The Montgomery advertiser., 1904-02-06
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1904.
ouR cuMuLATrvE poLL TAX.


 The Chicago Tribune editorially dis cusses Alabama's poll-tax law, and on the whole seems to think it "an efficient agent for the restriction of suffrage" be- cause, as it looks at the law and it's ef- fects, 'it keeps away from the polls the extremerly poor and stingy and leaves the ballot in the possession of a small, select class" To certain extent that may be true. though poll-tax of $50 is not burden on any one. It is only when 1t accumulates for three or four years that the total may become burdensome.
 Nor is it only the very poor who have neglected this essential road to suffrage, for investigation will show that many of those who have failed to pay were well able to do so. Procrastination and indif- ference have had much to do with their failure. Many who really intended to pay put it off until it was too late. but there were others who apparently cared so lit tie for the privilege of voting that they wouldn't put themselves to the trouble oi going to the proper place and paying the tax. We do not think such a course alto- gether creditablc to them, especially when it is remembered that all this tax goes to the school fund, but it is a fact none the less. In discussing our law however, The Tribune falls into one scrl ous error, as this extract shows:
 If Alabama were close State politically and votes were an object, the Party com. 1nttees would pay the poll tax of men whose votes they were sure of Nobody comes to the relief of the needy Alabama voter. He must pay or lose his vote. Ii Is surprising that so many white citizens shouId De unable or unwilling to pay s1.5C year Tor the privilege of voting. They should consider it cheap at the price. Pos. slbly they do not care so much about vot- tng themselves as about keeping the backs rom voting: That has been pretty eHectually accomplished. In d negro pop- uiatlon of SS0OOO, there are only 59SO reg iStered voters. S
 Section 19J of our new Constitution reads: Any person who shall nav tho poll-taX of another. or advance hi,o money for that purpose in order to in- nuence his vote, shall be guilty of bribery. and upon conviction therefor shall be i'm. prisoned in the pcnitentiary for not less than one nor more than five year. ., While there are cases where ono man might pay the tax of another without in, curing the penalty fixed by this scctio, it is plain that if Party Committees n, candidates were to go into the wholcsa,i tax-paying, it would be done for the pur pose of influencing votes and the paycr would suffer for it, It Was to prcver this roundabout method of bribery tha the penalty was fixed so that poll,lca heelers are shut out from buying vote at $1.5O each.
 The Tribune is about right in. its cor clusions as to the effectiveness of tn poll-tax requirement in shutting out tr colored vote. Whether or not this ba was purposely put in the Constitution matter of little consequence. It
 there, and 1t will be enforced. It is $ positive and specific that We think thel is little danger that attempts will made to evade it. and it will have t! desired effect of keeping the electora in the hands of those who are competel to exercise it properly. There will be fe votes cast by colored citizens in Al; bama, for a time at least. and the nol voting by that class will be best for bot them and the white race.