Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-06-08
yoW WITH THECOURT
n, South Carolina Registration Case
~ ,,,rsd Yesterday and Submitted
,,n,,on on one side THAT 1t Dis
rauen''e' voters nm" ." '"'
- Does Not Discrim'n"'e-N"
-, pccIsiou Expected

ne '''' -.s,cb has attracted so mueh
i'' throughout the country sin0e
'. con granted an injSne''On sN, -
''..,uy set the entire ei'S'oi'.'w ,.' =,
800 aside. is now before the On 0.'
'' ''- -.~,,lt court Of Appeals awaiting
...'s '''"''
ie.' ~.,,sni was heard yesterday oy
.fg.,icc Fallcr and Judges rus"
s.,wsur. 10 began at 10 o''OS -
g. srcr the arrival OF 'he D''','
81, ..3 TASTED until o'clock T. NJ
.a c.,crsl Barber, General NC
A" ana Nr. George $. Mower an
CO., carolina. appeared on pehah
= III. State. which prays that the inluno-
. 4..solvcd and the entire proee'a-
,' ,..,...,d. and Messrs Charles A.
US and n. y. Oboar. both OF Wash
l-' ..,.,senied the pctuoner-Miiis-
'N ....,. chat the court has jurisdic-
~. I'd asks that the order Of Judge
ca De Affirmed . ,,.. $50. clear
and lofc.ble. Mr.. Douglas, who.
f-.. r.rrrgr and associate. MI coeai,
'' ..fn Calounian. made an espec'",S
rre NATION OF "is si'e Vi w
vIae counsel were gwen 1 ,..1e
CAST .r.r. Id a.c lists OF authorizes
t b. believed that the court VIII
c''" On make known its decision by
o. ..tres.ay. or watch day the term
r.h- ..tIy end There is only case to De
vi. .od this will hardly exceed TWO
~Ba Important point 20 ne passeo
..'. ,befber or not the Goff injunc-
..u stand. The frequency with
t.a f.fustIc, Fuller asked whether
r ..r..ion.law made any discrlmi-
i.. '..-r-t me negro voter. LED 10 inc
F.. tho minds OF some or those
that hp is inclined TO dissolve
.-.u.cucn. There viii be surprise II
IN dnped ~ fun force
m ATTossNEs GENERAL OPENS,
e., Ser mads.the first speech. The
t ris openius- remarks was that
r.s.-,I courts ma rot jurisdiction in
.....- Hc saii~ u Was set forth
.-. ,;,er that the petitioner was
IMAM. AND therefore the refusal
.r. t.Us Of south Carolina to permit
D., Vote was In violation Of the hf-
,r amendment Of the Constitution.
b.. char called the attention Of the
b.. the fact that nowhere IN the
-# did this fact-that the petitioner
....rel- appear, though 1t was com
....l upon by attorneys in the io"a
r. anI very prominently brought 10
.-s attention II Judge Con Wheh ne
-,.f the injunction The Attorney
-...l stated that instead Of providing
-. termination against any Notei'
... t,- set forth that any male citize n,
..-tres OF race color, or condition,
7. rrI resided in the State for onc
, mas entitled 10 vote il was not the
b.. said that caused Judge GOf to
Ell. frst voters were being denied then
...r.,. but 10 was the abuse OF the
e hv people ostensioly working
~ D. re contended that the la~
.-t not be held responsible for dere-
-,~s ~ election officers.
he Barber argued along this line ~
..-. length. citing various authorities IN
..s.- which were IN some degree similar
..trs one under consideration. He said
... -.fuoner did not state that he had
...- f..u denied the privilege Of regtstra-
@ l.t that he alleged his inability to
.--.r with the requirements Of the law.
81 ....kcr cited numerous authorities
.-.....t-0- relief 90 just such cases. The
.-..y-General went into digest OF
ra r..stration laws OF the State, main
,-rc throughout that they required no
..-s f.an those of other States angsonl]
..-sl from those Of many states 10
..rr5rtaut particulars. In conclusion ne
...sl that the injunction granted by
...e COT De- dissolved and the state or
n Carolina be permitted TO continue
rs registration
FOR THE PETITIONER.
v- Douglas made the opening speech
Zip .-. petitioner. lie prefaced his argu-
--t wish the statement that though ne
..- f.. associate Mr. Obcar appeared In
..,...t.n 70 the cause Of the State, they
r.r4 tn no sense against the State, except
..t th.y were endeavoIins 10 bring
.t.lt right The registration laws, ne
end in the outset. were calculated 10
atrf-a TIE rights of voters, and this, he
rlrht was I'm violation Of all ltwn
t.s-re on elections. II in any particu>
i- r.l.-trati1n laws abridge or interfere
with tts rights Of voters in exercising
r-~ suffrage they must be declared
f Nr Douglas asked the court If II
.-.fsral the law governing registration
-..-h Carolina which had for It's pur-
.... rat the registration Of voters, but
r.. rob Them OF their votes 20 be consu-
-.rI BE called attention to the fact
t.st a. REGISTERED voters were required
-. have e certificate setting forth theis
.-r..,rtr1n. and loss Of this certificate
.r failure o. have n with them at the
was a practical Acknowledgement.
H.s a sina qua non of their right to
.Ia TIE whole plot he said, was show,
., fts rslu.rement that voter who moves
fn .ae hluse 10 another in the same
election precinct must get a new certifi-
c-t and he contended that such clause
U1 rot have been inserted except for
loo fEs
-u't.m MIS- OF the law he said, are so
.rah.y wrong that no argument is ne
.-..1r o. show its unconstitutionality.
T-- act not only necessarily renders void
"s suffrage Of many Of the voters, but
f.s done so Ga hundreds and thousands
~ cases.
HOW THE LAW WORKS.
,,- Douglas cited the fact that the
REGISTRATION books are closed 40 days be-
fr tte electon-the very time when
rg should be open-thereby making It
apparent that It Is not the intention OF
rs Iew % have the voters OF the State
el.rrs. their free suffrage.
Hs said De would have the laws wiped
of' entirely; the wall surrounding the
elections and blocking out voters torn
G U.. ana every man permitted 70 regis
Pep 40 the proper time and in the prop
f- amer. and 20 vote as ne IS en-
tfe1 t1 do under the Constitution.
T-e speaker was asked by the Chief
Justice 10 the workings Of the law applied
o. whites as well as negroes, and he re-
ft4 Hat on ts I1ce Il did. but a very
r.l volecrng covered the wall between
re whites and blacks. and he proposed
n move 10 and show the proper applica-
t.r q, me law.
li- stated. without fear Of cOntraVen-
'rr chat any man who was OF age IN
h- and failed to register then. had been
Permanently disfranchised. In 1891 an act
vs passed looking 10 curing this evil
Due N.s was more mOnstrous than the
previous one. Ia that Law there are re
C-.r.mfufa which are more than mons
tr1H ln The inst place. the disfranchised
voter ls given ten days IN which 10 regis
i.r He must ser forth 10 the registrar
etty movement he has made since lAH-.
a.l frls must be- certified 10 by two repu-
Htt citizens. who were In 1872 twenty
r.e years az age The petitioner SAYS
r.t Boo had made repeated and persistent
'..r'. t1 register. but he could not com
9J alrh all tha requirements and restrlc-
ilf ~ the registration laws.
n.y. Douglas asserted emphatically that
ne registration laws Of South Carolina
were n direct contravention OF It's own
C.ast.tutlon
QUESTION OF JURISDICTION.
M-. Douglas now addressed himself 70
o. CUE lion Of the jurisdiction OF the
ll,gl states Court and aa'd II WRONG
r-o committed and the effect OF that
Il