Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1881-06-09
Total loss Of the Word "White. ="

The full text Of the opinion Of the Supreme
Court in Neal agt. Delaware. which has now
been published. shows that the decision en-
braced point of widespread practical impor-
lance. Ii carries very far the doctrine that
the word ''white. in State Constitutions and
laws limiting suffrage. is to be deemed erased
--obliterated-by the Fourteenth Amendment.
No matter though the enactment stands on
the statute book unchanged, no matter though
it is brought into operation in some indirect
way, not involving a colorcd mans vote; a
limitation of suffrage bv the word ''white"
must be ignored. State officers rs well as Fed
eral are bound to adopt this revised version.
To appreciate the bearing of this, one must re-
call that, before the peace and reconstruction.
very many of the States limited suffrage more
or less strictly to white persons. This was
directed in the State Constitutions and re-
peated in the laws regulating elections. The
Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments pro-
hibited the States from excluding any person
from suffrage because of color. Obviously
this prohibition was inconsistent with the
word white as it stood in the law books of
the States. A few of the States changed it
in due form. amending their constitutions or
revising their statutes. emitting the prohibited
word. Most allowed the old text to stand I'M
changed. conforming their Practice more or
less cordially to the new order. And the
suggestion has been made, before this day,
that the Federal amendments of themselves
erased white" from State suffrage laws.
The new decision confirms this to the fullest
extent.
The story of Meals case ia, that Delaware's
Constitution, adopted in 1881, restricted suf-
frage to free white male citizens and her
jury Law, enacted in lS&s, confined jury duty
to qualified voters. Thus (betoro the amend
ments,) clearly a colored man could not
serve on jury. And these laws had not
changed Except by the amendments) when.
about a year ago, Neal, negro, was put
upon trial. in q Delaware court, for capital
offence. II soon became plain to his coun-
sci that the accused was not to have that
chance Of having some persons of his own
race drawn on the jury which modern FEEDER
al law assures to every colored man, and he
demonstrated in various forms but was over
ruled; = white jury was impsnnelled, and
the negro was convicted.
The Supreme Court. being asked to review
these proceedings, has set them aside on the
ground that the Delaware Constitution.
though never formally amended, must be
read and administered, for all purposes. as il
the word "white" were omitted. That word
is in fact obliterated by the Federal amend
ments wherever it is found inserted in State
Constitution or law with the purpose Of limit
ing suffrage. And colored men must be
deemed qualified voters, not only when they
come to the polls bringing votes, but also
when the question srises indirectly,
as when the list Of qualified voters is
being compiled for drawing jurors under
such law rs that of lS4S. The
officers could not be deemed authorized or
even directed by that law TO exclude negroes
from the jury-room; without their knowing
it, the Law was changed by the amendments.
1t is maxim that officers are to be presumed
to have done their duty. and this gracious
rule would have led the court to sustain the
trial. on the assumption that the Delaware
impanelling officers did in fact (as they
should have done by constitutional law in
clude colored men in the drawing, and that
the reason Why the jury contained only
whites was that accidentally no black men
were drawn. But, on examining the proofs,
the majority Of the judges found reason to
believe that the formation of the white iurv
vas not accidental; that colored men we're
excluded deliberately. Thesone Ne bro.
ceedinss vers ses aaids.-M r fsS5s.s.