The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1900-07-12
ONE OR TWO REJECTED
Lawyers Say Any Learned Judge
Would Dismiss the Case.
NO QUALIFIED VOTER TURNED DOWN
Beckerdite, Federal Officer, is Now Trying a
Case Coming Under The State Law
Now Winston is Loaded Down
With Floating Voters.
With Floating Voters.
Especial to the News and Observer

Especial to the News and Observer
Winston Salem, n. c., July 1.-THE
trial of Registrar Thompson before Uni
ted States Commissioner Beckerdite is
progressing slowly. All of yesterday was
consumed upon a motion to dismiss the
warrant upon the ground that there was
no authority for it. Powerful argu-
ments were made by Judge Shepherd and
Col. Argo, showing there was no author
ity. The arguments against jurisdiction
were unansWerable and in substance as
follows:
No case has been decided authorizing
interference by the Federal judiciary in
State elections except one by a District
judge in Kentucky, 80 Fed Rep. sos. The
proceedings in that case were under sec |
tion 1903 of the Revised statutes of the
United States, which provides that where |
two or more persons conspire'' to de- |
fraud any one Of right or privilege guar |
anteed by the Constitution of the United |
States they are subject to Indictment, &c.
The application of this statute to the
subject of suffrage has been denied by
Judge Gresham and other jurists, and the
Supreme court has only held that it APP
piled in cases where violence was used, or
to he used in Congressional elections.
In the present proceeding no conspiracy
is alleged or can it be proven, is
there any Congressional election. So it
could not be instituted under the said
section 550S. Nor could it have been
maintained under section 5507, as there
are no threats or bribery charged, neither
could it be supported by section 2004, as
no penalty is prescribed So the prosecu-
tion in this proceeding were driven to
S'ction $780, which provides against any
perSon under color of State law deprives
a citizen of the rights, privileges and i'm
munities derived under the Constitution
of the United States.
The defendant contends that that sec
ton has no application to the subject of
suffrage, but only to civil rights. The
Kentucky case above referred to is the
only decision authorizing Federal Judi
cial interference in purely State elections
This decision disposes most effectuaily
of the present case, as it decides that
section $50 has no application to suf-
frage. The court says: THE right of the
colored man to vote had its only source
and is most certainly in the language of
Justice Gray, in the Logan case (144 U. 81
defendant upon the 18th Amendment
which beyond doubt, not only created that
right for him, but which, at the same
time gave to Congress the power and
morally, at least, imposed upon it the
duty to enforce and protect it by legis-
lation. Sections 1904, 5507, 550S and $500
(the latter relates to the penalty only
may not by any means be entirely ade-
quate for the purpose, but they are all
that is left" &C.
This is direct authority TO the effect
that section $50 has no relation to suf-
frage, and thus by the prosecutors own
showing the warrants should be dis
charged.
Even if the section did apply to defen-
dants acting under color of valid State
law they cannot be punished. The inhi-
bition of the Amendment is directed
against State legislation, and Congress
does not undertake to punish erroneous
action under valid State law.
The enforcement of the guaranty
does not require nor authorize Congress
TO perform the duty that the guaranty it
self supposes it to be the duty of the
State to perform, and which it requires
the State to perform" U. S. VS. Harriss,
JOG U. S., and many other authorities.
Nearly all the enforcement acts have been
repealed or declared unconstitutional and
there remains but the few sections re-
ferred to- 1t is hardly to be supposed
that Congress, after repeating all the sec
tions relating to marshals at the polls
and supervisors, &C., should have left a
more dangerous right of Federal judicial
interference in a State election.
The Supreme court of the United States,
ex parte Seibold 100 U. S., especially de-
clares to the contrary. 1t says: eve
do not mean to say, however, that for any
acts of the officers of elections having ex-
elusive reference to the election of State
or county officers, they will be amena
bic to Federal jurisdiction, nor do we
understand that the enactments of Con-
grees now under consideration have any
application to such acts"
The Commissioner on overruling the
motion said he would only try the ques-
tion as to whether the registrar had COM
piled with the State law, so we have a
Federal officer undertaking to enforce
State law.
Today has been taken up in the exami-
nation o fthe government witnesses. All
of these (about thirty except four were
negroes. Many of the negroes who were
examined were very young. Only one or
two of them claimed that they had been
positively denied registration The others
said the registrar said he was not satis-
fed as to their identity or residence and
required additional proof. This the ne
groes claimed they could have easily
gotten, but admitted that they had not
produced it.
One of the prosecuting witnesses, a
white man who has been an alderman
of the city testified that great many
negroes came to this town to work in the
tobacco factories and as soon as the sea-
son was over, they having waited long
enough to vote, left and went back to
their respective homes in Virginia and
other places.
1t will be shown by real estate agents
that negroes in past years have fiocked
here just before elections from other