The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1899-05-21

! limiting the franchise to those who
We're entitled to vote before a time an
| tedating his emancipation
If such law would be constitutional
| in New York. or in any of the States
of the great West having large un-
educated foreign population, why would
| it not be constitutional in North Caro-
| lima? If there is anything that is abb
solutely certain it is that the Supreme
| Court of the United States cannot
hold that a law which would be
| constitutional i'll one State would
| be unconstitutional in another. The
| Federal Constitution applies to every
| inch of territory in the Union. and if
| there be one State in which such Il con
! stitutional provision would be cOnstitu-
| tional it would be constitutional in ALL
| If it We're competent for the court to
| look to political conditions in constituting
| Il constitutional provision it would have
| to consider the conditions in every part
of the country and not the conditions
i, i'll one nook or corner Of the country,
or in one State or a division of States,
else it might find itself by the application
! of this rule of Interpretation deciding
that a law constitutional in one part
of the country was unconstitutional in
| another part This analysis shows no
such rule of construction can be safely
adopted by the court OF last resort of
| forty-five States.
| 1t is true we have not in North Caro-
| lima today very large foreign popula
| ton. but who knows when the tide of
| foreign emigration may turn to our
| shores and quickly fill up waste places
as it has done in the great West in the
! last three decades. The day may
| come. and in the near future,
when \ there may be more uned-
| Gated foreigners in North Carolina
than ignorant negroes. When that day
may come. if it ever comes, we cannot
know. neither can the Supreme Court.
| 1t, however. the court should look outside
of the amendment and takes into CON
sideration the motives which led to its
ratification and the history OF this ques
!, ton of suffrage, we have seen that it
would find ample ground to support its
! constitutionality. but it is confidently af-
firmed that the court in constituting this
measure viii look only at the written
instrument and will not ascribe to it
! any motive or purpose which ITS lam
guage fails to disclose. 1t is Il rule as
old as jurisprudence that the Intent of
a law and of the lawmakers must be
gathered from the language of the law
and that the courts have nothing to do
| with any motive of the lawmakers
which does not appear from the con-
/ text of the law itself The courts are
! frequently and properly moved in reach
ing their conclusions by considerations
of urgent public policy ana there are
many instances in our judicial history
where the courts have seemed to ''strain
point to accomplish a great public
purpose and it is believed If it were
/ necessary the court would 'Strain a
| point" in this behalf to accomplish the
purpose of suffrage publication and ele-
yaton which this amendment has in
view for it is manifest that both the
| best thought and enlightened conscience
of the nation longs to see the
South relieved of the insufferable evils
of unrestricted negro suffrage and that
thirty years experience has overwhelm-
ingly convinced the nation that the
| Fifteenth Amendment is the greatest
political blunder of the century. That
the court will not inquire into the mo-
tives of this legislation would seem to
be conclusiyely settled by It's decision
| sustaining the Chinese naturalization
act. 1t was desirable to withhold the
suffrage from the Chinaman because
he had become a troublesome and dam
gerous political factor on the Pacific
coast, just as the negro has become a
source of political irritation and trou-
BILE in the South. With the avowed and
notorious purpose of denying him the
franchise. Congress passed an act by the