The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-07-27

| uOflty report WHere they say We submit that the test required is not a rule or condition to which all citizens similarly situated, may conform. This. we understand. from the decision of the United States Supreme Court. is necessary to make it va1id." l would inquire of the distinguished gentleman from Jefferson, who discussed this question if that is the proposition of the minority. and if I am correct in my interpretation of that clause in the report?
 MT. white-I suppose the gentleman can get quite as good an answer from the majority report, because they as- sert the same proposition.
 | MT. Knox-Where?
 MT. White-On the first page of the report they say this: We are of the opinion that the fifteenth amendment of the Constitution of the United States does not interfere with the sovereign right of the State to prescribe the qualifications of voters, further than to prohibit discrimination on account of Trace. color or previous condition of servitude," and this limitation in no way interferes with the sovereign pow CT of the State to fix a standard of fit- ness. applicable to all alike"
 MT. Knox-Oh. The proposition as- serted by the majority of the Commit tee is that the qualifications which they prescribe are applicable to all alike, because every man who is a soldier is included, and this is pro- vision which applies to all citizens alike. Every man who is soldier. or the descendant of a soldier whether white or black comes within the pro- vision. and the privilege granted by the report of the majority Committee. Every man who Is a man of good char acter. comes within the provision of the report of the majority Committee, but the proposition which the minority here assert. and which the distinguish ed gentleman from Montgomery ar gued yesterday. is that the State is without the power to set apart a class of citizens because they were soldiers, and set apart another class because they are the children of soldiers be- cause all citizens could not attain or reach that qualification, and the quail ification must be such as that all citi- zens might attain. Does the distin- guished gentleman from Jefferson deny that proposition?
 MT. White-I think that is right.
 MT. Knox. You think that is right. That is the point wanted to come to, because I wanted to understand the minority report.
 Now, then. I deny that proposition, and I submit to this Convention that the whole argument upon it is built upon a false premises. The only two authorities which the gentleman from Montgomery has cited is this Chinese queue case. which arose under the four teenth amendment, and the Catholic Priest case. which arose under the declaration of rights. What has the declaration of rights to do with the | nf Sfof fA t1ofa t1A rier rht of suffrage: That no State can rass an ex-post facto law" That is the Chinese queue case, and the proposi- tion of the decision of the court is as- serted in this head note. "an ex-post facto law" is one which imposes pun l ishment for an act which was not pun ishable at the time 1t was committed. Here Catholic Priest was being pro- ceeded against under the provisions of the constitution that were retroactive, that operated retrospectively, ''or i'm poses additional punishment to that then prescribed, or changes the rule of evidence. by which less or different evidence would be sufficient to convict than was then required"
 The proposition here asserted rests upon false premises. for 1t is not true that the State cannot, in the ex- ercise of its sovereign powers, pre- l scribe a condition to suffrage which is not within the reach of every class of her citizens. Every State in the Union almost. MT. President, confines the right to vote to male citizens, and yet l'women are just as much citizens with in the meaning and protection of the | Constitution as are men. And yet, con- stitutional provisions which limit the | right to vote to males and exclude fe- males are not unconstitutional. This was directly decided in the case of Mi- nor Vs. Happersett, (21 Wall. 162), | where the opinion of the court is thus stated in the headnote.
 The Constitution of the United States does not confer the right of suffrage upon any one and the Consti- tuition and laws of the several States which commit that important trust to men alone. are not necessarily void"
 Upon the same principle, I contend that sovereign State has a right to say that any class of citizens. that those who have fought the battles of the State. those who have risked their | lives in the defense of the State, may be admitted to the right of suffrage, and the same power which will enable the State to confer this right upon the soldier will enable the State to confer the right upon the son of the soldier. It is not a discrimination on account of race color or previous conditin of servitude. but a recognition, on the part of the State. of services rendered in it's behalf.
 What are the powers of the State in this matter of Constitutional reform A great many seems to go upon the principle that the State has no power in this matter except what 1t secures by grace of the Federal Government. MT President, this opinion is founded upon a misconCeption of our Govern ment. The State is not the creature of the Federal Government but the Fed eral Government is the creature of the States. The Federal Government is a government of limited powers. It pos sesses no power except such as has been granted by the States. The right of suffrage Is not given by the Federal law or Constitution. It comes alone from the State.- Save in the matter of discrimination against the voter on ac- count of his race, color or previous con- dition of sarvitude, which is a limita- tion not imposed by the Federal Gov ernment. but which the States, by the adoption of the Fifteenth Amend ment. imposed upon themselves the State may impose any condition upon the exercise of the right of suffrage which it choses, and the validity of these conditions, in my judgment, are not controlled by the circumstances as to whether they are reasonable or un- reasonable. The State is sovereign. Sovereigns may if they choose, be "a nririouS They may be uniuSt They