Evening star., 1927-03-07
VOTING BY NEGROES
IN PRIMARIES OF
.DEM0CRATSUPHELD
Supreme Court in Unanimous
Decision 0verthroWs
Texas Law.
14TH AMENDMENT MAIN
BASIS FOR OPINION
Ruling Made in Case Brought by
Man Who Says He Was
Barred From Ballot.

BY the Associated Press.
The constitutional guarantee Civ
ing negroes the right to vote applies
to primaries as well as general cleo
tions in the opinion of the Supreme
Court.
Overthrowing a Texas statute, un-
der which negroes are prohibited
from voting in Democratic primaries,
the court found today, in a unani-
nous decision, that even though the
primary Is not mentioned In the
Federal Constitution, Federal juris-
diction is sufficient to bar the States
from making primary laws out of
harmony with the constitutional
guarantee of equal rights for the
races.
Says 100000 Barred.
The decision was handed down in
the case of l.. A. Nixon, an Ell Paso
negro, who sought unsuccessfully In
the lower courts to recover damages
against election judges who refused to
permit him to vote at a Democratic pri-
mary election. Moorfield Storey of
Boston, his counsel, told the Supreme
Court that 10000 negro voters in
Texas had been excluded as ineligible
to participate in Democratic primaries.
Nixon, himself. represented that he
had voted the Democratic ticket for
years prior to passage Of the law.
THAT private damage may be
caused by such political action and
may be recovered for In a suit at
law has been doubted and has
been recognized by this court, Z"
said the opinion. "If the de-
fendant's conduct was wrong
to the plaintiff the same reasons that
allowed a. recovery for denying the
plaintiff a vote at a final election
allow 1t for denying vote at the
primary election that may determine
the final result. The important
question is whether the statute can
be sustained.
But although we state it as a
question the answer does not seem
to US open to q doubt
States may do a good deal of
classifying. that it Is difficult to be-
lieve RATIONAL said the court, but
there are limits, and 1t Is too clear
for extended argument that color
cannot be made the basis Of a statu-
tory classification affecting the right
set up in this case"
Fourteenth Amendment Cited.
The court said it was not even
necessary to take into account the
fifteenth amendment, which gives
negroes the right to vote, because the
injustice. of the Texas statute was
sufficiently apparent when considered
merely in the light of the fourteenth
amendment, which prohibited the
States from making any law to
abridge the rights or citizens on ac.
count of race or color.
THE statute Of Texas as
sumes to forbid negroes to take part
in q primary election, the importance
of which we have indicated, discrimi.
mating against them by the distinction
Of color alone" said the opinion.
"The objection that the subject mat
ter of the suit, If political, is little
more than a play upon words"
Justice Holmes, who delivered the
opinion, quoted from a former case
in which he said:
THAT amendment (the fourteenth)
not only gave citizenship and the
privileges Of citizenship to persons of
color, but it denied to any State the
power to withhold from them the
equal protection of the laws .
What is this but declaring that the
law In the States shall be the same
for the black as for the white: that
shall stand equal before the laws of
the States, and, in regard to the col.
ored race, for whose protection the
amendment was primarily designed,
that no discrimination shall be made
against them by law because of their
color?"
May Be Blow to Ware.
The decision Of the Supreme Court
may prove a severe blow to those
who are supporting the admission of
Senatorelect William S. Ware to the
Senate. One OF the principal argu-
ments made by the Ware forces has
been that the Senate has nothing to
do with the primary elections, but
that they are State affairs entirely
and not subject to Federal control.
Thomas w. Cunningham of Phila.
delphia, treasurer of the State Repub-
lican committee during the Ware cam.
paign, has been cited for contempt by
the Reed slush fund committee be-
cause he declined to tell the com
mittee where he got $4,000 which he
said was his personal contribution to
the Ware campaign. Mr.. Cunningham
and his attorney base their fiat refusal
to answer questions on the ground
that the primary was a State matter
and that the Senate committee had
no jurisdiction.
A similar argument has been Ulade
by supporters of Senator-eiect Frank
l.. Smith Of Illinois, whose rfgEt to
be seated will be challenged on the
ground that there was excessive eX.
penditure and improper contribution
Continued on Page 2, Column 3D.