The semi-weekly messenger., 1903-05-05

opinion of the United States supreme
court in the case of Jackson Giles of
Montgomery county, Alabama, versus
the board Of registrators Of that county,
which was delivered by Justice Holmes
last Monday, was made public today.
The opinion says that Giles, negro,
male adult, on behalf of himself and
5000 others similarly situated. sought
by a bill in equity to secure registra-
ton as voters of Montgomery county
which had been refused, and thus test
the validity of the suffrage provisions
of the new constitution of Alabama
Justice Holmes says it was alleged by
Giles that the refusal to register the
blacks was u part of a general scheme
to disfranchise them.' The federal cir
cult court for the middle district of
Alabama dismissed the bill for want of
jurisdiction. 1t was contended, says
Justice Holmes. that the federal courts
had jurisdiction in equity under sec
tions 629 and 1879 of the revised sta
tutes, providing that every person,
who, under color of state Statue. or
dinance, regulation. custom or usage
subjects or causes to be subjected. any
citizen of the United States or other
persons within the jurisdiction thereof
to the deprivation of any rights priv
llegeS or lmmuniteS secured by the con-
sututlon and laws, shall be liable to
the party injured in an action at law.
suit in equity or other proper pro-
ceeding for redress.
The court said that while there
might be some objections raised on
technical grounds to the Jurisdiction of
the supreme court and of the jurisdic-
tfon in equity, yet the court was of the
opinion that the appeal opens the whole
case and that the scope Of the COM
plaint was entitled to consideration He
then proceeded to announce the impos
sibility of granting ths relief sought
saying in explanation:
1T will be observed in the first place
that the language of Section 1879 does
not extend the sphere of equitable
jurisdiction in respect of what shall be
held an appropriate subject matter for
that kind of relief. The words are
shall be liable to the party injured in
an action at law, suit in equity, or
other proper proceedings for redress"
They allow Il suit in equity only
when that is the proper proceeding for
redress: and they refer to existing
standards to determine what is a prop
er proceeding. The traditional limits
of proceedings in equity have not en-
braced a remedy for political wrongs.
Remembering, however. the Importance
of the case. the court had found itself
unwilling to stop short of the final con-
sideration to be taken into account IN
dispoSing of it. These were summarized
as follows:
"The plaintiff alleges that the whole
registration scheme of the Alabama
constitution is fraud upon the con-
c-tit it11ti r I,n
us to declare it void But OF course.
he could not maintain bill for mere
declaration in the air. He does not try
to do so, but asks to be registered as
a party under the void instrument If
| then we accept the conclusion which
| it is the chief purpose of the bill to
maintain, how can we make the court
a party to the unlawful scheme by ac-
| cepting it and adding another vote to
its fraudulent lists? If a white man
| came here on the same general allie
| cations, admitting his sympathy with
| the plan, but alleging some special pre-
| judice that had kept him off the list
| we hardly think it necessary to meet
| him with a reasoned answer. But, the
| relief cannot be varied because we
| think that in the future the particular
| plaintiff is likely to try to overthrow
| the scheme. If we accept the plaintiff S
| allegations for the purpose of his case.
| ne cdllHOl cOIlpldln. 1t seems TO Us
| that unless we are prepared to say that
| it is wrong, that all it's principal allie
| cations are immaterial and that the
| registration plan of the Alabama con-
| StittuiOn is valid we cannot order the
| PLAINTIFFS name to be registered. 1t is
| not an answer to say that if all the
| blacks who are qualified according to
| the letter of the instrument were regis
| tered. the fraud would be cured In the
| first place there is no probability that
| any way now is open by which more
than ? few could be registered. but il
all coald be. the difficulty could not be
| overcome. If the sections of the con.
stittuion concerning registration were
illegal in their inception. it would be
| new doctrine in constitutional law
| that the original invalidity could be
| cured by an administration which de
feated their intent. We express NJ
| opinion as to the alleged fact of theil
| uncOnstitutiOnality beyond saying tha
we are not willing to assume that the!
are valid in the face of the allegation!
| and main object Of the bill for the pur
pose Of granting the relief which i