The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1895-06-12
The Registration Law.
Argument in the O. S. Court
Of Appeals.


Chief Justice Fuller and judges
Hughes and Seymour Attorney Gen.
sral Barber opened for the State OF
South Carolips. The trend of bis open
ing remarks vas that the Federal
cour.s had no Jurisdiction in the prem
ises. He said it was set forth BY Judge
Goa that the petitioner vas q colored
nan, and therefore the refusal OF the
laws Of South Carolina to permit him
to vote was in violation of the fifteenth
amendment of the Constitution. Mr.
Barber called the attention of the court
10 the fact that nowhere in the record
did the fact that the petitioner was
colored appear, though it was comment
ed upon by attorneys in the lover court
and very prominently brought to the
attention of gadge Gof when he grant
ed the iguncticn. The Attorney
General stated that instead of provid-
ing for discrimination against any
voter, the law set forth that any male
citizen. regardless Of race. color or pre-
vious condition of servisude, who had
resided 10 The State for one year, was
entitled to ~ese. It was not Law, ne
said, that CEASED Judge Gof to hold
that voters were being denied their
privileges, but 1t was the abuse Of law
oy people ostensiblg working under it.
he conteaded that the law should not
be held responsible for the delinquen-
cies Of eleetioe odicera.
Mr.. Douglass made the opening
speech for the petitioner. He prefaced
bis argument with the statement that
though he and his associate, Mr..
Obear, appeared in opposition to the
cause Of the State, they we're in no
sense agsiust the State they we're en-
deavoring to bring about right.
In addressing himself to the question
of the jurisdiction of the United States
court, be said that If a wrong was COM
mitted aud the effect of that wrong was
to disfranchise voter and thereby im-
peril the Federal elections, he conteoded
that Federal court had jurisdiction.
The Law, he said, was in violation Of
section l, article IL, Of the Constitu-
sion of the United States. The State
denies voter bis liberty when it takes
away his vote. and therefore the court
had jurisdiction to eyjoin against fur
ther ipfractions of the Constitution of
the U6ited States.
In conclusion. be sabaitted that the
law was 10 violation of the fourteenth
amendment to tie Consultation, and iu
substantiation of that statement called
attention to The certificate feature of
the law. aud said that it was almost
impossible for the illiterate voter to
dffereutiate his registration from his
tax receipt, or any other o6cial paper
be might have.
He asked the court the direct ques-
ton "What class is the law directed
agaipst-she whites or the negroes r.
Chief Justice Fuller replied that it
might have been directed against
either
Mr.. Douglass, continuing, directly
attacked the law aud argued that it was
enacted simply for the purpose Of dis
iranchising the negro vote.
Mr.. Douglass was followed by Mr.
Obear, whose argument was largely
Of a Legal nature. He held that the
court had jurisdiction to bear and act
in the case and therefore occupied
some time ia ealing attention to the
various authorities and cases bearing
upon the matter g. issae-
Gen. Edward McCrady made the
closing speech for the State. He
began his argument by making care.
ful explanation Of the registration law.
and showing that the circumstances
which existed when they were enacted
justified :heir passage. He compared
them to various other registration laws
and argued that they we're not more no
just or Discriminating than the laws Of
other States, which had at times been
declared constitutional, and thus,
though the laws had been iu existence
since 1876, their constitutioDal'ty had
never been questioned till 1895. He
said if they had been as unjust as they
we're charged to be they would mol,
have been allowed to have remained so
long uuquestioued. He claimed that
the wohle case was a politicsl one
snd that Mills vas only 6garehead
and the speaker did DOT know to-day.
so far as the record went, whether
Mills was white or colored. Gen
McCrady closed his very brief argu-
ment by sayiug be shought the court
was in full possession of all the facts
and that it would be unnecessary for
him to ask the attention Of the court
further
The Chief Justice asked if it were