|
6 4 CITIZENSHIP AND SUFFRAGE IN MARYLAND.
political party entitled to be represented by such officer and out of said
three names, .the other Supervisor or Supervisors .representing the ,other
leading political party, shall select the name of such officer who, when so
elected, shall be appointed." This law, it will be noticed, gives great
power
toahe minority Supervisor.
In 1888, the Legislature authorized' Mr`. .lohn P. Poe to embody the Acts
of that that session in a code of laws he was thin preparing for the State.
Re
was not authorized to make any changes in the law. Yet when the code
appeared, the word veto, which appears twice in the provision' above quoted,
was changed to vote in both instances. ~ This seemed to change the whole
mean-
ing of the law and entirely to nullify its purpose, as the two majority
Super-
visors could always outvote the minority one. In 1890, the Legislature
adopt-
ed3 the code of laws as prepared by Mr. Poe. The importance of the change in
the law was not noticed at the time. In 189, owing to the exciting
character of
3the campaign and the partisan conduct of the majority of the Board of
Super-
visors, the change was, brought to the attention of the public.' Mr. Poe was
asked how the change occurred and gave no definite answer,' stating it
"might have been a mistake of the printer." A few days later, however,
he made the clear statement that it was a typographical error. It seems,
evidently, that Mr., Poe either transcended his power by intentionally
changing the law, or that he was extremely careless in the reading of the
proof. If the latter be the case, it has been questioned b whether a
printer's
blunder can really change the lave of the land. Mr. Poe, himself, expressed
the opinion that the law -has not been changed. (See -$ppendix.)
Under the Act of 1882, the registers were commanded to sit "with open
doors." In 188'7, there wars quite an exciting campaign in Baltimore city.
During this campaign the Reform League, leaving for its object the secur-
ing of honest elections, sent a watcher to each registration office in the
city, at the September sitting, provided with a book. in which to make a
faithful copy of the work of the registers. In the Seventh ward, an officer
of registration refused to allow the League's agent. to .remain and take
notes
of what was done,? and, on his continuing so to 'do, ordered his arrest.
He was at once released on bail. The .Ref«rln League, through Mr. John C.
Rose, sued out a writ of habeas eo~l-)us before Judge Phelps and the curse
was heard on the following day. Judge Phelps promptly decided in favor
of the watcher, and that the arrest was illegal. In his opinion, he said,
"The office of a register is a public office, open to all persons for all
legiti-
mate purposes, whether it is a citizen who ,rues there on public businesss,
or
(1) Statutes of 1888, ch. L%%IV.
(2) Public Local Laws, art. 4 sec. 259.
(8) Statutes of 1890, oh. CC%LIII.
(4) See Balto. Sun, Oct. 1, 1895. The Baltimore American for the name date
has articles on the same subject. The
Sun's reports are more stenographic in character, and hence are quoted,
(5) Balto. Sun, Oct. 3, 1895.
(8) Mr. Edgar H. Guns, Balto. Sun, Oct. 10, 1895, and editorial Oct. 9,
1895.
(7) Balto. Sun, Sept. 0, 1887.
against register and recovered October sitting, 1887, a watcher who was
arrested, brought suit for damages
|
