The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1895-05-15

| before we proceed 10 examine more
critically the provisions of this amend
ment ION which the plaintiffs in error
rely, let US complete and dismiss the
history of the recent amendments, as
that history relates to the general pur-
pose which pervades them all. \ few
years experience satisfied the thought
ful men VINO had been the authors OF
the other two amendments that, not
withstanding the restraints Of those
articles on the States, and the laws
passed under the additional powers
granted to Congress, these were made
quate for the protection of life, liberty
and property, without which freedom
to the slaves was no boon. They were
in ali those States denied the right OF
suffrage. The laws were administered
by the white man alone. 1t was urged
that race of men distinctively marked
as was the negro. living in the midst
of another and dominant race, could
never be fully secured in their person
and their property without the right
of suffrage
Hence the Fifteenth Amendment,
which declares that ''the right of a
citizen of the United States to vote
shall not be denied or abridged by any
State on account of race, or previous
condition of servitude." The negro
having, by the Fourteenth Amend
ment. been declared to be citizen OF
the United State, is thus made voter
in every State of the union.
I'VE repeat, then, in the light Of
this recapitulation Of events too recent
to be called history, but which are IA
miliar to us all and on the most cas-
ual examination of the language of
these amendments, no one can fail to
be impressed with the
ONE PERvADlNG PURPOSE
found in them all, lying at the founda-
ton of each, and without which none
of them would have been even sug-
gested; we mean the freedom of the
slave race. the security and firm estab-
lishment of that freedom. and the pro-
lection Of the newly-made freeman
an, citizen from the expressions OF
those who had formerly exercised un-
limited dominion over him. 1t is true
that only the Fifteenth Amendment,
in terms, mentions the negro by speak
ing of his color and his slavery. But
it is Just as true that each Of the other
articles was addressed to the griev-
ances of that race, and designed to re-
medv them, as the fifteenth.
I'VE do not say that no one else but
the negro can share in this protection.
Both the language and spirit of these
articles are to have their just weight
in any question OF construction. I'm
doubleday while negro slavery alone
was in the mind Of the Congress which
proposed the thirteenth article, it for
bids anv other kind of slavery, now
or hereafter. If Mexican peonage Or
the Chinese coolie system shall de-
velop slavery of the Mexican or Chi
nese race within our territory, this
amendment may be safely trusted to
make it void. And so if other rights
are assailed by the States which pro-
perly and necessarily fall within the
protection ofthese articles, that protec-
ton will apply, though the party in
terested may not be of African descent.
But what we do say, and what we wish
to be understood is, that in any fair
and Just construction of any section
or phrase of these amendments, it is
necessary to look TO the purpose which
we have said was the pervading spirit
of them all, the evil which they were
designed to remedy, and the process OF
continued addition to the Constitution
until that purpose was supposed to be
accomplished, as far as constitutional
law can accomplish it.
The first section of the fourteenth
article, to which our attention is more
especially invited, opens with detinl-
ton of citizenship-not only citizen
ship of the United States, but citizen
ship of the States. No such definition
was previously found in the Constitu-
ton, nor had any attempt been made
to define it by act of Congress. 1t had
been said by eminent judges that no
man was a citizen Of the United States
except as he was citizen of one of the
States composing the union. Those,
therefore, who had been born and re-
sided always in the District of Colum-
bia or in the Territories, though with
| in the United States, were not citizens.
Whether this proposition was sound or
not had never been :iudicially decided.
But it had been held by this court, in
the celebrated Dred Scott case, only
few years before the outbreak of the
| Civil War that man of African de-
scent, whether slave or not, was not
and could not bea citizen of State or
of the United State. This decision,
while it met the condemnation Of some
of the ablest statesman and constitu-
tional lawyers OF the country, had
never been overruled: and if it was to
be accepted as constitutional limita-
ton of the right of citisenship, then
all the negro race who had recently
been made fl leemen We're still not only
not citizens, but were incapable of be-
coming so by anything short of an
amendment to the Constitution.
ITO remove this difficulty primari-
ly, and to establish clear and COM
prehentive definition of citizenship
which should declare what should
constitute citizenship of the United
Estates, and also citizenship of a State,
the first clause of the first section was
framed:
"All persons born or naturalized IN
the United States, and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the
United States and Of the State wherein
they reside.
The first observation we have to
make on this clause is that it puts at
rest both the questions which we stated
to have been the subject of differences
of opinion. 1t declares that persons
may be citizens of the United States
without regrad to their citizenship of
a particular State, and it overturns
the Dred Scott decision by making all
persons born within the United States
and subject to its jurisdiction, citizens
| of the limited States. That its main