The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1900-01-28

to be highly offended because pound
of ointment of spikenard was devoted. Il
a sacred use that he did not approve Of
and he demanded to know:
why was not this ointment sold
for three hundred pence and given t.
the poor
..This he said, not that he cared Tor
the poor. but because he was . .hi.f,
and had the bag and bare what was
put therein.
Such was the Judgment pronounced
upon this arch traitor and hypocrite by
one who knew him well, and no one
who knows the men who are using tnis
argument TO brighten the ignorant and
credulous into voting against the amend
ment believes that they are better "a
politicians, 50 far as their sincerity Is
concerned, than Judas was as a disciple.
1t has been shown that if the proposed
amendment, taken by its four corners and
construed or interpreted as whole, is
in conflict with the constitution of the
United States, it is so because it makes
an unjust discrimination against the
negro by denying or abridging his right
tn vote on account of his race, color or
nreviolls condition of SerYitude, and that
a discrimination on any other account
yould not be obnoxious to the Constitu-
lion of the United States; and ii has
also been shown that there is moth
ing upon the face of the proposed
amendment which would exclude the ne
GRO from the right TO vote on account
of his race. etc, and that neither Con-
gress nor the courts will be at liberty
to look beyond the words of the amend
in,
No court, without ignoring the settled
rules of Interpretation, would be at
liberty to pass upon the validity of sec
ton five as n separate and independent
subject. This section is so intimately
connected with the other PROVISIONS OF
the amendment that ii it were declared
void the amendment would not be the
amendment proposed by the Legislature
and ratified by the people, but one
made by the court, and this is never per-
mitted The Supreme Court of the Uni
ted States i'll the case of Sprague VS..
Thompson, lis L. s., 81, said: If a
clause in a statute, which violates the
constitution cannot be rejected without
causing the act to provide what the Leg
islature never intended, the whole statute
must fall" OF course no court will
hold that the Legislature of North Car
DINA would have proposed this amend
ment to the people for their ratiiica-
ton if they had supposed that the fifth
section would be declared void, and the
rest of the amendment valid.
Is il not manifest that such a decision
would have the effect to deprive thous-
ands of their votes contrary to
the plainly expressed intention OF the
Legislature? And it must be kept in
mind that this amendment deals only
with the elective franchise and the right
to hold office, and no one rs entitled
to hold an office unless he possesses the
right to vote.
But, if it be conceded that the effect
of this section will be to give to white
men q privilege that the negro, on ac-
count of his race, etc, cannot enjoy.
it will not follow that his right to vote Is
denied or abridged on this account; be
cause if he has the qualifications pre-
scribed in the preceding sections he will
have the right 10 vote, and will not
be affected in any way by section FIVE.
Let it be admitted that he was not en-
titled to vote ON January ], 1867, be-
cause of his race, etc, there is nothing
in section five To show that such was
the fact, nor is there anything there TO
show that white men were given the
benefit of its provisions because they
were white.
WHAT COURTS WON'T DO.
Let it be now supposed that at this
very time it is a notorious fact that the
number of negro men II years old and
upward in this State who cannot write
is as great as the humble rwho We're not
entitled to vote on January ], 1867, and
the descendants Of such. would any
court be justified in holding that the
educational qualifications III the proposed
amendment were placed there on account
of race. color or previous condition OF
servitude? Would the court go outside
of the plain meaning of the words and
make an investigation or act upon motto
rious facts and declare that the IcGisla-
ture and the people had practiced
fraud upon the negro? Would not this
be to overthrow the settled rules of
law Of every court of every enlightened
country in the world?
In discussing this matter before the
people we are justified then in telling
them we can rely upon the courts to oh
serve settled principles of law. There
is no reason whatever to fear that the
courts will become revolutionary in
order to defeat the will Of the people
of this or any other State.
The negroes, as a class, cannot claim
that their right to vote is denied OF
abridged on account of race, etc, for
1t is an admitted fact that very large
number of them possess all the pre-
scribed qualifications Senators Pritch.
ard and Butler both claim that if the
amendment is adopted $4,000 will he able
to register and vote. This demonstrates
the fact that negroes are not, disfran.
chised on account Of their race, etc, nor
as a race. Each individual negro who
does not possessr the requisite qualifica.
tons will be under the necessity OF
making it appear that section 5 was
aimed at him; burt this he will be utterly
unable to do so far as his race, etc, Is
concerned. for 10000 of his race will ar
pear as witnesses against him, and show
that such contention will be utterly
false and the language of section 5 will
tell him that if he could vote on January
I, 1867, or if he is a descendant of any
one who could, it will take him to its
bosom and cherish and defend him.
But let us, for the sake of argument,
NOT hpcguSo thnra Is any danppr fake