The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1900-04-17

rom orr political contests in the
f,+ure and give to US the opportunity
E discussing issues of far greater i'm
9ortance.
Now, will it be consistent in US to
-.fuse to assist in the effort to sup
nress the ignorant negro vote? 1
-hink it the duty of every true lover
IF the State to put aside any bitter
ness or arrangement that may have
occurred in the past, and unite in the
-aouest from all to secure this modi-
fcation of suffrage and relieve US
rom this irresponsible and danger
pus negro vote.
For the benefit of those of my
readers who fear that the grand
-lthcr clause may be declared I'M
constitutional without invalidating
he remaining sections, thus making
The educational test apply to all illit-
rate whites now of age, I present
-hcse opinions.
NahELD NAAAAD ID DIN AAOh
New, the Senator from North Caro-
ina assumes that if part of this Con-
-titutional amendment shall be de-
Jared unconstitutional, that part
ioes not carry the remainder with it,
md he cites from a decision of JUS
ice Matthews, 1 should like to find
that case.
Mr.. Pritchard. 1 think you will
ind it in 1913 United States.
Mr.. Money. One hundred and
ifty-eight United States. Ihave the
case here, 1 suppose. It is the case
IF Pollock VS.. Farmers Loan and
Trust Company, quoting from
Sprague VS.. Thompson O18 U. S., 90,
~
The insuperable difficulty with the
application of that principle of con-
~trUctiOn to the present instance is,
mat by rejecting the exceptions in
ended by the legislature of Georgia
he statute Is made to enact what
onfessedly the legislature never
meant. 1t confers upon the statute
ID positive operation beyond the legis-
Iative intent, and beyond what any
ne can say it would have enacted in
view of the iIlegality of the excep-
tons
Then, again, the court says:
We dOnOtmean to say thatan act
laying by appOrtiOnment a direct tax
IN all real estate and personal prop
rrty, or the income thereof, might
not also lay excise taxes on business,
privileges, employments, and voca-
tons. But this is not such an act,
and the scheme must be considered
: Il whole. Being invalid as to the
-reater part, and falling, as the tax
would, if any part We're held valid, in
direction which could not have
neen contemplated except in connec-
non with the taxation considered as
IN entirety, we are constrained to
Jude that sections p to 81, inclusive,
ii the act which became a law with
mt the signature of the President on
august IS, 1894, are wholly inopera-
i've and void
That is on the income tax. That is
..t the case l wanted, although it is
-n the same point.
In the case of George w. Warren
md others vs.. Mayor and Aldermen
Charleston C6S Mass.), the court
~.v~:
When the parts of a statute are so
-Utually connected and dependent as
.nlitiOns, considerations, or com
a.n-ation for each other as to war
amt Il belief that the legislature in
ended them as a whole, and that if
IN could not be carried into effect
-lc legislature would not pass the
-~idue independently, if some parts
re unconstitutional and void, all the
PROVISIONS which are thus dependent,
additional or connected, must fall
18th them"
That exactly meets the case in
ont. Now, it is evident that the
.-i~lature of the State of North
rrolinu intended to present scheme
+ suffrage to the sovereign people Of
mat State for their adoption. 1t
AIS a whole scheme it was some
.ln- in entirety. 1t had its several
-.cronS, it is true, but, as the court
~ frequently said, sections +
IMPLY artificial and carry no mean
IL 1.-Two different things may be in