The Caucasian. (Clinton, N.C.) 188?-1913, 1900-01-11
tend, / suppose that the ballot might

"a conferred upon the white women 1
f the State without comforting il :,
Ike wise on the negro women. This
would make q Discrimination by rea
ION of race. Sd would offend against
.he 18th amendment. Whyf Because
he negro women. under these cir
would be the eitiz ans
protected by the 18th amendment.
The future discussion will make this
point plain.
2. What citizens are protected by
this amendment ia the exercise of
this franchisef They are only thoss
who are, or are attempted to be, dis
on account Of race, color
or previous condition of servitude. |
There is no Limitation upon the gen
eral and admitted power of the State |
except in these particulars. In other
words, the State may confer suffrage |
upon.
(a) Those educationally qualified. |
(b) Those qualified by ownership
of property.
(c) Those qualified by having paid
their taxes.
All these matters are to be deter
mined by the State. Aud In addi-
ion thereto the State may say that
women may vote. There is no dis
elimination IN any of these provis-
ions, on account of race color or
previous condition of servitude. The
Is b amendment was intended to Sc
cure equality of privilege to all col
ors and all races and it prohibits d.
rectly any discrimination on account
of priVious condition of serv,tude. L
gees no further. 1t interferes no
more with the States power than
this. 1t does not.and was never H.
tended to confer the ballot uoon any
class upon whom the State itself had
not conferred 1t. it Is, 10 other words
prOhloitlon upon the State to exer-
else its power in the above particu-
lars, and only in those while it leaves
1T free to act in other particulars,
Conseq lently when a general law is
passed which acts equally upon all
coiors and all races it is constitu
tional, though it may disfranchlse
more of enc color, etc., than of an
other. The cases have decided this.
The following considerations must
convince any one independent of ca
ses. The Is h amendment protects all
races. Suppose 8 negro State, which
attempted to disfranchise directly or
indirectly the whites residing there
in; certainly the whites would ap
peal to this amendment and would
be protected by it. But We are deal
ing now with a general law which
acts equally upon all colors and all
races and we are taking an educa-
rional qualification a IN illustration.
There are, say 100 900 negro voters,
out of population of 100000 who
are entitled to vote under this educa-
tioual qualification. There are 250,-
900, white voters out Of population
OF $50 900 under this educational
qualification, who sre entitled to
vote. That is an equal proportion
of those entitled to vote on election
day, supposlng the equal proportion
to occur on that day. The next day
1t would be different and the next
day after, it would be still different.
SO this general law would disfran-
ch,se more men of one color one day
than it would smother: This would
be unconstitutional one day accord
idg TO t1e accident of circumstance
aud constitutional the next and this
is reductio ad absurdum. C,nsti-
buttons and constitutional construct.
ion do not run along these foolish
lines.
80 repeating, when q general law
is enacted which acts equally upon
all races and all colors, aud regard.
less of their previous condition in re.
stricting the suffrage, that law is
constitutional notwithstanding the
tact Chat 1t DISTINGUISHES a greater
number of blacks than whites, O,
whites than blacks. This principle
however. does act extend so far as to
permit the State to establish a mere
, ly arbitrary qualification, though i,
does not In trims import a discrimi
nation by reason of race, ETC.. if in
fact and IN truth it is such dlscrlmi
nation. Courts can not close their
eyes to the history of this country
ladeed, IN constituting constitutional
} Questions, they are bound to take iu,
dlclal notice Of it. The negro as 8
class was q slave until 1865. AS q
class, neither he nor his forbaars
could vote before January l, 1867 l.
there any other class in North Caro-
lima who could fill the bill that sec
ton 5 describes SO well as the ne
groes9 Is tbere any any other elias:
for whom section was enacted? The
previous sections of the proposed
suffrage provision are plainly consti.
rational. All of the designated class
are disfranchised, regardless of race
color or previous condition. That
class include quite large number OF
white men as well as negroes. whose
educa ton does not qualify the M tn
vote. Then section 5 is added. Whvq
Simply to remove the educational
qualification therefore imposed upon
all white voters, leaving it still eff
fective against negro voters. That is
what the section does and that is
what it was intended to do. There
is no eoncealment of its purpose by
IT'S authors. Section 5 was intende ed
to dlsfranchise IS many negroes as
possible, and not single white man
# possible. And the meaning of this
section cannot be hidden to a court,
that has common sense. by a para
phrastical designation of class
which it is designed to favor at the
expense of the 18th amendment aud
the expense of class which the 10Th
amendment protects in direct terms.
| Section 5 is an exception In both Mr..
Rouutree's and Maj. Guthrie's argu-
nents. SO section might as we'll
aave been incorporated in section 4 as
an express exception to It's provisions
2, t6lng 1T down in plain terms as an
exception to sec. and emitting all
psraphrases, would not sectioa 4
read thus: avery person present.
ing himself, for registration, ex-