Jackson advocate. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1939-current, 1943-06-19
Texas Again
CONTINUED from Page u

to argument of the case. The mo-
ton of the American Civil Liber-
ties Union to file brief amicus
curiae in this case has also been
granted by the U. S. Supreme Court.
The granting Of certiorari in
the Texas primary case is hailed
as a further step in the securing OF
the franchise for the Negro citi-
zen in the South, Thurgood Mar
shall, NAACP special counsel who
is fighting this case, told the press
this week. At the same time Mar
shall condemned the recent Subter-
fuge action of the Florida State
Legislature.
'"The State OF Florida" Marshall
said, 'is obviously now attempting
the same subtefuge which the State
of Texas has been using to prevent
Negroes from voting in the white
primary"
In other words 1t is now up to
the democratic party of Florida to
determine who shall vote. There
is no doubt that the party will
continue to exclude Negroes, but
the decision in the Texas Primary,
Marshall said, will determine the
subterfuge now being practiced in
Texas. This precedent will like
wise make or break similar prac-
tices in Florida or other states.
The present Texas primary case
marks the fourth time the question
of the white primary" has been
before the Supreme Court. In 1927,
the NAACP carried the case of
Nixon VS. Herndon to the Supreme
Court which ruled that the state
Of Texas could not exclude Ne
groes from the primary by means
OF a state statute. Texas then pass
ed a statute which gave the power
to the executive committee of
the Democratic party to decide
who should vote in the primary.
The executive committee promptly
limited the primary to white"
persons. In 1882 the NAACP again
carried the matter to the Supreme
Court where it was decided that
this procedure was equally unlaw-
full. The opinion, however, pointed
out that the Court did not pass
upon the question as to whether
or not it would be lawful for the
Democratic party in convention as
sembled to decide on who should
vote in the primary. At the next
convention OF the state party, a
resolution was passed limiting
membership to white" Demo-
Gratis. In 1885 a group of interested
citizens in Houston, Texas, carried
the third case to the Supreme
Court (Grovey VS. Townsend). In
that case the United States
Supreme Court held that this
action in excluding Negroes did
not violate the Constitution.
O'DANIEL VIEWS SITUATION
An interesting sidelight on the
Texas Primary is recent letter
from q. S. Senator w. Lee
O'Daniel of Texas who, while con-
demning the anti-poll tax bill to
his constituents says: "a general
impression is held by a great
many people that by abolishing the
poll tax, the main gain would be
to permit the colored people to
vote. That is not the case at all. If
Congress should enact this Resolu-
ton abolishing the poll tax, it
would have little effect on the
elections in my State of Texas.
The reason it would have little
effect is because the elections in
Texas are generally determined in
the Primaries, and not in the gen.
eral election. Poll tax or no poll
tax, colored people are not permit
ted to vote in the Democratic Pri-
maries Of Texas. The Democratic
Party of Texas is an organization
which has Members, the same as
many other organizations, and
consequently has the legal right
to fix the qualifications of it's own
Members, and this right has been
upheld by the Supreme Court of