Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1903-05-01
TEXT OF OPINION.


Ala, VS.. the Board of Registrars of that
county, which was delivered by Justice
Holmes last Monday, was made public
yesterday.
The opinion says that Giles, a negro
male adult on behalf of himself and
S, 900 others similarly situated, sought
by bills in equity to secure registration
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 a part of a general scheme
TO disfranchise them. The Federal
Circuit Court for the Middle District of
Alabama dismissed the bill tor want OF
jurisdiction. 1t was contended, says
Justice Holmes, that the federal courts
had jurisdiction in equity under sections
629 and 1879 of the Revised Statutes,
providing that every person who, under
color of state "statute, ordinance, re-
gulation, custom or usage, subjects,
or causes to be subjected, any citizen OF
the United States or other persons with
in the jurisdiction thereof to the de-
privation of any rights, privileges or
immunities secured by the constitution
and laws, shall be liable to the party in
iured in an action at law, suit, In
eouitv or other proper proceeding 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 jurisdiction in equity,
vet the court was of opinion that the ap-
peals open the whole case, and that the
scope of the complaint was entitled to
consideration. He then proceeds to an
nounce the impossibility of granting the
relief sought, saying in explanation
at will be observed in the first place
that the language Of section 1879 does
not extend the sphere of equitable juris-
diction 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 a suit in equity only when
that is the proper proceeding for redress,
and they refer to existing standards to
determine what is proper proceeding.
The traditional limits of proceedings in
equity have not embraced a remedy for
political wrongs. Remembering, how
ever, the Importance of the case, the
court has found itself unwilling to stop
short of the final consideration 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 con-
stitution is fraud upon the Constitu-
ton of the United States and asks us to
declare it void. But, of course, he could
not maintain a bill fora mere declaration
in the air. He does not try to do so, but
asks to be registered as party under the
void instrument. Ifthen 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 accepting it and adding another vote
to its fraudulent lists?
"If a white man came here on the
4 same general allegations, admitting his
sympathy with the plan, but alleging
some special prejudice that had kept him
off the list, we hardly should think il
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 tc
overthrow the scheme. 1t We accept the
plaintiffs allegations for the purpose o
his case he cannot explain. 1t seems tC
us that unless we are prepared to say
that it is wrong, that all its principal al
legations are immaterial, and that the
registration plan of the Alabama consti
tuition is valid we cannot order the plain
tif7s name to be registered.
1t is not an answer to say that II al
the blacks who are qualified according tC
the letter of the instrument were regis
tered the fraud would be cured. In the
first place, there is no probability tha
any way now is open in which more thar
a few could be registered; but if al
could be, the difficulty could not b.
overcome. The sections of the constitu
ton concerning registration were illega
in their inception; it would be new
doctrine in constitutional law that tn
original invalidity could be cured by al
administration which defeated their in
tent. We express no opinion as to tn
alleged fact Of their constitutionallty be
yond saying that we are not willing u
assume that they are valid in the face o
the allegations and main object of tn
bill for the purpose of granting the relic
which it was necessary to pray in ordI
that the object should be secured
The other difficulty is of differen
sort, and strikingly reinforces the argu
ment that equity cannot undertake now
, any more than it has in the past, to en-
force political rights, and also the sug
= gestion that State constitutions were ne
left unmentioned in paragraph 1879 b
accident.