The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1910-11-05


Legislation for the proposed negro
disiranchisement has at last come
squarely up to a ruling in Federal
Court. Heretofore this class OF legis-
lation has managed to escape decision
as to the Constitutional merits on the
score OF some tcchnicaiity in the me-
thOd OF its presentation to the Court.
In handing down his decision last week
as to the Annapolis Grandfather Act,
Judge Morris went to the heart of the
matter, and brushing aside all techni-
cal considerations, all minor aspects of
the question, cmphatcally declared
such legislation to be in conflict with
the supreme law OF the land, and held
the election officials who had refused
registration to negro applicants on
the score OF the said legislation to be
clearly liable to damages. In discuss
ing the liability OF such officials Judge
Morris said
ELECTION OFFICERS LIABLE
FOR DAMAGES.
1t is true that in refusing registra-
tion to the plaintiffs the registers were
acting in their official capacity. and
that by the law OF Maryland under
which they were acting they were re-
quircd to refuse registration to the
plaintiffs. But, in my judgment, there
arc two considerations which affect
this defense.
If the provision OF the State law un-
der which they acted in refusing regis
tration is void provision, it affords
them no protection; and if by valid
law OF the United States right OF ac-
ton is given to the plaintiffs as a rem
edy for denial OF registration, then
their right OF action is based upon such
valid law and is rcferable to it and is
governed by its terms.
The consideration oi the question
whether or not the provision OF the
Maryland law under and by virtue of
which the Plaintiffs were deliird regis
tration, and i'll consequence, denied
the right to vote, is a valid provisl
lies at the foundation OF these suits
and must OF necessity be dealt with at
the threshold.
The Court then cited sections 1 and
? of the Fifteenth Amendment and fol-
lowed with Section 2oo4 OF the Revised
Statutes which act CONGRESS nassed
to enforce tbc oma,durn+ Cantipu-
mo the court referred ~ Section 1910
oi the Revised Statutes, which makes
a person depriving another OF his
rights and privileges Liable in any ac-
ton for redress Lastly, the court
quoted clause 10 OF Section o2o OF the
Revised Statutes, giving to Circuit
Courts or;g;u,l ;,'r;s sJict;Gn in all such
cases
Rasinu his decision on thcsc laws
che court nrocceds os fnIlows.
Prior to January J. 1903 by thc Con-
stituion OF MARYLAND, only white"
maIe c;tizens oi tbc limited St.tos hay-
mo the ren,;red 1,uoth nj residence
rera ertit,ed - yn+e and ,berefnro
NV the letter oi thc MARYLAND law
or;or to January : 1893 the n1a;,t;ff
anderson bc;no bIark man WAS NOT
ent;t,cd to vote. Ind Howard and
Brown not he;np dcscendants from
orrsons who hc;no white" =" were en-
t;tIcd to vote were likewise NOT en-
t;tIcd to vote. and thc dcicnd,rts rnnn
that Ground solely denied IA IN, n;ain-
tiTs registration
Jrnon this state of facts and nj the
.rnreme Inv. oi thc land have ,nt ,he
defendants contrary to that ,aw dis
,.rin;nstcJ ana;nst The nI,intifTS IN de-
n,;ng to tbem the r;gb+ ~ ,.otc hccouSo
ri their race and c0lnr and have nor
,ho statutes enacted fnr that nnr,ose ~
';vcn tbcn, = r;aht ii art;ons
II ;s trne That the words ..roce" aud
.olor" ,rc not rscd in the ststn+os of
,ryland but the meaning of the law
az nIa;r a. 4 thn vnr,e ,,,ards bad
d. n,n made nsc oi. and il Is tho nean-
%; intention and efroct of ,be Iaw.
NOT ;ts ,,hraseoInay u>h;ch l. inv,
por ~, NJ other nnes;hIo ,,,non, g. fnr
neS ,rov;s;o, hoe boc, s,,arnStad , ao. ao
IA he Discrimination Which h,, il ;s
WIS indicated '''> y - -
enPa hcing so vha, i tbo ogect ot