The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1903-05-01


Giveu ny the state or nv Congress.
WARRINGTON April 3O---JIlsticc Holmes
to-day made public the text Of he supreme
COURTS decision, rendered last Monday,
IN the case Of jackson w. Giles against f..
Jen Harris and othar members of he Board
81 registrars of Mont Romsry county
Ala, involving the Legality of the
grandfather" clause of The Alabama Con-
stitution, which went into effect in 1901 4.
and which practically excluded negroes
from suffrage in that State The dissenting
opinions Of Justices Harlan. Brewer and
Brown accompany tire maj ority opinion.
Giles. a colored man 10 whom registTa
ton had been refused. on behalf of 5000
others Of his race brought suit against the
registrars to get their names on the lists.
on the ground that the Alabama constitu-
tional amendments as to suffrage were
void, being repugnant to the Fourteenth
and Fifteenth amendments of the Federal
Constitution. The Circuit Court dismissed
he bill for lack of jurisdiction and on appeal
that question vas certified 10 the Supreme
Court
The articles Of the Alabama Constitution
which excluded the negro are those pro-
iding that, until 1903, those citizens who
could he registered for voting comprised:
First. all who served in the enumerated wars
of the United States, including those on
either side of the war between the States:
second all lawful descendants of Revolu-
tionary soldiers, and, third. all persons of
good character Northumberland the duties
and obligations Of citizenship under a re-
publican form of governms All regis
tered under these provisions were 70 he
permanently qualified, while after Jan. /,
1903, educational and property uualifica-
tons were also required.
The administration Of these provisions,
Said Justice Holmes, undoubtedly permitted
the registration Of all the whites and The
exclusion Of practically all the blacks
Brushing aside the question of Jurisdiction.
which, he said was properly before the
court, because lt involved a constituti nal
question, Justice Holmes thus discusses The
merits of the case:
1t seems to us impossible TO grnnt the
equitable relief watch is asked II Will lie
observed 10 the first place that the language
OF Section ,J7g. Revised Statutes does not
extend the sphere Of equitable Jurisdiction in
respect Of what shall M held an appropriate
, ,.nss matte S tor that kind Of relief The
lured m an action Of law. suit in equity or
other proper proceeding for redress. They
allow a suit in equity only when TINT Is the
proper proceeding for redress, and they refer
TO existing standards 10 determine what IL a
proper proceeding. The traditional limits of
remedy for political wrongs Green vs. Mills,
b,lt We cannot forget That We are dealing
with a. new md extraordinary situation,
maj considerations which seem 10 us 10
dispose Of the case.
The difficulties which We cannot overcome
are two, and the first is this: The plaintiff
alleges that the whole registration scheme
4 The Iabama Constitution IS fraud upon
1f he mi Tod ynfa "a
asks ns 10 declare IL void. But, of course, |
he could not maintain q bill for mere dec !
so. but asks to be registered as q party under
the void instrument. II then We accept |
the concmsion, which it IL the chief purpose
u the bill to MAINTAIN how can We make |
me court party TO the unlawful scheme |
ny -, a'G Trla, Il and adding another vote
The other difficulty Is Of a different sorr.
and strikinglv renforces the argument thai |
equity cannot undertake now, any more
rights. and ais" the question that state
constitutions We're NOT left unm entioned in
whether courtof equity can tske Jurisdiction
one Of the frst questions ia what IL can do I
TO force any order that i may make. Tits
II alleged 70 he the conspiracy OF the state,
although the state is NOT and could not be
made party 70 the bill. The Circuit Court
has no constitutional power TO ccntrol its
the state ont Of consideration the court has
as little practical power 10 deal with the
people ~ the state IN a body.
The bill imports that the great mass Of the
intended 10 keep he blacks from
Voting. To NEE, such ntent something mors,
han ordering the plaintiffs name Inscribed
m the lists Of 0O2 viii ne needed IL the con-
-pirncv and he intent sNIst n name on piece
" paper will not defeat them Unless we are
prepared to supervise the voting in the State
~ officers OF the court IL seems TO us that all
hat the plaintiff could ger from equity would
~ an empty form Apart from damages 10
he individual, relief from great political
wrong, Il done as alleged by the people Of a
State and the State Itself. must be given by
hem or nv The Legislative and political de-
lartment of the Government OF the United
itntaS
The dissenting Justices concur in de-
'!aring that The Circuit Court, in which the
Ait was originally brought, had juris-
iic.ion over he case and II should have
,een sent back there for trial. Justice
Harlan, however, considers that question
If less Importance than the overt,Irning
VI long line Of the court x precedents by
absolutely passing by the only question
t was asked TO pass upon and going out
u its way 70 decide the case on its merits
lila opinion is nearly twice as long AS that
# Justice Holmes, and all Of it except two
ines il devoted To discussion Of the new
md startling doctrines of procedure by
he court and citations from prior decisions
% the contrary.
And iJustice Brewer. for himself and
ustice Brown, shows by numerous de-
isions of the supreme Court that the
Constitution Of the United States expressly
ives the Circuit Court Jurisdiction over
list such cases. The plaintiffs bill, he holds.
hould sntitle him to a judicial hearing and
ecision. 1t showed thar he was citizen
4 Alabama and registration and qualif-
alton to vote was wrong!ully denied him.
hat many others were similarly treated
Id not destroy his rights or deprive him
( relief in the courts. That such relief
vll he given, he declares, has been
gain and again affirmed in both national
nd State courts
Jew QUARTERS FOR THE ARMY.