The Jackson standard. [volume] (Jackson C.H., Ohio) 1847-1888, 1868-05-28
The Visible Admixture Law
JUDGE BURKE'S OPINION.
THE AcTDEcLARED UNooNsrTTunoNA

JUDGE BUkkE'S OP1NlON.
THE ACT DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Gentlemen Of the jury: 1t is my duty
to call your attention to an act Of the
Legislature of this State, known as the
visible admixture law. by the first
section of the act it is made the duty
Of the judges Of the elections to chal-
lenge the vote of any person offering
to vote at any election held under any
law Of this State, having a distinct and
visible admixture of African blood, and
to require the person whose vote is
challenged to answer, under oath, the
following questions
lst. What is your name1
I'd. Where were you born?
I'D, Were your parents married, and
did thsy live together as man and wife7
4th. Had your parents, or either Of
them, a distinct and visible admixture
OF African blood7 etF
5th. In the community in which you
live are you classified and recognized as
a white or eolored person, and do you
associate with white or colored per-
sons ..l..
9th. Are there schools for colored
children in operation in the township,
village or ward in which you live, and
If You have children do they attend
such schools, or do they attend the
common schools organized for white
children, under the law of the State I
The second section of the act pro-
videS that the judges of election shall,
unless the vote of such person is re-
jected, require him 10 produce before
them two credible witnesses, who shall
answer under oath the following ques-
tions:
LIST. Are you acquainted with (the
name Of the person 'cballenged), if so,
for how long time have you known
him mu
I'd. Do you know when, where, and
in what State he was bornf
Sd Were you acquainted with bis
parents, or either OF themi if so, did
such parents, or either of them have a
distinct and visible admixturc OF African
blood, and were they married, or did
they live together as man and wifel
The third section provides for keep
ing record of such questions aud an
swers, and such other questions and
answers as may be put and answered.
The fourth section provides that ''NO
evidence shall be received as to the ad-
mixture of white blood, which is based
upon the opinion of the person Chal-
leuged, or Of the witness testifying in
Ehis behalf, founded merely upon APP
pearance, unless the facts are fully stated
as TO parentage Of the person challen-
ged, and no-eYidence Of reputation as
TO parentage shall be received unless
t The parties about whom such reputation
exists, are provedto have been married.
p 'phb Rfth section provides that ''if
the party challenged, or qny other person
iaisTogaleti as aforesaid, III his beha!f, shdil
Prytase to aasUer taly am question as herein
presGribed, the Jqdge- shqA reject ne rate,
and il the judges shall dc satisfied, from
the statement Of all persons examined
aud the eyidenceadduced, that the peri
son offering to vote isa ,cdite male citizen
| Of the Tinted States, before receiving his
ballot, they shall tender him the follow
lowing oath or affirmation: You do
solelhnly swear, that to the best Of your
knowledge and belief, you are white
bmale citizen Of the United States, and
ka6tt he }actto be so from k7'o'cledge ot
both your parents and your pedigree" s.
a7'The succeeding sections Of the act
provide penalties for false swearing by
the person challenged, or his witnesses,
against Judges of elections for receiving
TIE vote Of any person having visible
admixtnre Of African blood, except in
accordance with the provisions OF this
act, aud certain requirements in regard
to enforcing the law, not necessary to
be particularly mentioned at this time.
The fourteentb and last section OF the
act provides that IL shall bs specially
given in charge Of the Grand Jury at
each term Of the Court OF Common
Pleas BY the presiding Judge theteof'
Such is an outline OF the visible adj
mi xture law Of this State, law which
l doubt not most Of you have read and
considered. The General Assembly Of
this State, whether wisely or unwisely,
| has enacted this statute, and ifit ityiolates
mo provision Of the Constitution 1t must
be regarded and enforced. Does this
act violate any provision Of the Con-
stitution9 Can it be fairly enforced
according to It's letter aud spirit, with
! out a violation OF the constitutional