The Caucasian. (Clinton, N.C.) 188?-1913, 1900-03-29

ubsequent acts is net conclusive as to
5uoh repeal or supersedure. Wneth a
.tatute was repealed is a judicial, not
l legislative question.
Whether section will fall. leaving
5he remainder of the amendment 10
1tand, is a judicial and not a legisla-
tive question, and II is a piece OF i'm
pCntinence on the part CT the legisla-
ture to attempt to instruct the court as
to hC.v it Shall construe a judicial
question.
Mr.. President, nothing is better set |
tied than hat an alternative judgment
is void. Now, this proposed section |
instructs the court that if it thinks all
Of the sections of the amendment are
constitutional, then to let all of them
stand; but, on the other hand, if it
should find one Of the sections uncon-
stitutionsl, that then it must declare
the whole act unconstitutional Such
proposition seems absurd.
The courts have uniformly held that
when the legislature attempts to create
a corporation, that if it fails 10 confer
the essential powers necessary to make
corporation in the charter, that then
a corporation has not been formed,
even though the legislature declare IN
the same act it's intention to create a
corporation. And, on the other hand,
if the legislature should confer The
powers necessary to create corpora
ton, the court would hold that it was
a corporation even though the legisla-
ture in the same act should declare
that it did not intend to create cor
poration. There is a case in the
North Carolina Reports, which have
not had time to put my hands On,
which declares that where the maker
of a deed declared at the end thereof
that The above deed was made with
out fraud" that the declaration was
not only void and of no effect to make
the deed valid, but that the declara-
ton was itself badge of fraud. Just
so this declaration, if made by the
legislature of North Carolina would
| not only not be considered by the
| court in rendering its decision, but its
| only purpose will be to serve to put
| the court on notice that the leglsla-
| ture, when it adopted this provision,
! itself doubted, to say the least, the con-
stitutionality of section :, and that
they passed the provision in spite of
this doubt and belief.
! ANOTHER ATTEMPT TO FOOL THE
VOTERS.
Judge Brown, in this interview, while
expressing the opinion IL at the pro-
posed amendment was constitutional
yet gave as his excuse for advising the
legislature to adopt this new section
that in his opinion the masses of the
people could not understand legal argu-
ment Therefore | take 1t that he Of.
fers this new section because he thinks
the people will not be able to see its
absurdity and utter futliity. If he haf
less ability as a lawyer, it might oe
supposed that he had fooled himself.
But, Mr.. President, this section, at
tempting to instruct the court how tt
construe the amendment, will not foo
the voters of the State into supporting
such a dangerous scheme. They have
had intelligence enough TO see the dan
ger in section 5. The same intelli
gence will guard tn en- against thi:
new device. The voters of NORTH
Carolina are intelligent enough !;
know that there is not only grave, i
not certain, danger to from fifty 4
sixty thousand white voters in thi:
amendment, but they also know tina
if this amendment were adopted AM
section 5 eliminated that no way unde
heaven could restore to these voters
their ballot except 10y again amending
the constitution. These thousands o
illiterate white voters are intelligen
enough to know that when once dis
frauchised they would have no vote t.
help change the amendment and he'll
wipe out the WI ng. They also know
tioio Cin1X 10 T.
the people so long as they have
vote.
This proposed new section will no
prevent the court from declaring sec
ton ) invalid and holding that th
remainder of the amendment shal
stand, and no one knows it better thai
Judge Brown, and the voters will shoV
at the election next August that the.
also know better.
; 1T PUTS THE SOUTH IN A FALSE
POSITION.
Mr.. President, this whole scheme i
not only fraught with danger, but it /
unnecessary. 1t not only puts tn
representation of the South in Con
gress and in the electoral college II
Jeopardy, but it also puts so man,
!, thousands of white voters themselve
. in danger. Section 5 is not only un
constitutional, but it is offensive t
every principle of democracy; offenslv
to political honesty and to American
. ism. MIR. President, it puts the Sout
in a false and unenviable position t
attempt to deal with suffrage in thi
miserably uncandid manner. 1t is
, position that NO Southern State shoul
put itself i'm. 1t is dangerous, it Is un
,, , necessary, it is not honest. There ar
/. /. constitutional methods for dealln
with the suffrage question whe1eve
and wherever the necessity arise;
!, without resorting to such undemf
cratic and unconstitutional and absur
:. subterfuges.
ANOTHER ABSURD SUGGESTION
= One word more ON this subject.
notice that in the interview by tn
Damocratic State chairman to whlc
= | referred a few minutes ago that b
= also advises the legislature wnen
meets to do another thing-to put se'
tions and of this proposed ament
= ment into one section, and he say
: that will lessen the danger Of the cour
{ knocking out section and leavin
section 4 to stand. That suggestion
:. absurd. There is not an authority
= all the books burt what holds that tf
. court will knock out not only one Sc
!, tion but even one-half of a dozen,
- one sentence of a section and let II
y other half stand, just as quick as the
: would knock out one section and lea'
!. : another stand. Every lawyer with
= th.unlyle full of brains knows tha
- Then why is that suggestion made?
= it made in good faith? No! There ca
be but one purpose why man WI
- knows any law should make such
- suggestion, and that is with the hol
~ that 1t would fool some voters who a.