The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1881-04-22

rp,nAv APRIL %, 1881.
Judge Cooley on a Capitation TAX
We have more than once shown how un-
scnsblc Is tho proposition that tue require
meut Of the payment OF capita'ion TAX Us
prcreoui.ite TO voting Is such Violation %
shs fourtccnth amendment as would JUSTIFY
Congress in reducing the basis OF Representa-
ton Of the state imposing such conoition
upon l,s voters. II that amendment had
previously been supposed to bear such =
construction, this supposition ought al ONE
"a have been considered as negaiived wne"
The fifteenth amendment was proposed cy
Cengress. seeing that this latter expressly
,,.ny,aes that no citizen shall be denied the
right TO vote on account oil race eo'o,' y.
nrevious condition Of OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES
which carries the plain implication .na' '"e
xseht IN question may be denied ior a"!
other sufficient reason. s..o.
The recent debate in the Uni'eo e'a'''
senate in which this question has oech 80
fully discussed having called the at'en''o"
q, \ learned lawyer Of this state 10 'he sun
,ee,. be has kindly furnished US win the
Following extract from late WORK oil J"ogc
COOLEY, of Michigan, known to all the pro-
fsssion as an eminent writer on constitu-
tioual law, and known also as nortnerh
man in full sympathy with the objects IN
tended to be accomplished by the new
constitutional amendments and with inc
rasults of the late war between the States.
: On page 26S Of his |" Principles o. Co"S.''
tutionoi Law," (Law students Sefies') pup
ljsbed In 1880, Judge THOMAS NJ. COOLEY
ri the Supreme Court Of Michigan, author
Of the welLknown work on" Constitutional
limitations and editor Of the last edition
OF 50 Story on the Constitution" speaking
OF the fourteenth amendment, says:
at proyided that when the right TO vote
was denied 10 any OF the male lBhaDi!aI's
of State, being twenty-one years OF aye
and citizens Of The United States, or IN any
way abridged, except for participation III
crime, the basis OF representation ID Con-
cress should be reduced in the proportion
which the number OF such male cillzens
should bear 10 the whole NUMBER Oh maze
citizens twenty-one years oil age III sucn
Sfates1
oftbis Judge COOLEY says:
.,The provision is general. II Is not mn
tied 10 freedmen, but 1t applies Wherever
the right to vote is denied TO male cltlzehs
OF the proper age, or is abridged ior DINER
cause than for participation In crime Inc
state of Connecticut denies the figOI OF
snffraee 10 all who cinnot read, and Massa'
nj IN oil
both read and write; and many OF the
STATES admit no one to the privilege OF SUI
frage unless he is a taxpayer. so IN
tho majority OF the States citizen
absent ,herefrom, though in the public SER
vice. caupot vote, because the State requires
IA a condition the personal presence OF Tue
voter at The polls OF his municipality. Pos
sibly il may be said, in respect 10 such
cases, that the representation oil the ota'e
should be reduced IN proportion 10 the
number OF those who are excluded because
they cannot read and write, or DO not pay
taxes. or are absent. II is not likely, how
ever. that any such position w0uld be sus-
tanned. To require the payment Of capt
tation tar is no dental Of suffrage; 1t Is de-
handing only the preliminary performance
of a public duty. and may be classed, as may
also presence at the polls, Win feeistra-
ton or the obsel vance OF any other pfeiiin-
mary 10 insure fairness and protect against
frand. Nor can it be said that to require
ability TO read is any denial OF suffrage. To
refuse ia receive ones vote because he was
born in some particular country rather than
elsewhere, or because OF his color, or be-
cause of any natural quality or peculiarly
which it would be impossible for him TO over.
come. is plainly denial Of suffrage. But
ability 10 read is something within the power
of any man; il Is not difficult 10 ATTAIN
II, ana 1t is no hardship to require 1t. On
the contrary, the requirement only by indl'
rection compels one to appropriate per-
sonal benefit he might otherwise neglect. III
denies 10 no man the suffrage, but the privi'
lege Is freely rendered 10 all, subject only 10
q condition that Is beneficial in its perform
anee and light in its burden. Ii property
qualification, or the payment OF taxes upon
property when one has none to be taXeo, Is
made condition to suffrage, there may DC
room for more question"
We commend this extract 10 the consid-
Grafton Of Governor BROWN. 1t will please
Mr.. DAWES to hear ii read in the Senate and
see it printed in the Record. We also call
attention to Judge CooLEY's emphatic de-
claration that
10 require the payment OF a cdpuono"
tar is no denial of Suffrage"
See, too, how he shows what might con-
siitute denial Of the right to vote, as, for
instance, 10 require Of man that he should
pay tax upon property when he bad no
property that could be taxed. Rhode Island
does this very thing, we think, in requiring
her ioreign-born citizens to own real estate
on penalty OF being denied the right TO vote.
Sectional Bitterness.