1162 JOURNAL OF PROCEEDINGS [Mar. 22

they have heard counsel of great ability argue the law
and the facts disclosed by the testimony, and after
mature consideration, respectfully report as follows:

The contestants claim that the contestees are ineligi-
ble as members of the House of Delegates under Art-
icle 3, section 9 of the State Constitution wherein it .
is provided that "no person shall be elible as a Sena-
tor or Delegate, who at the time of his election is not
a citizen of the State of Maryland and who has not
resided therein for at least three years next preceding
the day of his election and the last year thereof in the
County or Legislative District of Baltimore city which
he may be chosen to represent, etc."

The allegation being that Messrs. Walbach and
Smoot were not residents of Charles county for the
year preceding their alleged election to this House on
the third day of November, 1903.

It being conceded that both the contestees have been
residents of the State for more than three years, the
two questions arising are:

First. Were the contestees or either of them non-
residents of Charles county for the year preceding the
election on the third day of November, 1903, and
therefore ineligible as members of the House of Dele-
gates ?

Second. If the contestees or either of them are in-
eligible are the contestants or either of them entitled
as minority candidates to the seat or seats thus de-
clared vacant ?

In order to discuss these questions intelligently it
is necessary to first consider the testimony and law as
to the respective residences of the contestees, Messrs.
Walbach and Smoot and then the second question.

The testimony shows that both Mr. Walbach and
Mr. Smoot were born in Charles county. Mr. Wal-
bach at the Gardnier Homestead in the Patuxent or
Ninth district, that he cast his first ballot in that dis-
trict, married in the county and lived there, either
farming or teaching school. There seems not to have
been any question as to his residence in the county
until he received a position in the Rural Free Delivery
Service of the Government, after the adjournment of