The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1895-02-13
THERE Is Bur ONE TEST MANHOOD.

Discussing the suffrage. the Norfolk
| Landmark has, the foloWing
| We know of no way Of protecting the
| State from ignorant and Venal suffrage
| without restricting il IN some reasonable
! way. We are not willing That the most
! illiterate. worthless. shftless, irrcsponsi-
| bic negro or white man shall exercise the
! same power i'm making and enforcing Law
| that the highest type Of man may eXer-
else We rcpudiate any such doctrine. It
is unsouud, and utterly contrary TO the
principle OF good government anywhere
or at any time The ignorant, Vcual We
ciOJs freeman has tin, same right 90 "a
budecon ana 10 use II that he has TO
the ballot, and more. lie may know
how To use the tluigeon in sclf-dcfenuo.
He does not know how TO use the ballot.
The law should restrict hin in the use
of both. 1t should protect Him against
himself
And who is to Judge whether par
ticuar man belongs to the highest type
II man" or whether he belongs TO the
most illitcrate. worthless shifuoss. IRE
sponsible' type? If each man is asked
to decide which type be belongs to. he
VIII certainly decide that he belongs to
the highest type IT, on the contrary. a
particular man or a particular set Of men
is to pass the sentence he or they will
certainly admit some to and exclude
some from the coveted class. upon the
ground of faVortism. That must be
obvious to the Landmarks Ii must con-
cede, then, that there can be no leaving
of mans case TO other men to pass on.
fixed rule must be established that
will admit all that are within it, and eX-
clude all that are without it, At what
line would the Landmark fix that rule?
WEI it fix il at the line Of "yenality"?
If so, how much money loving shall con-
suWte "ve1aly'? and VINO shall judge !
whether particular man is vouaI? VIII
il tiN 1t at ''viciousness'? If SO, wnat de- /
gree OF deprayity shall constitute vicious |
ness, and who shall determine whether |
a particular man is that far depravcd? /
We suspect that the Landmark would he
forced 10 admit that it would draw the
line at ignorance and when pressed 90
state the degree of ignorance that should
disqualify it would name inability to
read print.
But the Landmark must know many
" huc men who arc unable to read print
that Il thinks rs well qualified to cast
n ballot with judgment and intelligence
rs the average citizen is. While il must
know many vicious and venal young ne
yroes. who can read print and who are
gnorant also, in spite of their ability to
read print Would the Landmark ex-
Jude ito illiterate white friend who is as
worthy and manly man as it
Knows from the privilege OF
'oice in the making of the laws
hat are TO govern him, and permit
he ignorant, venal young negro scamp
Who has learned TO read in the public
choois to cast a vote? We don't be
ieye FOR a moment that the Landmark
would agree to such thing But per
laps the Landmark would add to the re-
uirement OF ability TO read. capacity to
nderstcnd what is read That is the
Mississippi trick. Now, if the Landmark,
vii think on this we don't believe ii
viii over give its consent 20 it. 1t is
rick, ard a disgraceful one, at that. T
t puts men OF one party TO judge of
neither men OF another party under
tand what they read, and. of course,
ne Judges always determine that a suf-
cient number of the other party do
OF understand what they read TO pat
lie party of the Judges into control Of
he election. This is nothing but a
an for debauching and perjuring the
ldges. 1t is worthless unless II tricks
re negroes; II debauches our judges II
aeeompl!shss Its end. We know that