The commonwealth. (Scotland Neck, N.C.) 1896-1929, 1899-07-27

them from the old world, or to lmDlDe
the democratic principles of self-gov-
eminent upon which our republic is
founded and it is absurd to suppose
the court would say such an amend
ment was unconstitutional, because
forsooth the few negroes who happen
to be living there along with the great
not be able to qualify themselves I'm
der the clause limiting the franchise
to those who were entitled to vote be-
fore a time antedating his emancipa-
ton.
1t CONSTITUTIONAL IN NEW
YORK, GOOD HERE.
II such a law would be constitution
al in New York, or in any of the States
of the great West having a large I'm
educated foreign population, why
would it not be constitutional in North
Carolina? If there is anything that is
certain it is that the Su-
preme Court of the United States can
not hold that a law which would be
constitutional in one State would be
unconstitutional in another. The Fed
eral constitution applies to every inch
of territory in the Union, and if there
be one State in which such constitu-
tional provision would be constitution
al it would be constitutional in all. If
10 To
look to political conditions in constru-
ing a constitutional provision it would
have to consider the conditions in ev-
cry part of the country and not the
conditions in one nook or corner Of
the country or in one State of a divis-
ion of State, else it might find itself
by the application of this rule of in
depreciation deciding that law con-
stitutionM 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 Car
olina today very large foreign pop
ulation, 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 uneducated for
eigners in North Carolina than igno-
rant negroes. When that day may
come, if it ever comes, we cannot
know, neither can the Supreme Court
If, however, the court should look out
side of the amendment and take into
consideration the motives which led to
it's ratification and the history of this
question of suffrage, We have seen
that it would nd ample ground to
support its constitutionality; but it is
confidently affirmed that the court in
constituting this measure will look only
at the written instrument and will not
ascrfbe to it any motive or purpose
which dts language fails to disclose.
1t is a 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
itself.
PUBLIC POLICY.
The courts are frequently and prop
erly moved in reaching their conclu-
s;ons by considerations of urgent pub
dc policy and there are many instances
in our judicial history where the courts
have seemed to "strain point" to ac-
complish a great public purpose and
it is believed if it We're necessary the
court would strain a point in this
behalf to accomplish the purpose of
suffrage publication and elevation
which this amendment has in view,
for 1T is manifest that both the best
thought and enlightened conscience of
the Nation longs to see the South re-
iieved of the insufferable evils of I'M
restricted negro suffrage and that thir-
ty 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 conclusively settled by its decis-
ion sustaining the Chinese naturaliza-
ton act. 1t was desirable to withhold
the suffrage from the Chinaman be-
cause he had become troublesome
and dangerous political factor on the
Pacific coast just as the negro has be-
come source of political irritation
and trouble in the South With the
avowed and notorious purpose of de-
nying him the franchise, Congress
passed an act by the provision of
which the Chinaman was excluded
from citizenship and the Supreme
Court held this legislation which was
intended and in fact did disfranchise
him by indirection, constitutional, and
today the Chinaman, the descendant
of nation which has produced some
of the greatest men and foremost
| thinkers of the world, and which rep