Iowa state bystander. [volume] (Des Moines, Iowa) 1894-1916, 1908-04-03
DISCUSSION-THE FIFTEENTH
AMENDMENT.

In the issue OF Cne DyStanOer unuer
date of March 81, 1908. there appeared
q communication from one s. Joe
Brown "a. NJ, l. l. b., Attorney-at.
law; President Iowa State Afro-Ameri.
can Council" Etc in which the said s.
Joe Brown, A. NJ; l.. l.. B. ct. cetra,
makes q feeble effort to defend his
course in the public discussion of the
repeal of the fifteenth amendment to
the Constitution of the United States.
Mr.. Brown goes into TRADE about
the Holy Bible and even decree
and frowns upon High School Educa.
tor and by intlmation would have us to
know that one who has had simply
High School Education should in no
wise oppose the public utterances OF
him that can flourish college degrees
before the public eye.
Let it be said that college degrees are
splendid things to hold and congratu-
late Mr.. S. Joe Brown, A. M !; L. L. B.,
in his possession of such gifts; they
bring honor and distinction to one but
/ would add that DISCRETION is a most
helpful adjunct in the exercise of their
functions.
As to the humble possession of
High School education, it can be truth
fully said that some of our greatest
men never had as much, and many of
them never finished the common
schools. AS an instance of this permit
me to cite the name of Abraham Linz
c )ln, Americas greatest President, and
Friedrich Doug lass; the gifted champ
ion of civil rights. Possibly Mr.. s. Joe
Brown has overlooked the fact that
these true types of American citizens
never sat within the walls of q college.
A college graduate holding the degrees
of A. M. and l.. l.. b. is treading on
dangerous ground when he frowns on
High School education, it Is supposed
that college training equips one for
nobler purposes.
If Mr.. Brown will take the pains to
examine more closely my article OF
March 11th, he will find that my argu-
ment hinges on the public discussion Of
the repeal of the fifteenth amendment
and not merely the discussion of the
fifteenth amendment.
Mr.. Brown says that in discussing
the repeal Of the fifteenth amendment
he was not expressing hispersonal con-
,victions. If such be true then Mr..
Browns declarations for the repeal Of
the fifteenth amendment are open to
severe criticism. A man who will pub
licly declare the repeal of the fifteenth
amendment in one breath and in the
next vigorously assert the contrary is
is guilty of inconsistency and sets q
dangerous example before the commu-
nifty. There is such thing as SINGER
ity and he who assays to leadership
must possess this prerequisite in mark
cd degree.
Mr.. Brown states that the articles or
~ CAC SoAStlLuVAOu W eAO
u. 8. are neither "too sacred nor too
profound for public discussion" That
is g truth that has been told since 1857
and is not the question at issue, but
when Mr.. Brown trifes with the Me-
gro's right to vote publicly advocating
| the repeal of the fifteenth amendment
he tampers with that which is too sa-
cred and too profound" for even Mr..
Brown to touch with violent hands.
As to enlighteniug the audience" as
to whether the repeal the fifteenth
amendment would be right, I will say
for Mr.. Brswn's benefit there is not a
man or woman alive possessing any
knowledge of the war amendments who
does not know that the repeal of the
fifteenth amendment would be the
greatest injustice that could befall the
race. That being true then no colored