The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-06-12
SUFFRAGE IN ALABAMA.
Problem of Limiting the Ballot
 Criticism of Two Proposals.


 Criticism of Two Proposals.
 Editor The Advertiser:
 A little. boy was once asked to give a definition of a pessimist. "A pessi- mist" said he "is a man who, when given a choice between two evils, always chooses both." Upon the same principle, I suppose we might define an optimist as a man who, when given q choice between two evils, chooses neither. At any rate, that's the kind of an optimist am. on the subject of the suffrage in Alabama. But we are facing a pretty knotty problem. We all agree that We must maintain white supremacy; and yet every member of our Constitutional Convention has deliberately sworn to conform to the Constitution of the United States. which declares that no man shall be deprived of his vote on the ground of trace, color, or previous condition of servitude."
 Now, how can the great masses of the negroes be excluded, and how can white supremacy be thus ensured, without violating these terms of the Federal Constitution? Two well-known schemes have been proposed. I should prefer to manifest my optimism by choosing neither. There have been ordinances by the dozen, but most of them are merely variations or adaptations of the Louisiana and Mis- sissippi provisions. Each of these plans would be, practically, the preface to a chapter of consequences. Let us see what some of them are.
 The Mississippi scheme has been worked over and revamped by the able hand of Senator Morgan. It has some brilliant advocates. But there is one point that sticks out all over it. Noth- ing can hide it. Nothing can justify It. It cannot guarantee the very re- forms which our conditions demand. Elections, under it, would turn,. not primarily upon the will of the people, but upon. the partisan or factional allegiance of the registrars. Are the registrars for you? Then you are elected" Are they against you? Then you can get your palmetto fan, smile at the foilies of public life, and go sit down in the shade with McGinty. We have had enough of such elections" The Common people of Alabama want to do little electing themselves.
 The Louisiana plan has also got some brilliant advocates. It's a taking plan at the first sight. It seems to he popular here, and tis always popular where it has been tried. Where they have tried it, the approval is not unanimous. It provides general suffrage restriction. Then, in an ad- ditional clause. 1t further provides that no one shall be subject to this fore '67. This is supposed to let in all the white people who can't meet the general test. That is what it does. in theory. But that is not what it does in practice. The white people who can- not meet the general test have in large numbers f1atly refused to avail them selves of thls grandfather clause" They are quick enough to see that the very pleading of this cause is the con- fession of deficiency The pleading of the exemption is the admission of illit- eracy, and they don't want to make any such formal admission. The more intelligent and capable the voter, the more sensitive he Is. The rene gades. the men without standing or self-respect. will vote right along. for they have neither personal nor family pride. But the very class of white illiterates that ought to vote-the worthy, self-respecting country people is the very class kept Tut by "the grandfather clause"
 We want our new constitution adopted. after 1t is proposed. The plain people of Alabama are not going to vote for it, if they understand that the clause which lets the illiterate white voter through the bars, Is a clause, the very using of which consti- tutes the publication of his ignorance. This objection applies to all the ordi- nances involving the Louisiana prin- ciple. Whether the operation of the grandfather clause is dropped in five years or ten or twenty. the clause, so long as it lasts. will virtually exclude the best voters among the illiterates of the State. They are going to see 1t as 1t touches themselves, and they would probably vote against it.
 After all. why may not Alabama fall back on a simple square poll tax pro- vision of about $2.50? Such a law would exclude more negroes than an test, modified by grand father clause. It would guarantee white supremacy in every county of Alabama: it could be met by all the deserving iliterates among our white people; it would not imply that any of our white people need to ask odds of the negro in the way of special favors; it would not invite an adverse decision from the Supreme Court nor adverse agitation within the State. It would be just, and being just is good morals, good politics .and good busniess.
 Optiuotst