The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1895-05-15
DOWN ON THE Law.
JUDGE GOFF'S VIEW OF OUR ELEC-
TON SYSTEM.

He Holds it Tiolative of the Federal Con-
st;tutior. and Therefore Void The Rich
land Supervisor Enioined--Dr. Pope's
Motion Dismissed.
COLUMBIA, May Especial: There
was a great crowd IN the Federal
court room this smorning-drawn there
by the previous announcement thai
there would be announced the decls-
Ions on all the questions brought be-
fore the court in the several cases ar
eued before the judges. Every seat
was occupied, and all the available
standing room was also used: There
were quite number of negroes pres.
ent-these being, for the most part, OF
the more intelligent class. The room
was well filed some little time before
the session of the court opened. -
Promptly at ~ o'clock Judges Con
and Simonton entered from their con-
sultation. room in the rear, and as
cended to the rostrum where the seats
are provided for them. The marshal
commanded, Silence in court. and
he waszimpGcitly obeyed. The audi
ence was all attention.
Judge Golf, with a short reference
to theimpo-tance of the case to be oe-
cided and to the short time which he
had had to prepare his opinion, said
that he would read his Judgment IN
the case of Mills VS.. Green [the Rich
land Supervisor of Registration re
serving to himself to file additional
authorities if he should think proper
to do so. The case against Green. 1t
will be remembered, arose out OF the
complaint on the part of Mills, col
ored man, that he had lost his right
to vote for delegates to the Constltu-
tional Convention, because he had not
had proper opportunity to register
asa voter, and because there would
be.no adequate opportunity for him so
to register at any time before the cleo
ton of delegates to that convention.
He asked that the Supervisor be en-
Joined from proceeding under the
registration law, until the merits OF
his complaints and charges could be
considered. and determined by the
court.
The Richland Supervisor, through
the Attorney General, answered, cia!nn-
ing that the court had no jurisdiction
in the premises, and that If it had, it
could not grant any injunction on the
showing made on behalf of the COM
plairant Mills. The real question IN
the case, considered by Judge Gotf.
are these: i. Has the Circuit Court of
the United States jurisdiction to pass
upon the matters set forth In the
bill of cemplaint2 2. Is the reglstra-
ton law. Of South Carolina in viola
ton of the Federal conshtutioas At
ter a full statement of the case as set
forth in the bill and the return OF the
Supervisor, together with full quota
tons from the registration law, Judge
Golf proceeded:
<The question of jurisdiction is 6rst
toIAe determined. Defendant insists
that this suit is in effect proceeding
against the State of South Carolina,
and that it should not be entertained
because prohibited by the Eleventh
Amendment to the Constitution OF the
United States. It is not my intention
at this time to consider separately the
many cases cited by counsel In argu-
ment bearing on this question. After
carefully examining them all. | con-
clude that it is the duty Of the Circuit
Court of the United States to restrain
State officer from executing an un-
constitutional statute Of the State,
when the execution of it by him
would violate or abridge the rights,
privileges and immunities of the COM
biainant that are granted by the Con
stitution>of the United States. So far
as this question is concerned, it IS I'M
material if the officer so restrained be
the supervisor. of registration, the Au-
ditor ;:of the State, the Comptroller
General, the Treasurer, the Attorney
General or the Governor. We DO not
have in this country any class OF peo-
pie, State or national officials, or prl-
yate citizens who are above the law
and who are not compelled to respect
it. The Constitution ofAthe United
States is the supreme law oS,the land,
ANYTHING in the Constitution or laws
of any State to the contrary notwlth-
standing. The mandate of the nation s
Constitution isaddressed to all officers
ofthe United States aswelast to all the
officers of all the States. The judges
of~the Federal as well as Of the State
courts must respect it.. for it declares
that the judges of every State shall
ha .ho1,n1 thereby AS IS said by the
Supreme Court in Dodge VS.. Woolsey,
Is slow, 331: To make its suprema-
cys more complete, impressive and
practical, that there should be no es-
cape from its operation and that its
binding force upon the States and the
: members of Congress should be un-
mistakable, it is declared that the Sen
ators and Representatives before men
toned. and the members Of the several
State Legislatures, and all executive
and judicial officers, both Of the Uni
ted States and of the several States,
shall be bound by oath or affirmation
to support this Constitution. It would
be strange admission, a startling de-
cision, that the courts Of the United
States cannot open their doors to the
citizens of the United States who al
leges that they are by the unconstitu-
tional laws of a State deprived OF their
privileges or immunities as citizens OF
the United States and denied the equal
protection of the laws within the jurls-
diction of such State. am not aware
that any court of the United States
has ever so held, I trust will never
be advised of such a decision, and |
am sure as [ now see the law and my
duty, that will not SO rule, not es-
, tablish such a precedent.
: The case of in re Ayers, 123 U. s.,
:t43, relied on by defendants counsel
does not in my judgment sustain the
position taken by them. In that case
the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court
was denied, not because the officers OF