The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1900-02-11


control over the question of suffrage, ex-
cent in regard to race, color or servitude
The wisdom. the propriety the Justice Of
any provision in the Constitution Of
state prescribing the qualifications Of an
eIector, cannot be called in question by
the Federal Government save in the par
ticnlars mentioned.
Some States require educational quail
fcations, others require, or did require 4
property qualification. some admit wo-
men to full participation in voting and
holding office. If North Carolina sheuld
permit boys of fifteen to vote. or should
debar from the ballot box all who could
not read Greek. only the people of the
State would have the right to make OBJ
lection. The State has the right 10 pre-
scribe an educational qualification, alid
to exempt from its operation those Wh"
have long exercised the right to vote and
the children and grand children of such
persons. without necessarily infringing
the Federal Constitution.
But if the effect of the provisions should
be to exempt all white persons, or al free
horn persons from the educational test
and should leave only colored persons, or
former slaves and their descendants to-
bear the burden of the abridging section,
then it seems to me that the legislative
intent would be SO manifest. and the OPP
GRAFTON of the amendment SO clearly III
opposition to the letter and spirit OF the
Fifteenth Amendment, that the abridg-
ing section would be VOID.
it would violate the constitution rs
clearly as if it had provided in express
terms. instead of indirectly.that it should
apply only to negroes or to those VINO
had been in Il previous condition OF
servitude and their descendants. But II
the exemption is restricted in its scope
and if not only coored men ana eX-
slaves. bat many other classes are left
under the full restriction of the ahrldglng
section. then it would seem that tn"
amendment i constitutional. Inc
abrdgement of the right to vote, or more
accurately the failure TO exempt from
the operation of the abridgement. must
not only include all former slaves. but
ii must also clearly and Enthusiastically
be on ACCOUNT OF their race, color
or previous condition of seryitude. But
is any one authorized to speak for a
State. and to declare that the failure to
exempt former slaves from the operation
of an educational qualification is ON
ACCOUNT OF their former condition
Of servitude, when negroes and eX-slaves
form only one class of the various
classes who derive no benefit from the
section which eXempts? In facJ only 4
single class receives any benefit from the
eXception--thoSe who were emitted to-
vote in a State in 1867 and their descen-
dants. There is nothing inherently un-
constitutional in hereditary suffrage, UNI
less the denial of it to others is based
upon their race, color or previous serv.
tude
To Illustrate. let us see what would be
the effect of Il provision identical with
the proposed amendment if adopted by
another State. In North Dakota and
Minnesota, for instance. there is Il large
foreign population, many of them we'll
educated Scandinayil9S. living iii com
munit;es Of their own. and many of them
unable to read or write tn Constitution
in English. There are very few negroes.
The humber Of white free born persons
who would heeXcluded 10y educational test
and not admitted by the cXenpting sec
ton would be many times greater than
the number of negroes. Could it be Seri-
ouSly argued that in Minnesota the few
negroes who were affected had their right
to vote abridged ON ACCOUNT of their
race, color or previous servitudeE At the
risk of tireSome repetition. let it be kept
in mind that not only must the right to
vote be abridged but it must be abridged
en- ACCOUNT of race .color.Or servitude
And if the amendment would not be adj
judged invalid in Minnesota, can it be
unconstitutional in North Carolina? As
1T seems To me. the fact that the amend
ment or failure TO exempt from the opera
ton Of the abridging section applies to
all foreign born citizens and their dcs
ccndants, unless the ancestor was natur-
allied before 1861, is Il decisive answer to
the position that the educational qualiti-
cation is prescribed on account of race.
color or servitude. If a lineal descendant
of la Fayette, an accomplished French
and German scholar, naturaliZed .citi
zen of North Carolina since 1868, should
present himself for registration he would
he rejected unless he could read the con,
stitution in the English language.
There is another suggestion which
have not seen presented in any discussion.
Not adj citizens of the United States are
entitled to the benefits of the exemption
from the edllca tiOnal tests. but only citi
zcns OF THE STATES in existence in
1867. A lifelong resident of the District.
Of Columbia, citizen Of any one of the
numerous territories in existence i'll 1867,
and all their descendants are debarred
from any benefit under section ., because
it applies only to citizens Of STATES in
the United States
If under an enabling Act New Mexico
should be granted statehood, it would be
obliged to present its constitution for APP
prevail by the Congress. If such constitu
ton should contain Il provision identical
with the proposed amendment in North
Carolina, its effect would be absolutely to
disfranchise a maj ority of its present vot
ing population (for many are uneducated
and Of the educated many write and read
only the Spanish language, and the fact
that they had been territorial voters for
a generation would not entitle them to
the benefit of the exemrting section. Yet
such abridgement Of the right to vote.
clearly would not be ION account of race,
color on previous condition of Servitude,"
and would not violate the Fifteenth
Amendment.
Can it he said upon reviewing the whole
question that an exemption which applies
only to single class voting citizens of