San Antonio light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1911-1993, 1924-04-06
Opponents Of Law to Take
Question to Supreme
Court.
CLAIM ACT INVALID
If Upheld Would Prevent
Negroes From Voting
in Texas Primaries.

primary law in the hearing of the
Hurley c. Chandley case, Saturday
morning, will be taken directly to
the Supreme Court of the United
States, according to an announcement
Saturday afternoon by ]. NJ. Woods,
attorney for Chandler.
Chandler is a Bexar county negro
who sought to restrain the governor
and attorney general of the state and
the county chairman of the Demo-
cratic committee from interfering with
his alleged right of franchise in the
Democratic primary election next
July. He also sought to have the
white mans primary law declared I'M
constitutional.
Primary Not an Election.
Judge West, in 4 lengthy memo
randum opinion, dismissed the suit
on the dual grounds that a court of
equity was without jurisdiction to
apply the remedy of injunction in
purely political matters and that a
primary was not an election and hence
was not concerned with the fourteenth
and fifteenth amendments to the fed
sral constitution.
The opinion in full is as follows:
nv OpAlAOA
Hurley C. Chandler, plaintiff, a
negro citizen Of the United States
brings his suit against the governor
and attorney general Of the State of
Texas, and the County Democratic
chairman of Bexar county, defend
ants.
Plaintiff charges that he desires
to exercise his right to vote at
primary election of the Democratic
electors in the selection of that party's
candidates for state and national of
fees. That Article 3993-a of the
Revised Civil Statutes of Texas for
bids a negro from participa ting in
such Democratic primary solely be-
cause he is a negro, and that he can
not become a Democrat or Demo-
cratic elector. The article is as fol-
lows:
~Au qualified voters under the laws
and constitution of the State Of Tex
as, who are bona fide members of the
Democratic party, shall be eligible to
participate in any Democratic party
primary election, provided such voter
complies with all laws and rules gov
erning party primary elections; how
ever. in no event shall a negro be
eligible to participate in q Demo
cratic party primary election held in
the State of Texas, and should
negro vote in a Democratic primary
election, such ballot shall be void and
election officials are herein directed
10 throw out such ballot and not
count the same"
Plaintiff charges that this article
IL in conflict with the Fourteenth
and Fifteenth Amendments to the fed
eral constitution.
The Fourteenth Amendment reads
hs follows:
"All persons born or naturalized In
the United States, and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof, are citizens Of the
United States and Of the state where
In they reside. No state shall make
or enforce any law which shall
Bbridge the privileges or immunities of
eitizens of the United States; nor
Bhall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property without due
process of law: nor deny to any per
son within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws"
Plaintiff charges that the Four
teenth Amendment Is violated because
In enacting the article in question
the State of Texas made and is now
attempting to enforce a law which
abridges the privileges and immunities
Of citizens Of the United States; and
likewise denies to him the equal pro-
lection of its laws. That the act
violates the Fifteenth Amendment in
that it denies and abridges his right
10 vote on account of his race and
color. The Fifteenth Amendment
reads as follows:
"Section /. The right Of citizens
Of the United States to vote shall not
be denied or abridged by the United
States or by any state on account OF
race, color. or previous condition OF
servitude.
"Section .. The Congress shall
have power TO enforce this article by
appropriate legislation"
The plaintiff prays that defend
ants be enjoined from enforcing the
provisions of the act of the State of
Texas, and that he be accorded his
right to participate as an elector in
Democratic primary elections in this
state.
To this petition the defendants file
a motion to dismiss in which the suf-
ficiency of plaintiffs petition in mat
tiers of law is challenged upon the
following grounds: % That the sub.
Iect mdIlPT Oh tut suit
in its nature n court of equity is with
out jurisdiction to determine the is
sues involved, or to award the relief
prayed for. CD That plaintiff is moi
a proper party to maintain the suit
(3) That there is failure TO joir
necessary defendants, other than those
named. (4) That the Fourteenth
and Fifteenth Amendments do not
from the allegations in the petition
appear to have been violated. 10
That the bill shows that the primar!
election referred TO was not an cleo
ton within the meaning of the -Four
teenth and Fifteenth Amendments Il
the Constitution Of the United States
1t is touching the motion to dis
miss and the issues of law raise
thereby that are to be passed on AM
determined here. Both parties hav
submitted. during the past few
months, elaborate and able briefs o
authorities and arguments in supper
Of their several contentious.
The rights of the negro citizen Z
vote in many of the states of tn
Union have frequently been consider
ed BY the highest courts in those sew
rrai states, and by the federal courts
A careful consideration has been Civ
On 20 the authorities cited. and tn
following conclusions have beef
reached:
The tgO main questions presente'
~ tie deferdauta AZ to the suffi