Richmond planet. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1883-1938, 1910-12-03


register, one Clarence NJ Jones, was
imposed the duty OF registering the
qualified voters at a special registra-
ton held in the city OF Annapolis in
the month of June, 1908.
by the votes OF the two registers,
who are defendants. the plaintiffs
were denied registration, and in con
sequence. their votes were refused by
the judges Of election. for the reason
that they were not entitled 20 vote
because their names did not appear
among the registered voters of the
city Of Annapolis.
The plaintiffs allege that they are
natives Of Maryland. and lifelong
residents therein, who have been reg
dstered as voters since they were
respectively, twenty-one years Of age,
nj had been continuously since regis
tered voters in Maryland. They allege
that I'm obedience TO the law Of Mary
land enacted at the January Session.
1905. Chapter SOS. they were denied
registration by the defendants. al
though In other respects they were
legally qualified. solely because they
were negroes. and were Disseminated
against solely on that account. That
the defendants, as registers. denied
the plaintiffs registration against the
protest of the third register wrong
fully. Illegally and oppressively. and
thus prevented the plaintiffs from
voting at subsequent elections I'm the
city OF Annapolis"
The registrars made no denial OF
having done ali that was set forth in
the above allegations. It continues.
The declarations allege that the
action of said defendants, as registers
was in accordance with the said act
of the legislature OF Maryland. Chap
ter 525, of the Acts OF 1905. proyii-
ing for the qualification of voters IN
municipal elections I'm the city of An
napol.s. and providing for the regis
tration of said voters. BY said Act
.of 1908. the registers were directed
TO register CD all male citizens of
Annapolis of 21 years or over. who
had resided therein over one year,
who had never been convicted of any
Infamous crime, and who were tax
payers assessed on the city tax books
lat least $500, CO an duly natural
lied citizens. CD all male children
OF naturalizet citizens of 81 years of
age: (f) all citizens who. prior 20
January /. 1865. were entitled 20
vote ia the State of Maryland. or any
other state of the United States at a
State election: (5) and all lawful
male descendants Of any person who.
prior 90 January I. 1865, was emit
tied 90 vote in Maryland. or in any
other state OF the United States att
a state election. And enacted that
no person not coming within one Of
the enumerated classes should be reg
istered as legal voter of the city OF
Annapolis. or be qualified TO vote all
any municipal election held en- said
city"
The above citation should be read
carefully and especially the latter
part of it. Il continues:
The several declarations then all
lege that SO much OF said Act OF Mary
land Jas refuses registration. and con.
sequently the right 60 vote at NUM-
oils 90 all persons, OF their descend
ants, who were not entitled to vote in
Maryland prior 20 January /. 1865.
Us contrary Co the Constitution and
Laws of the United States. and more
especially 90 the Fifteenth Amend
ment 90 the Constitution. and 10 the
Act OF Congress, approved May 81.
$40, constituting Section 2OOf of the
United States Revised Statutes. in so
far as the said clause OF said law Of
Maryland OF 1885 Affects or profess
les or attempts 90 affect the rights 20
vote of any citizen OF the United
states by reason OF the race. color
Tor previous condition OF servitude Of.
himself or any ancestors OF his.
The plaiutin Anderson alleges
that he is a citizen of the United
states, born i'm Anne Arundel County.
Maryland in 1884 That prior 10 Jan
.uary I. 1865, he would have been en-
TITLED 20 vote at any election in Anne
Arundel County but for the word
white in the Constitution of Mary
land then in force. restricting the
right 20 vote 10 white citizens. by
which restriction, being of the negro
race and black color and by reason
of no other cause whatsoever, he was,
prior 10 January LIST, 1865, excluded
from voting at municipal elections I'm
the city OF Annapolis.
The plaintins, Howard and Brown.
allege substantially that their father
and grandfather. respectively, would
have been entitled 10 vote in Mary
land except for the word white in
the Maryland Constitution which was
in force prior TO January 1, 1865"
This would seem 10 establish be
yond the power of cavil or denial
that this discrimination was based
on race and color, which discrimina-
ton is specifically barred by the
Constitution of the United States and
further legislated against in the Re
vised Statutes.
But we do not want 10 be in a
hurry about this matter. The eta