Delaware gazette. [volume] (Delaware, Ohio) 1855-1886, 1868-06-05
The Visible AdmiGtura Law Un0on-
Observation-Disclosures Of Judge
GrangeF Of MuekinRuEn.


The last clause oftHe Visible Admix-
ture Act requlres that it shall be given
in charge 10 the grand jury at each term
of the COart 'of Common Pleas by the
/ presiding Judge thereof Many judges
in fUllEling this duty have charged the
jury taat the law is unconstitutional
and void. Among the Rblest opinions
delivered are those Of Judge Burke, o.
1 Summit county, Judge Welch, of the
Supreme Court, Judge Winans, Smith
and Corwin, and Judge Moses N. Gran.
ger, Of Muskingum. The following i.
Judge Granger's opinion, delivered
May IS:
We are indebted to Judge Granger
for copy Of his Charge, eourteous1y
furnished uDon application, as follows,
After addressing the Grand Jury up
on other matters, the Charge proceeded
on the 10th day Of April, 1868, tn,
! General Assembly'dlf the State Of Ohio
| passed an act entitled
AN act supplementary to the act en-
! titled 'an act 70 preserve the purity Of
/ elections, passed March, 20, 184l, and tc
| protect the 5adges of elections in the
| discharge 0f trUir duties. +"
The 18th section Of this act reads thus,
'''This act shall be given specially in
charge to the Grand ury at each term
/ of the Court of Common Pleas by the
1 presiding5udg thereof"
Thus kt,has become my duty to eX-
Il anime this eact." and considering it in
lcOnneCtion with the provisions of the
/ Constitution applicable to the subject
netter Of this ''aet," to tell you what
D is the law.
This act relates to the qualifications
| Of electors, and the constitutional pro-
4 vision upon that subject is found in ar
I ticle 5, section /, which reads thus:
Article I, Sec. 1. Every white male cit.
izen of the United States of the age oi
/ twenty one years, who shall have been
i a resident of the State one year next
! preceding the election, and of the cOun-
/ tY, township or ward in which he re-
sides, such time as may be provided by
law, shall have the qualifications Of an
4 elector, and be entitled TO vote at all
| elections.
The meaning Of the word @wbite" as
used in the Constitution Of Ohio was
/ first determined by the Supreme Court
of the State in the year 1881 in the case
of Polly Gray, vs.. The S6ate--Eeported
in 4th Ohio Reports, page 354. Again
in 1888 in the case of Williamson vs..
The School Directors, &c, reported in
Wrighb's Rep, page I78, the same ques-
ton was decided By the supreme Court
upon the circuit. At an early day-35
. I
sen was President of the United States,
when the almost universal opinion re-
I Qardod an ttabolitiOnist2 with is much
hltuea ,Und EoEfOr as 0IE a11C8se0rs Of
four centuries ago bestowed upon
tAJeWs, Turks, Inndels and Heretics -
when no party or political influence or
prejudice existed in favor of the color
ed race when all party and political
influence and pref udice-1f any such
were e-Eerted-Was in favor of COnsGru-
White'' at that time-and under such
circumstances the Court in both cited
cases decided f'That all nearer white
than black, or of the grade between the
mulattoes and whites were entitled to
enjoy every political and civil priVi-
lege of the white citizen; that no other
rule could be adopted SO Ineligible
and practicable as this; and that fur
ther reinements would lead to incOn-
venienee and to no good RESULT"
Again, in 1912, the same question
came before the Supreme Court Of the
State in the case Of Jefries VS.. Ankeny
and others, reported in IL Ohio Rep,
page 373 &c, and in the case Of ThaCher
vs.. John Hawk and others, reported in
the same volume, 376y &C., and In both
cases the decision was the same. The
words Of the court IN the last case be-
ing as folloWss f'The court (below)
charged the jury that il the plaintiff had
any negro blood whatever he was not
a lawful eIector. That charge was
wrong, and the judgement must be
reversed"
A gaiu in 1913. the case of Lane vs.
Baker and others, y Ohio Rep, p. 90,
the same court decided the same ques-
ton the same way
Again, in 1848, in the case Of Stewart
VS.. Southland, the Supreme Court recOg-
mized the construction established by
the foregoing decisions as correct
lie - aA-aaf
had received a construction so well de-
fined and conclusive as the one under
consideration. From 1881 to 1848 ser
les Of decisions by our court Of last re-
sort had Hsettledn the question
Though made at intervals Of years, and
by different judges, the decisions were
all the same
The Constitution Of 1851 superseded
that OF 1902, and the words "White male
citizen of the United States" took the
place OF the words ''white inhabitants" ("
Yet NO claim was made that this
change Of phraseOlogy affected the Ques-
tion now under consideration until 1857
the majority Of the Supreme Court Of
the United States decided that ga negro
Of African descent whose ancestors were
or pure African blood, and who were
DrOughG to this country ana sold as
slaves, was not q citizen Of the United
States.' 10 Howard Rep, 400
Then for the first time was it claimed
that the Convention of 1850 by the
change of the words above referred to
intended to disfrsnchise persons Of mix
ed blood.
The question was brought before the !
Supreme Court in 1852 In the case Of
Anderson VS.. Millik1n and others, 3 /
Ohio State Rep, PIP. 568, de-, and the |
Court decided that the construction as |
settled by the Courts under the old 4
Constitution remained the same under /
the new.
Here let mo read some paragraphs |
from the we'll considered words Of Judge /
Gholsoll who pronounced the opinion 4
OF the Court in the case last cited. I
Pages SOL, 577-9.
IA tho law now before us the Legisla-
ture recognizes by implication q con-
struction thus given to the Constitution
as &C inttmates that under certain cir
persons having "a visible 1
OF African blood may be 4
admitted TO vote.
From this recital it Is evident that 1
under tlle Constitution Of our state per- /
sons having "a visible admixture Of I
African blood" are entitled TO vote, pro- /
vided they are more than half white /
and have proper qualifications as 70 1
residence, DC, and so far as this law 4
affects such persons 1t Affects qualified /
voters.
we'll settled that the Legislature has no /
power to admit to vote any person not /
qualified as an elector under the Con- I
stitution and no power TO prevent any 4
person 10 qualified from Votings except 4
upon consideration Of certain crimes,
But the Legislature may well provide
a reasonable and proper mode OF asceE-
tanning the qualifications OF an etectoE
when such qualifications are or may pe
our present duties call for consider
alton Of such portions Of this law as
- 20 y,rryyfei6T for the punishment of
certain acts as crimes.
Section z provides that eany Judge Of
election receiving the vote or sanction |
person having q distinct and visible ad- 4
mixture Of African blood contrary 70 4
the provisions Of this aots shall on con-
victiou thereof, be Imprisoned &c
Section provides that any person /
aiding, 0betting, o. oounsel1ng any ]