The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1900-06-19

1hc AN u lHe rSpuoLFCdn LcklS-
atures of 1SS5-s7 Opened the Doors
to Frauds and Blocked the Means OF
Preventing Them-The Present Act
Of the Democratic Legislature Simply
Attempts to Prevent These Frauds
and Allow All Entitled Thereto TO
Vote, and No Others.
Republicans have denounced the
election law passed by the Legislature
Of 1899 as unfair and unjust. and even
have gone 50 far as to say it is infa-
nous.
Viewed from the standpoint of a re-
publican, who wishes all negroes TO
vote, whether entitled to do so or not.
convicts, boys Is, 10 and 20 years OF
age, and who think all things wrong
that stand in the way of his desire,
there Is some truth in the charge; bu
from the standpoint of a white man,
who thinks negroes not qualified ought
to be prevented from voting, the charge
is utterly false.
A comparison of the fusion election
law of 1S95-'97 and the democratic law
of 1899 will show that each was framed
around one central idea, and that all
the provisions of the law worked to this
end. Under the fusion law the aim was
TO get every negro on the registration
books, whether entitled to go there or
not, and to make it impossible to get it
off when once there, while under the
democratic law the aim is to keep the
negroes name off the book, unless it
ought to go there, and if it gets there
~wrongfully to enabley you to get it off.
A brief statement of conditions will
show that the democratic idea is right
The fusion legislature of 1895 revised
the democratic laws and repealed every
part of them which interpoSed the
slightest obstacle to the registration of
any n who desired to register, wheth-
er entitled to do so or not. 1t literally
threw down the bars and allowed any
one and every one who took the oath
to register. Under this law no ques-
lions were permitted to be asked and
nc objection allowed to be made to the
free registration of every one whose
conscience would permit him to lake
the oath. If the fusion legislature had
stopped here it would have been bad
enough, but it did o stop here.
Having removed every effective i'm
pediment to doubt, fraudulent and lille
gal registration, it adopted new and
unheard of measures to deter and de-
feat all attempts to purge the registra-
ton of illegal names.
The right to challenge was not, in
deed, denied in terms, but a name once
on the books was so safely guarded
that he right to challenge was prac-
tically mad to no effect. Let US see
how this law proceeded to defeat h
right to challenge.
Before that, in North Carolina, when
a mans right to vote was challenged,
he was required to prove his right to
vote, and failing in this his name was
stricken from h registration books.
This rule a always, before 1895, pre-
vailed in North Carolina The aSo
of it was that it was easier for the
voter to prove his qualification than it
was for the party challenging his vote
to prove his disqualification. This rule
is based upon a principle of evidence
which is recognized in every court in
every civilized country in the world.
The act of 1895 reversed this we'll es-
tabliShed rule of evidence and requires
the challenger to prove a negative, to-
wit: the facts of the voters diSqualifi-
cation. This was the first obstacle
which the legislature provided against
purging the books of illegal registra-
tion. No one will say that fraudulent
registration ought to be permitted, and
no one will deny that it is the duty of
every honest citizen to object to such
registration, and that in so doing he is
performing a high public duty and is
entitled to the aid of the state in his
effort to thus protect the integrity of
the ballot. The Legislature of 1895
seems to have taken a different view
of the matter, however. 1t threw OBJ
stacles in the way of challenging. 1t
required notice to be served pon the
party challenged, without making any
provision for paying the expenses of
the service, thus making it necessary
that the party making the challenge
should do so at his own expense. 1t
required the challenger to rov affirm
atively the disqualification, but made
no provision for the payment of wit
nesses that might be summoned for
that purpose, thereby requiring the
challenger to secure the witnesses in
the best way he could, at his own ex-
pense. It will readily be seen that un-
der these conditions a fraudulent voter
was in very little danger from a chal-
lenge. This was the second obstacle
which the legislature Of 1895 i~nterposed
against purging the registration books
Of illegally registered names. The third
obstacle that was interposed was even
more formidable than the other two. 1t
was the character and composition Of
the tribunal which was provided to try
anu OeIeTIInne UnS QueSlIOIS IdlScO ny
the challenge. True, each of Tx three
political parties were given representa-
ton upon that tribuanl, but two OF
these parties were in close, compact
political affiliations. For all practical
purposes they were but one party. All
questions before this tribunal of three
We're determined by a majority vote.
1t was, therefore, apparent that the de-
cision was left to a tribunal composed
of two members on one side and one on
the other-a strictly partisan tribunal
to decide a purely political question
The result of this law, framed, as we
have seen. in the interest of fraudulent
registration and to protect that ragis-
tration against every attempt TO purge
and correct it, as applied to the general
election of 1896, was just what might
have been and was expected.
standing the obstacles interposed by
these provisions for the protection OF
illegal registration, many challenges
were made in that election, but every
body knows that, as a rule, especially
in the eastern counties, without any
reference to the testimony, these chal-