Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1867-09-26
0blo Statesnlau.
Is a NEGRO n WhIte NIane


ilege of the White in voting. Judge
HITcHCocK delivered the opinion OF the
Court, Judge READ dissenting. This dis
senting opinion we reproduced. So utter
ly did it demolish Judge HIrcHCocK's ar
gument, that the Judge never made it
public.
Judge READ has been deal for some
years. His legal decisions are always re-
ceived with respect by the courts of Il e
country as well as by fhe legal profession,
and he left behind him the reputation of
being one of the ablestj jurors the State has
yet produced. His dissenting opinion,
which we give below, is unanswerable in
its facts and in its conclusions. 1t shows
conclusively that the trainers of the Con-
stitution of 1902 understandingly incor-
porated into it the word" d"whites-incorpor-
ated it for the express purpose of prohib-
iting every person from voting who had
even the slightest visible admixture of At
rican blood in him-that during the terri
torial condition of the State it was the
privilege of sail free male inhabitants, u
&C., to vote, and although none but purely
white persons sought to exercise that
privilege, when the people came to form
their State Constitution, they resolved to
put the question beyond the reach of hon.
est misconstruction, and hence they sub
stituted the word ''aohite'' for the word
'Jree," thereby making the clause read s'all
,chite male Inhabitants" &C.. Judge READ
had the views that controlled the framer:
of the Constitution, and the current, COM
mon sense understanding of the word
'white'' to sustain him in his dissenting
opinion, which we herewith submit to
the perusal and consideration of our read
ers: f
Read, j., dissenting. cannot concur in
the opinion, that any person OF less than
half black or negro blood, has the right oil
an elector, under the Constitution of Ohio,
The words of the Constitution, are Cart.
4th, Sec. Ist.) ''In all elections all aohite
male Inhabitants above the age of twenty
one years, shall enjoy the right of an elec-
tor"
Thus, color is constitutional qualifica-
ton of an elector in Ohio, and that instru-
ment confers the enjoyment of the elective
franchise upon 1ohite persons only, and, by
the force of its terms, excludes all persons
who are not aohte.
To hold, therefore, that all persons less
than half black, or less than half negro
blood in their veins, have the right of elec-
tors or voters, in the State of Ohio, is, in
my opinion, direct and open violation.
both of the letter and spirit of the Consti-
ution
Ine Constitution, in defining the color
qualification OF an elector, does not employ
the phrase-partly white-InOre white than
black-all persons less than half black
but, simply, the word aotitc.
The word white means pure ,ohtte, un-
mixed. The word expresses simple idea,
quality or principle, homogeneous. not
made up or compounded of two different
elements or qualities. A mixture of black
and white is not aohite, white and black may
be mixed in different proportions-there
may be more white than black, or more
black than white; but preponderance of
the one or the other color, will not make
the mixture pure white, or pure black.
When the words white and black are en-
ployed to designate different races of men,
they are applied to men OF the same blood
or stock. When applied to individuals to
designate the stock or race to which they
belong they mean that the individuals, thus
designated, are purely of the blood of the
white race or the black race. A man of
mixed blood, partly white and partly black,
cannot be called white man or black
man, because those words import, that the
person, to whom applied. is of the pure
blood of the white or black race. Nor
does it matter about the proponderance of
blood, if there be mixture, he is OF pure
blood of neither the one nor the other. 1t
is not the shade of color, but the purity of
the blood, which determines the stock or
race to which the individual belongs.
The word aohite has never been applied
to persons OF any shade of black or negro
blood, TO contradistinguish them from the
full black. In speaking of such, the
language is. "he is quarter black" "light
mulat5o," 'nearly white" always using
some qualifying term. To say that man
is white man, is to affirm that he has no
black or negro blood in him, that he is of
the pure, unmixed blood of the white race.
Such is the meaning which has universally
and at all times attached to the term white
l man. 1t is an axiom in the construction OF
written laws and constitutions, that words
are to be taken in their ordinary and COM
mon acceptation. The word white, then.
employed In the constitution, to define the
color qualification of an elector, limits the
right of voting to white persons only, and
excludes all others. To hold that all per-
sons, less than half black, are voters under
this clause of the Constitution. is to hold
that all persons, less than half black, are
white. To establish this proposition the
reasoning would stand thus:
White persons are voters under the Con-
stitution of Ohio all persons are white who
are less than half black; therefore, persons
less than half black, are voters under the
Constitution of Ohio. Which reasoning
proceeds upon the affirmation, that the part
is Equal to the whole; that more than half
is all that three-fOurths white, is white
that is, that three-fourths, is equal to the
whole.
But. it is contended, there should be some
limit-some certain and fixed rule, upon
the suhjt of color. There can be no more
certain and definite rule upon the subject
than that which the Constitution lays down
To say that no person can vote who is moi
white, is as definite, as to say all persons
are voters who are less than half black, and
of far more easy practical application, be.
cause, where it would be easy to determine
whether a man had any black blood in him
1t might be impossible to determine the ex-
act amount, in persons who were mixed
The whole difference strikes me to be this
that when the Constitution has declared one
rule upon the subject of color, a majority
ofthis Court have declared totally differ
ent rule, destructive OF, and repugnant to-
the one laid down in the Constitution
Whether. a man is white or bla~ k, is ques-
ton of fact; that the white man, only shall
have the right to vote, is rule of law and
that it may be difficult to determine wheth
er, in given case. the fact within the law,
does not impeach the rule of law as uncer.
tain, but only proves that the question OF
fact is involved in doubt.
The position that all persons, less than
half black, are white persons, possessed OF
the political rights of citizenship, is sup
ported, neither by the examples or author
ity of other States, nor by the policy OF
practice of our own, nor by judicial decis-
ions.
1t always has been admitted, that oul
political institutions embrace the white
population only. Persons of color were
not recognized as having any political ex.
istence. They had no agency in our polti
cal organization, and possess no politica
rights under it. Two or three of the State.