The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1902-07-11
PritChard Seeks to Eyade
the Question.
Continued from First Page.)

to be out of touch with the Democratic
party, one in the Western end of the
State and the other in the Eastern end of
the State, took advantage of that pa
triotic occasion to criticize the Demo
cratlc party and to make an appeal to
the people for Independent action. Does
anybody doubt what they meant? In the
last few days well known gentleman
in the central part of the State
has been approached by a
leading Republican with the PROPOSE
ton to run as an independent candidate
against the regular Democratic ticket,
with the promise if he would do so he
would be taken care Of Taken care of
how? BY being given a Federal office? Is
there anybody in North Carolina who
does not know the Republican party is
using today all the resources it can en-
ploy 70 bring about a Democratic bolt of
the nomination of Judge Clark? who
does not know that they are now and
have been for weeks industriously seek
ing to get some Democrat to consent to
the use of his name as an independent
candidate against him? That has become
an open secret.
This part of the policy this part of
the proposition this part of the con
spiracy' deals with the present. In the
face Of the situation in North Carolina
today and the development Of the last
week, does anybody doubt that this part
of the program is being vigorously put
into execution? The other part of the
policy or proposition or conspiracy
relates to the future, and for myself |
no ir1a
it shall be deemed expedient for the plr-
pose OF the Republican leaders, It also
will materialize.
''The Senator also says in his answer
that the policy outlined by me or the
proposition made by me with reference
to the amendment could not be carried
out because of legal difficulties. He
argues that the poll tax feature of the
amendment is clearly constitutional, and
says that any one versed in
legal, procedure must be aware
of the fact that no question
can be decided in a law suit which
is not raised by the pleadings. Exactly
But the shrewd lawyers who would bring
this suit would of course not only allege
in the pleadings' that the complainant
was denied the right to vote because he
had not paid his poll tax but that the
provision of the constitution requiring
the payment of poll tax was part of the
section of the constitution which con-
tains the grandfather clause, and that
the constitution provided that the whole
should stand or fall together, and that
therefore if any part of the section was
in conflict with the constitution of the
United States, the whole was unconstitu-
tional and that the complainant was be-
ing deprived of his right to vote under
an indissobly connected unconstitutional
enactment.
did We not amend the amendment be-
cause it was claimed that un-
less it showed upon it's face that it was
the purpose of the Legislature that the
whole should stand or fall together, a
part might be constitutional and
part unconstitutional, and did we
not say that we would not leave that to
inference, and though the legislative in
tent seemed clear we would so fix the
that it would be impossible
part of it was = held unconstitutional?
do not believe there is a
lawyer in the State, including Sena.
tor Pritchard, who does not know that
ii any part of this amendment be uncon-
stitutional, a voter who loses his right
to vote by virtue of any other part of
it can appeal to the court for protection
upon the ground that he is being de-
prived of his right by virtue of an I'M
constitutional law. l have discussed this
matter with three of the ablest
lawyers in the State, and they all
express the unqualified opinion that the
of the amendment can
be attacked in this way.
But Senator Pritchard says his
party does not propose to attack the