 107, Page 1807 View pdf image (33K) |
|
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.
Maryland State Archives