The Baltimore County union, the Towson news., 1909-10-09
EQUAL JUSTICE TO ALL

EQUAL JUSTICE TO ALL.
With desire to be perfectly fair to courte-
GUS antagonist, we print in another column
lengthy communication from Col. d. g. McIn-
tosh of Towson. referring to an editorial pub
lished in The Union News of last week taking
issue with that gentleman on the proposed
suffrage amendment.
Colonel Mcintosh does not deny that the
amendment is purposely designed to eliminate
the negro vote. AS we understand it. he con-
cedes this and also comedies that be is support
ing it for that reason and because the negro
uniformly votes the Republican ticket. We
infer the latter because he asks if we would be
just as energetic in our opposition TO the
amendment if the colored vote were about
equally divided between the parties. He also
insists that, so far, the procedure of the ad-
vocates of the amendment has been cloaked
With the forms of law, and that no man can
say in advance that the Supreme Court will
say that the measure is unconstitutional. We
will grant that it is the spirit behind the
amendment that is illegal, but we insist that,
in advance of any court decision, the great
preponderance of skilled legal opinion publicly
6ADTcScCU lS dRdlLSt tDc Vi
the scheme
We might ask Colonel Mcintosh if the fact
that the negro usually votes the Republican
ticket is not his chief reason for supporting
the amendment but that would only be an
swering his question by another pertinentquery
which would be only repartee, not argument.
We will answer his question by saying frankly
fbof oo ooop 90 on ounondr1onf 10 tod
basing the elective franchise simply upon in
telligence, without reference to race, birth or
wealth, we will support it. We will not sup
port one made notoriously to shut out black
men, white men, yellow men, cross-eyed men,
bald-headed men or red-haired men, nor one
solely designed to further the fortunes of one
political party.
And, chiefly, we are against the pending
amendment because ii is part of desperate
scheme to thwart the popular will in Mary
land. This scheme began with the extra ses-
sion of the Legislature called by Governor
Smith in 1901 and has been consistently fol-
lowed by the enactment of fraudulent election
laws and absurd State naturalization laws. It
is admitted in the inner councils of the Demo-
cratic oligarchy that rules this State that, with
fair vote and an honest count, Maryland
would be normally Republican by 10000 plu-
rality, and all of their political legislation
during the present century has been designed
to cripple the Republican party in the only
way known to them. But their laws, to their
chagrin, have cut out large number of their
own voters even the white man can not mark
their complicated ballots sinteligently-so their
announced plan is now to pass the amendment
and then make the election laws so simple that
the most ignorant white man can not fail to
vote the Democratic ticket. How far have the
Democratic leaders of Maryland gotten from
the ringing doctrine of Jefferson: Equal and
exact justice to all men P'
AMENDMENT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Major Richard NJ. Venable, former vir-
ginian and Democrat recognized authority
on Constitutional law, on which he formerly
lectcred at Johns Hopkins University, is
clearly of the opinion that the proposed dis
franchising amendment is unconstitutional.
In an interview published in the Baltimore
Star on Friday of last week he called it "a
puzzle' and "a model botch" He said
further:
'As to the unconstitutionality of the amend
ment, have little doubt The Constitution
of the United States says that no man on ac-
count of race, color or previous condition of
servitude shall be deprived of the right of
franchise 1t also provides that no man shall
be deprived by any State of the equal protec-
ton of the law, and, as interpreted by the
Supreme Court, the latter clause was designed
particularly to protect the enfranchised negro.
''Now the propounders of this amendment
make no concealment of the fact that the whole
purpose and design is to deprive the negro of
the right of suffrage. If this were expressed in
the law itself tyro would know that it is
unconstitutional. But, artfully and of design,
it is not expressed, though the law is drawn
with this purpose.
1.-The only question, therefore, for the courts
is whether or not an intention not disclosed in
expressed words in the amendment, but clearly
disclosed by implication without direct ex-
preston, is the intention of the statute.
"If the courts decide that it is not the true
intention of the amendment to exclude the
negro, they would defeat the purpose of those
who drew the amendment. If, however, the
courts decide that it is the true intention as
purposed by the drawers of the amendment,
they would be bound to hold it unconstitutional
l see no escape from the dilemma"