Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1902-11-29

your name on our
books this week.
Look Into It,! /
ing that the instrument should be sub
mtted to the people. No one dreamed
tina. il would be railroadcd through and
adopted as an ordinance.
The convention met in Richmond on the
18TH day of June, and before they had
gotten warm in their seats they discovered
that they had not come here to amend
the Constitution, but that they had come
here 20 eliminate the negro vote. HOW
shall we get rid OF the negro vote? was
the tune the body hearkened to. what
had they done in Mississippi? How did
they work it in South Carolina?
AN EXPERT AIANIPULATOR.
And then Mr. Wise singled out we'll
known statesman by name. who. ne SAID,
had manipulated negro votes before the
convention. and was quite at home in the
,u-incss
It was here that the Chief Justice in
terrupted a stream of gall, winged py
linguistic lightning. with an almost plain
tive regret that the learned counsei con-
fine himself to the argument.
The Court: I wish you would AVOID
personal illusions. Mr. Wise. This is
question of constitutional law and suca
illusions are irreievcnt.
The orators Pegasus came down with
q thud and he apologized to the court
,-i,,cv y
looking around for the end OF his thread
which had escaped him in the confusion
Of the incident.
THE OATH OF OFFICE.
Only one member of the convention had
taken the oath of office. said Mr.. Wise.
The others had refused to take 1t and the
question was adjudicated and settled that
the acts Of an official who had not sub
scribed to the oath where one was made
the prerequisite of holding the Office, were
null and void They met and drew their
pay and discussed and considered and
| finally concluded that they were not Off
Gals They did not know what they
were. but they were satisfied what they
were not.
he passed from one point to another
very rapidly, and without obvious connec-
ton and seemed TO justify the express
sion of one = The attorneys present that
his points were as numerous as the
sands of the sea-shore." but that he fail
| cd to state in his petition a single sound
| legal proposition
BY curious rhetorical processes he ar
| rived at statement of what his plain
titrs were One Of them. he said, had
been denied a vote because the new Con-
stitution only intended to include soldiers
who fought in the war of 1888 and the
war of 1861 and not those who fought in
the Indian war.
COURT SCORES A POINT.
Here the court made a point. and Mr..
Wise seemed to be worsted, yet his gilt
for oratory and expression came to ms
aid and in this case, as several times
later he was always ready with reply,
the vehemence and fire of which was IN
vivid contrast TO the measured ana cola
tones Of the Chief Justice.
Laughter was evoked when North
Carolina case was cited by the Chiel
Justice and Mr.. Wise, with his usual
cuiclzness, said that that was a point. on
his side Il do not think So answered
the Chief Justice. dryly.
DID NOT PURSUE REMEDY.
The Court asked Mr.. Wise if the COM
plainan1s undertook to register under the
new Constitution and if they undertook
to pursue the remedy to which they were
entitled under the Constitution
Mr.. Wise replied that one of the judges
OF the Corporation Court was out OF
town at the time having gone fishing.
The Court further asked if the CON-
nlainants went to the Court of Appeals
and further j. any one of them had offer
cd 10 vote
: To these cold. pitiless questions on mat
tiers Of fact and detail Mr.. Wise could
only say that William H Anderson offef-
ed to vote but his name appeared on the
register as William A. Anderson. and he
ord a
The Chief Justice: There was enough
the-a TO evoke the action or
tho Court of Appeals. That court had
not been wiped out" Further remarks
of the Chief Justice indicated his OPINION
that the remedy should have been sought
in the Virginia courts ana not IN tiie
United States courts.
PEFI-SAJ, TO TAKE THE OATH.
Mr.. Wise referred again to the oath
question and the court asked whether
the refusal 10 take the oath lnValidated
the Constitution. Although Mr.. WISE IN
sisted that it did it was not apparent
that the court agreed with MIN: ms
court went further, and said that II was
a very old question, and was discussed
s,,l, in the book of Judge Tinson, of
chicago. but that he did not think IT
was ever settled. However. he did not
think the oath question was the real ques-
ton
THE REAL QUESTION.
Tine real question, the court SAD, was
whether il was not a de 1acto conVenuoh:
Tht, court asked if an ordinance was Vo1o
because it was not an ordinary act OF
Hesitation. and said that the questlon
had come up from North Carolina 10 tie
United States Court as to whether oohos
iss,,ed under an ordinance OF the Con-
s+;tutional Convention were valld, ana
II was then that Mr.. Wise did not agree
with the court.
WENT OFF BY ITSELF.
Mr.. Wise stated that there we're three
Questions which came up before the con-
yertion. One was Shall the Constitution
no submitted TO the clectorate?" 1t SAID
no The second was SHOULD the Con-
s.itutjon be submitted to the new cleo
torate?" TO which the convention an
syered No" The third was Snall II SO
off nv itselE?" and the convention an
swered Yes" by vote OF Al to IS. which
vas less than a majority of the conven-
.ion. The Chief Justice asked II II "a.'
a naiority Of the quorum, to which the
reply was yes.
MIR. Wise here took up the legal aspect
nc The case. and read many extracts from
decisions on constitutional questions ana
writer's OF constitutional law, such as
nj 9TH