The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1874-12-01

/ compared Win the exercise ana enjoy
ment OF the same rights by the white
race This was their most favorable con-
dition in several states of the Union, they being
admitted to the equal exc else of civil and polit-
ical rights and privileges with the whites in but
one state of the Union. In nearly one half OF
the states of the Union, as a race, they lived in a
state of lifelong Servitude, having no control OF
their time or actions-no right 10 acquire prop
OF their own thoughts and judgmentsFtheir
lives and limbs-their minds and strength, the
property and subject to the will OF their masters
and. Notwithstanding the proclamation OF
emancipation, this continued to be their cOndi-
ton, practically and In a large degree, until af-
ter the ratification of the 18th amendment TO the
constitution OF the United states, December Is,
1855. 2 Kents Com. ] Ed, side page 252-25S, and
note | TO side page l5S; Scott 4 SANFORD, 10 Hon.
1853; smith VS.: Moody, % Ind, z99. Rev. Stat. 1883,
BY section : OF article IL OF the constitution OF
l56 IL is provided that there shall be either
slavery nor involuntary seryitude in this state,
otherwise than for the punishment of crimes,
whereof the party shall nave been duly con-
Section ? of article 3 provided for an enumera-
ton of all the white male inhabitants above the
age OF twenty-one years. X. S. ISIS, %. 81.
Sec ion l of article d limited the right or sur
frage TO the white male CT liens of the United
states. of the age of twenty-one, and who bad
resided In the state one year Immediately pre-
ceding the election. r. s. 1888, Al.
son comm into or being brought into this slate,
was prohibit d nom residing therein, unless
bond with good and sufficient security, to be
approved by the oversees : of the poor OF some
township, was given on behalf of such person,
payable 10 The state OF Indiana, In the penal
sum OF $500, conditioned that such person should
not, at any time, become a charge 10 the county
In whica sach bond was given, nor TO any other
county In the state, as also for such persons
II provided penalties, likewise, for failure to
comply with those provisions, consisting OF hir-
ing such person out and appIying the proceeds
TO his benefit, and removal from the state; and
by nns imposed, and recovered by presen ment
falling to give the required bond.
This act remained UPON the statute book of
over twelve years; and received The judicial
sanction Of the Supreme Court OF tn stale. Rev.
ais; the State VS.. Cooper. 5 Black I'd Ssi phsPpttiiste
VS.. the State, Id, 2e3; HickIand VS.. the Stale, S
Id $50.
Article XIII. of the constitution OF this state.
which took effecton the first day OF November
lo5l, and supers- ded the constitution of 1915. Dro-
hlbiied negroes and mulatlOes rom coming in, o
clared ali contracts win such persons void. and
made II an offense punishable by fine of not less
than ten nor more than five hundred dol.
lars for any person 10 employ them: and this ar
ticle was ubmftted, as a distinct proposition. q
tne Poole Oh tne STATE Tor the 7 approval or dis
2l.065. lG. & FL. p. 81; DillOu's Hist Ind. 5T7.
Other provisions of this constitution excluded
negroes aud mulattoes from the elective ran
ch1se-from holding Office la the state or any OF
its dePa' tments-from the enumeration for sem
ator1al or repres NATIVE purposes; anu from
p srticipation in all of the privileges pertaining
10 fuii and active citizenshlp-making o. them a
law, and placing them politically i'm a separate
body, with no constitutional grant of priv ieges
anu immunities under the title of '~ciUizen" or
"cluzens, but leaving them in posses ion only
OF the three primary rights heretofore men,
toned Top. ATTY Genl, 500: 4 CD Atty Gen1,
AZ; smith VS.. Moody, 10 Ind. 800.
This the constitution, and subsequent recog.
nized aud decided constitutional legislation,
clearly establish. Acts June Is, 1852, 2 G.. & II.
443; Hatwood VS.. The State, Is Ind. 492: Berk
shire VS.. the state, z Ind. 3S9.
In the light of the foregoing history, c~onstitu-
uOnal PROVISIONS, legislative acts and judicial
constructions thereof, it is very plain and OH
vious to us that persons of the African race were
not In the minds or contemplation of the wise
or thoughtful trainers of our constitution when
they prepared and agreed upon the above quoted
sections, or of the people OF the state when thev
ratlhed aud adopted the constitution contain
ing such provisions.
In our opinion, the privileges and immunities
secured by section q of article 4 were not in
tended for persons OF the African race. for the sec
ton expressly limits the enjoy ment OF sueh nriv-
1legeS and immunities 20 citizens, and AZ that
time negroes were neither citizens of the Unified
states nor OF THIS state. 1t was held by this
court IN sears VS.. the Board of commissioners
or Warren county, 80 Ind. 267, that the privileges
and immunities secured by the above ouoied
section were intended for citizens of this state.
Nor, In view OF the other provisions of our
constitution, and in the light Of the rules of con-
struction before stated. can il be successfully
maintained that the provisions OF section 1 OF
article were intended for the children of he
African race. 1t is unreasonable to suppose that
the trainers of the constitution. who had DENIED
TO that race the right OF citizenship, of suffraoe-
of holding office, of serving on iuries and Of
testiiying as witnesses in any case where a white
fNEoC R0AN oAa P4OuSDlIcU, un0Gr
heavy pains and penalties, the further
emigration of that race into the state.
of the children Of that race in our conn
mon schools with tue white children of the
state.
The public sentiment of the state at that time
was unfTiendly To the African ace and their
participation in governmental affairs, and de-
manded their exclusion from the state; and il
is not for us to say, sitting here, whether such
policy was wise or unwise, aud we sneak of il
only as a matter of history having a bearing
upon the construction of our constitution.
An application of the rules of construction.
heretofore laid down, TO the various provisions
strate that the provisions of the sections under
examination have no application to the children
and grandchildren of the appellee.
One of the cardinal rules of construction is
that courts shall give effect to the intent of The
trainers OF the instrument and of the people i'm
adopting 1t. Then, as it is manifest that neither
the trainers OF the constitution nor the peOple i'm
adopting II, intended that the children of the
African race should participate in the advan-
tages OF a general and uniform system of
common schools, we possess no power to adjudge
TO them what was not designed for them.
Another rule OF construction is, that in placing
a constr ction upon one section or clause. courts
are required TO examine the whole INSTRUMENT
and TO give effect. If possible, to the whole insIru.
ment; and II different portions seem to conflict.
the courts mus harmonize them, If practicable,
and lean IN favor OF a construction which will
render every word operative, rather than one
which may make some idle and nugatory.
serve the unity, harmony and consistencv Of
our state constitution and that is to hold that IN
was maue anu adopted Dy and for the exclusive
use and enjoyment of the white race. Anyother
construction would convict the members of the
constitutional convention and the voters of the
state OF the grossest inconsistency, absurdity
and injustice. 1t would be monstrous TO hold
that the trainers OF the constitution in adopting
and the voters of the state. in ratifying il, in
tended that the common schools of the state
should be open TO the children of the African
race, when, by the same instrument, that por-
ton of such race, as then resided in the state,
were denied all political rights, privileges and
immun1ties and the further emigration OF that
race MO the state WAS nrOhihffod hr the fIf-
teenth article OF the constitution, which re-
eived the almost unanimous approval of the
voters of the state.
Another important rule of construction is,
that the meaning of a constitution is fixed
when III Is adopted. and IL is not different at any
subsequent time when a court has occasion TO
pass upon 1t. A constitution is inhexible and
can not bend TO circumstances or be modified
by public opinion. 1t is, therefore, the duty of
the court to declare the law as is Writfen-