The weekly chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Craig County, Okla.) 1905-1913, 1911-02-24
ELECTION CASES HEARD BY
JUDGE C0TTERAL At GUTHR

to the United States constitution. l
can put a negro in separate school ;
you can put him in a Jim Gre
coach, because of his race and co
but you cannot take from him the q
tive franchise"
This was the declaration of Ju
John Embry of Guthrie, United ST.
district attorney, during his argun
before United States Judge John
Cotteral here Monday in suppori
the sufficiency of the indictment9
Gently returned under Embry as pf
cutor against Duke Jeffries and 7
lard Smith of Seward, j. ]. Beal, [
Quinn and Harry Neal of Kingf5
county on charges of conspif
through enforcing the states g}
father clause law, which is prohiI
| ny federal statute.
Appearing for the defendants a
torneys were w. A. LedbettsA~s
lahoma City, former private counI
to Governor Haskell; Judge q
Stuart of McAlester, former U
States attorney under President O.
land; Norman Haskell, son ol
former governor; Fred Bransor
Muskogee, chairman of the demoC
state committee, and G. G. Horns
Guthrie. They appeared not onI
the defendants, but also for the
as defending a state law, and wit
exception of Horner, for the
cratic committee. These attorney
paid by Legislative appropriated
proved by Governor Cruce.
Embry made his strong point
fact that the Oklahoma grandS
clause provides on educational
and then submits to the test onl9
persons or their descendants who's
not vote under some other form a
ernment prior to 1866.
The phrase, under some other
of government" Embry de-
simply revises the laws of all
states existing prior to 1856 re
to qualification of voters, an
added that in no state was any
prevented from voting because O.
color or condition of servitud
cepting the negroes, therefore
Oklahoma law, by re-enacting
gro disfranchising laws of other
seeks to and does disfranchisf
the negro by compelling him
nit to the educational test becd
his race. color and previous co
Of servitude. T| ~.
| 1t is an interesting fact that
is southern man, native d
lucky, and the author of the on
arate school law Oklahoma hs
had.
| The attorneys for the deft
argued that the Oklahoma
father clause" statute is constit
that it has been sustained by
pelate courts Of the state and
principals have been sustained
i United States supreme court,I
iularly in Williams VS.. United
from Mississippi.
They argued also that theI
criminal statute under whichI
dictments were returned is u
itutional, and that it was so
Chief Justice Brewer of the
States supreme court in Jai
Bowman from Kentucky, and
Judge Lurton of the United
circuit court, but recently
to the supreme bench by Mr..
They made the third point a
numerous precedents, that thd
state grandfather clause STD
unconstitutional, even then
fendaIfts could not be found
crime because they were b
ing into effect the provision
state law which the state
court had held constitutional,
defendants therefore could
charged with any criminal inI
In making his argument,
Horner said:
Justices Brewer and Luri
that law to protect persof
the provision of the fifteenth
ment must be limited to carl
provisions into effect and i'll
was broader, then it becanI
stitutional." 81
The attorneys for the de
tackled particularly the statJ
which the indictments were
as unconstitutional, holding
fifteenth amendment prohibit
from enacting laws to did
whereas the federal statute |
and is not aimed at the staI
stead specifies that if "twd
persons" conspire to preyeII
from voting because of race
they shall be punished.
Judge Stewart made the