The Caucasian. (Clinton, N.C.) 188?-1913, 1900-01-04

troll stronger than the Republican
party. Since nearly all Of the Popu-
lists can read, he knew he could not
many Of them with the
Amendments, SO he adopted the
Goebel election law with which to
steal their votes. l am aware that
they will indignantly deny that this
is their purpose. just like they indig-l
nantly denied in the last campaign
the charge that they intended TO
disfranchise anybody, white or black.
They fooled the people then; l do not
think they can fool them again.
But let us for arguments sake. adj
NIT that they had no such purpose;
yet the result. if the Amendment is |
adopted, will be the same as far as
the voters who are disfrauchised are
concerned. No matter what thu pur-
pose was, when they are disfran-
chised it will do them no good to be |
told it was not done on purpose. 1t
will not give back to these sixty
Thousand white voters when disfran-
chised the power to vote unless the
Constitution could be again amend
ed. And remember, these sixty
thousand white voters could not (aot
single one of them) vrte to change
the Amendment and wipe out the
wrong; and remember also, that the
machine politicians only fear the vo-
ter SO long as he has q vote. They
would not fear, and therefore would
not care for these sixty thousand dis
franchlsed citizens when they no
longer had q vote. The simple fact
that there is danger of this being the
result Is sufficient cause for every
man who does not favor dlsfranchis-
ing these men and having the state
ruled by small autocratic machine
while the masses will be denied a
| voice in government and forced to
pay taxes to support ito vote
against this disfranchisiug scheme.
WHAT SENATOR STEWART SAYS.
discussed this question at some
length few days since with the VEN
cradle Senator from Nevada, Sena-
tor William M. Stewart, who is ad-
mitted by every one to be q great
lawyer. Senator Stewart is an es-
pecially high authority on this ques-
ticn, for he is the author of the 18th
Amendment to the Constitution of
the United States, and is the man
who led the fight to put the measure
through Congress-. He is the only
man who was in the Senate at that
time, WHO is still in the Senate. He
said he had examined the Louisiana
Amendment and the proposed Amend
ment in our State and that it was his
opinion that section of the propos-
ed Amendment was clearly uncop-
stitutional, and that he was satisfied
the Supreme Court of the United
States would so declare when the
question came before it.
WHAT THE LOUISIANA SENATORS SAY.
Now let us see also what the two
Democratic Senators from Louisiana
say abont this Amendment. As you
know, Louisiana is the only state
that has adopted DISTINGUISHING
scheme, containing the 'monstrous
absurdlty" known as 1.-THE GRANDPA.
thsr clause The two Senators from
, that State are recognized by every
one to be able lawyers, and one OF
Them was Chief Justice of the State
when he was elected to the Senate.
They have both publicly declared
!, that section was demonstrations
aud must fall when it reaches the
Court. Surely every one will admit
that their opinion is very high autho,
ity.
WHAT THE LEADING DEMOCRATIC
PAPER IN LOUISIANA SAYS.
Besides, the New Orleans Times
, Democrat, the leading Democratic
paper in Louisiana, has also ad
mitted that Section 5 is unconstitu
tiOnal, and has expressed regre
, that the Amendment was eve
adopted in that shape. In the las
. issue of THE CAUCASIAN there i.
copied an able editorial from tina
paper, in which it says "the Amend
ment is not only demonstrations
but dangerous besides."
WHAT THE GEORGIA LEGISLATURE
SAYS.
? Now let US look at the exampl,
of Georgia on this question. Tn,
: present Democratic Legislature O
that S ate, which is now in session
has repudiated this very Amend
2 ment by large majority. A mem
Der, named Hardwick, few weeks
2 ago, copied the North Caroline
amendment, and introduced it ii
! the Georgia Legislature. The ques
ton was debated at some length
| The speakers opposing the disfran
. chising scheme took the position
that it was not only unconstitu
tional, but that it was also unju :,
! to attempt to disfranchise "tht
good, honest old country darkey'
5 while allowing the young town ne
, gro to vote. They also took the
I position that no State that had less
: than a majority of negro votes
! could be justified in attempting te
pass such unjust, doubtful, danger
r Gus and drastic legislation. Now
: what are the facts about Georg a
t In that State 46 per cent. of the
r vote fs colored, and there are nearly
sixty counties that have majority
> of negro votes. How is it in NORTH
5 Carolina With us there is only
4 about one-thlrd of the vote colored
and only thirteen counties
e where the colored vote is in the ma
, jority. These few counties can b.
] controlled by having a d,fferon
, system of county government il
$ them, while allowing the people il
the other eighty-four counties t.
! elect all Of their officers. That il
. what the Legislatures Of 1895 ant
d 1897 would have done had not tn
e Democratic Supreme Court hell
+ that it was unconstitutional to d
q SO. But the present non-partisal
It Supreme Court has since held tina
it is constitutional for the Legisla
Il ture to provide one system O