The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1909-05-13
Mr.. WILLIAM r. STONES ANSWER
Amendment in Reply to Demo
cratic ChallanSe.

B. B. Shreeves, Chairman of the Dem
oeratic City Committee. The Collector
declines to go upon the platform with
Mr.. Shreeves, stating that he is not a
debater or speechmaker. and character
ICES the letter of the Democratic Chair
man as offensive Mr. Stones letter is
as follows:
Sir: | do not think that the tenor
of your letter of a few days ago-the
full text of which the newspapers did
not publish-entitles it to the courtesy
of reply. Its offensive terms may be
attributed to the excess of zeal that so
often characterizes the convert.
Your so-called challenge, embodied
in the letter, is unique in that you not
only do the challenging, tut insist upon
choosing the weapons. You limit it to
one phase of the obnoxious and danger
Gus amendment, and seek to ignore
some of its most serious aspects and
consequences.
AAN my HNAiNNilI plCoo anu NlIlLCllo
oppose it for many patent reasons.
ct would make Maryland a one-party
state. To you as Chairman of the Dem
ocratic City Committee this may not APP
pear to be an objection, but on the con-
trary desirable object. The disinter-
ested and patriotic citizens of this state
lonly ha
are unwilling to surrender their control
of the government of the state and city
to one party. That the adoption of the
amendment would make Maryland a
one-party state has been demonstrated
d lring the course of the amendment
campaign, and is conceded by all Gi in
terested thinkers on the subject. This
in itself is sufficient to condemn it as
vicious legislation, antagonistic to the
public welfare.
There is, moreover, no race issue in
Maryland. No one free from prejudice
and unaffected by partisan or personal
interest can seriously believe for mo-
ment that there is race issue in this
state. The colored population is only
small percentage of the whole popula-
ton, and this percentage has steadily
declined instead of increasing. If the
only excuse for the adoption of any
amendment has no foundation for it in
fact, the natural inference to be drawn
is, that the real reason is to obtain
party advantage by making Maryland
one-party state.
Furthermore, in the opinion of Presi-
dent Taft and of the leading lawyers of
the state, the amendment is clearly in
violation of the Fifteenth Amendment
of the Constitution of the United States.
AS state official and a member of the
bar, who, in both capacities has sworn
to uphold the constitution of the United
States. this phase of the question should
give you some concern.
"You have seen fit to ignore all of the
above considerations.
GAS to the naturalized citizen, ! repeat
that it would be absolutely impossible
for naturalzed citizens to whom the
amendment will apply to comply with
its provisions You claim to have care
fully read the amendment, but | will
venture to say that you are at this mo-
ment unable to comply with the drastic
test prescribed by it, and that like Mr..
Stanford, who introduced the amend
ment, you would fail to stand the test.
For naturaized citizen to write in
English fully Is questions from memory,
without being permitted to have copy
of the question before him, is an evident
impossibility. The most intelligent nat
uralized citizen would be unable to COM
ply with this unreasonable and unfair
test.
why do you ask me to enter in a
joint discussion with you in a large
hall in Baltimore city?' You have been
member of the bar for many years,
and should be experienced as a public
speaker and debater. am not a public
speaker, much less versed in the art of
public debate. If you are anxious to
enter joint discussion on the merits of
the amendment, you need not go out
side of your own party to find foemen
worthy of your steel A number of
prominent Democratic lawyers have al
ready publicly denounced the amend
ment in the severest terms, and could
discuss it more convincingly than |
could possibly do.
AS an inducement you suggest Gf
rightly understand your letter. that you
may be perhaps converted to my views
regarding the measure, and, in this con-
tingency, you promise to aid me in de-
feating it,
q am'well aware, sir, that you have
shown yourself so far open-minded on
this subject as to completely change the
views you expressed during the cam
paign for land against the Poe amend
ment. In the Baltimore Sun of july %,
1905, | find la report prepared by you,
and adopted by the Crescent Club, in
whichsyou say of the so called grand
fatbar o1ouoa.