Mr. MARSHAL A. That is unquestionably true, but the gentleman is coming to a point in the case thatI have not yet arrived at. I am answering the argument of the Gentfrom Michigan, Mr. BEAMAN] in regard to the question of qualification. He was combatting the idea that the place of voting is any part of the qualification of the elector. That is conceded, and therefore that portion of his argument was wholly unnecessary. I do not contend that the place of votingl is a part of the qualification of the elector alt ough there are some decisions that use that language, but I think that it is amisuse of terms. It is a condition necessary to the exercise of the right at that time, and the elector not being able to be present at the time, one of the conditions necessary to the exercise of the elective franchise was wanting, and therefore he could not properly vote. I was answering that proposition of the Gentfrom Michigan, and adnot yet come to the point which the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. SCOFIELIa] resents. Now, it is concede, fbelieveit certainly is in the report of the majority of the committee, and I unerstood ittobe conceded by the Gentfrom Michigan [Mr. BEAMAN] who has just taken his seatthat the constitution of the State of Michigan does require that the elector shall be present in his township and personally present is vote there on the ay of the election. That is not denied; but it is said that the Legislature of the State of Michigan have passed a law authorizing polls to be opened outside of the State of Michigan, and at certain points beyond the limits of that State. Now, sir, the proper construction to be placed on the constitution of the State of Michigan has been settled by the supreme court of that State, and the jud cs of that court have done themselves immorta honor in deciding correctly the law of their State, although their decision was manifestly contrary. to the natural feeling which they entertained in regard to what are considered the rights of the soldiers of the armies of the republic. God forbid that any right should be enied to citizens who are exercising the highest privilege of patriots unless the organic law of the country requires that certain forms shall be observed. he gallant soldiers who went out to fight for the constitution and laws of the country will not demand that the constitution and laws shall be trampled on for the purpose of securing them a right which is not taken from them, but only for a time suspended by the constitution of Michigan, and which they can exercise with the same privilege as all other citizens when they return to the townshiis in which they live, just as you and I can o when we return to tetownship s in which we live. We cannot exercise the c ective franchise while we are here in the discharge of our official duties, and by the constitution of Michigan the elect ors of that State do not exercise the elective franchise when absent from the State in the discharge of their duty as citizens, not because they have not an equitable right to the exercise of this franchise, but because the fundamental law of their State prescribes that every vote cast by an elector shall be cast in the township in which he resides. The supreme court, all 4 judges, were, as I am informed, of the political party to which the sitting member belongs. lhcirsympathies, and in fact the sympathies of all the good eo ple of the country, went out with the soldiers as they marched on in defense of the rights and the constitution of their country. The judges knew that the sympathies of the people were with the soldiers in declaring that their votes should be counted in every election in which they had been cast. But these judges arose above partisan considerations. They found the constitution of the State of Michigan, with its solemn guarantees, in their road, and, as honest judges, they declared that the act of the Legislature was in conflict with that constitution, and, in consequence thereof, it was null and void and their decision was approved by the entire people of Michigan, as I understand it. The fending judge of that court, who gave the ablest Opinion, was reelected to that court by all parties of the people, because of his independence and manhood in thus construing properly the constitution of his State.