The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1900-01-21

| ic paper. but against the Amendment: and
| they read from it and give out Il few
| copies here and there. Now. | want TO
| ask You whether this is a Democratic
| paper
Business Man: We'll l am very glad
| YOU have called any attention to this mat
! ter. for this scheme OF palmiGg off the
| ASheville Gazette as a Democratic paper
| is one of the lowest and dirtiest frauds
ever attempted to be practiced ON the
| people. They are doing the same thing,
| all over the State. and the miserable edi-
tor OF this sheet is lending himself to
| the trick. This paper is published by a
man who has recently moved into this
| State When he first bought this paper
| he published it as a Democratic paper,
and strongly advocated the Amendment.
| A few months ago he sold out the paper
| TO the Republicans, and it is row the or
| gan of that party in the State-every-
| thing in it is inspired by the Republican
| leaGers-but it stiu pretends to be Demo
cratic. in order to better deceive the peo-
| pie. 1t is said that this duplicity was a
| part of the contract of sale. You can see
! that the whole scheme is disreputable
and contemplate, and it. like the other
| deceits we have been talking about, Illus
trates the desperation of these Republi-
can white leaders in their eagerneSs to
| uphold ngrO suffrage"
| Farmer: There is one other thing the
! Republicans are telling the uneducated
white men which | wish to ask YOU about.
| They argued that the court Will hold
| the educational qualification clause of the
| Amendment was legal, and it Will hold
| the Grandfather clause illegal, and would
| strike it out And then nobody who can t
| read and write can vote. | want to ask
/ YOU if there was any danger of this being
| DONE"
Business Man. Before | answer this
| question let me ask you question: Upon
what ground do they claim that the 9th
section is unconstitutional"
Farmer: why. they say it is unconSti-
tutiopal because. they say, it violates the
| 10Th Amendment TO the Constitution of
the United States which, they claim pro-
hibitcd any State from denying the negro
the right to vote on account CT race or
color or previous condition of slavery"
Business Man: '>EXactly; that is the
ground upon which they all put it. Now
there is nothing in the Constitution of the
United States which takes away from
the State the right to say who shall and
who shall not vote: neither is there any
| provision in the Constitution which says
that a State shall allow all white M IL
| or all negroes to vote. The Supreme
Court of the United States has decided
over and over again, that the States have
right to regulate the question of stuff
rage as they see fit. The only thing in
the United States Constitution which in
any way restricts the right of the State
TO regulate the subject of suffrage is the
] 9TH Amendment. That does not allow Il
State TO deny the right of Il negro TO vote
on account of race or color or previous
condition of servitude. Now, lei Us again
examine the 9TH section. Read 1t over
carefully. please, for yourself Now tell
me is there one single provision IN that
section which denies to the negro or any
body else the right TO vote? On the con-
trary. is it not clear that it is moi Il deny
ing clause hut an enabling clause, that
is. it denies nobody the right to vote who
otherwise is entitled to vote, but simply
enables some to vote who otherwise might
not be entitled TO vote
Farmer: That seems to he so. 1t not
only does not deny any oody 90 right 70
vote but il seems 10 me ia "her to confer
upon certain persons the ,lgnt Il vote
business Man: That is it exactly. But
/. That is the only section of the Amend
ment that abridGes the negroes right to
vote. as you will see by reading it. That
section does not allow amy negro to vote
unless he can read and write. That is
clear abridgemcnt of the general right
10 vote: clear denial of the right TO vote
to all negroes who can not read and
write: but the denial is because of the
In. Of nl, IN no of q ~
gro; because he cannot read aud write,
not on account of his race. color or prey
ious condition. SO that we see by read
ing the two sections that il is not the
9th section which denies or abridgeS the
right of Il negro to vote, but ii is the 18th
section. and the 18th section denies ana
alaidgeS his right, not because of his
race but because lie does not possess GER
tain educational qualifications which the
State has perfect right. as everybody
admits. to impose. Now then, We have
seen tllat neither of these two sections
violates the Constitution of the 4 mted'
States when taken separately. OF course,
therefore. If when taken together they
should violate that Constitution, the ul-
constitutional element would be IN the
combination of the two and not In either
taken separately, and of course both
would have TO fall together.
Farmer: well. really. that seems to
be clear from the reading of the two
sections. Now. | would like to ask you
if there is any probability of the two
sections taken together being held 10
be unconstitutional"
Business man: None in the world.
| am not lawyer hut have talked with
great many able lawyers about this
matter and | have read pretty much
all that has been written about ii, and
/ find that every lawyer of any standing
who has investigated the Amendment
has reached the conclusion that it Is
constitutional. | know some lawyers
who thought il was not constitutional
when they first read it. but as socn as
they investigated it they changed their
minds | understand that our Amend
ment is a copy of the Louisiana Amend
ment and that it was prepared by two
of The greatest lawyers the South has
produced. after long investigation, and
that they prepared it - thai t would
not be open TO valid constitutional OBJ
jections | know Butler and Pritchard
say that it is unconstitutional. But
neither of them has any reputation as