Evening star., 1944-04-09


unanimous.
Grovey VS.. Townsend (1035).
MR.. JUSTICE ROBERTS delivered the opinion of
the court.
The petitioner by complaint filed the Justice
of Harris County Tex alleged that although he is citizen
of the United States and of the State and County and
member of and believer in the enets of the Democratic
party the respondent the county clerk State officer hav
ing such only public functions to perform refused him
ballot for Democratic party primary election because
is of the Negro He demanded $40 damages The
pleading quotes articles of the Revised Civil Statutes of
Texas which require the nomination of candidates at
primary elections by organized political party whose
nominees received 100000 the preceding
general election and reces that agreeaby to these enact
ments Democratic primary election held July 28
1894 at which petitioner had the right to vote Referring
to statutes which regulate absentee voting at primary
elections complaint the petitioner expected
absent from the county the date of the primary election
and demanded of the respondent absentee ballot which
refused him in virtue Of resolution of the State
Democratic Convention of Texas, adopted May "a, 1882
which is
resolved that all white citizens the State Of
Texas vino qualified to vote under the constitution and
laws of the State shall be eligible to membership In the
Democratic party and such entitled to participate in its
deliberations"
Lack of Legal Excuse Charged.
The complaint charges that the respondent acted with
out legal and his wrongful and unlawful const
uted violation of the 14th and 18th Amendments of the
Federal Constitution.
A demurrer assigning that the complaint
insufficient in law and stated of action
sustained and motion for trial. reasserting viola
ton of the Federal rights mentioned in the complaint
overrd We granted certorar because of the Importance
of the Federal question presented which has been de-
termned by this court Our jurisdiction is clear the
Justice Court is the highest State court in which decision
be had and the validity of the constitution
of the State drawn in question the ground of their
being repugnant the Constitution the States
The charge is that respondent, State officer in re-
fusng to furnish petitioner ballot obeyed the Of
Texas and the consequent denial of petitioners right
vote in the primary election because Of his and color
State action forbidden by the Federal Constitutions
and it claimed that former decisions require hold
The cited however, not in point. Nixon
Herndon 273 u s. $685. statute which enacted n no
event shall Negro be eligible to participate in Democratic
party primary election held In the State Of Texas
pronounced offensive to the 18th Amendment In Nixon
Condor, 2ss U. s. 73 statute question which
provided that every political party this through its
State Executive Committee shall have the power to pre-
scribe the qualifications Of its members and shall
its own determine who shall be qualified vote or
otherwise participate in such political party held this
was delegation of State to the State Executive
ittee and its determination conclusive irrespective
OF any expression of the partys will by its convention
therefore the committees action barring Negroes the
party primaries State action prohibited by the 14
Amendment. Here the qualifications of citizens to par
cpate in party conses and to vote at party primaries
have been declared by of he party in
convention assembled and this action upon is not
State action The question whether under the constitution
q Qeclarauon
ship amounts to State action expressly reserved in
Nixon VS. Condor Petitioner insists that for various
reasons the resolution of the State convention limiting
membership in the Democratic party in Texas to white
voters does not relieve the exclusion Negroes from
tcpaton in Democratic primary elections of its true nature
as the act of the State.
Primary Required by Statutes
FIRST An argument pressed upon in Nixon VS. Con-
don which found it unnecessary to consider is again
presented 1t that the primary election was held under
Is
Incidents those charged with its management have been
deprived by statute and judicial decision of all power to
establish qualifications for participation therein inconsistent
with those laid down by the laws State save only
that the managers of such elections have been given the
power 10 DENY Negroes the vote is further urged that
"he the election is designated that of the Democratic
party the statutes not only method of selecting
party nominees but define the powers and duties of the
parys representatives and of those are to conduct
the election so completely and them so thoroughly
ocers OF the State that action taken by them in con-
necon with the qualifications members of the party
is IN fact State action and not party action.
IN support OF this view petitioner refers to Title so of
the Revised Civil Statutes of Texas of 1925
perusal of these provisions so it is said will con
vince that the State has prescribed and regulated
primaries as fully general elections and has made those
who manage the primaries officers subject to state
direction and control.
Expense Not Borne by State.
While it is true that Texas has by its laws elaboratelv
provided for the expression of party preference a IN
nominees, 1t is equally true that the primary nartv
primary the expenses of it not borne v the state
but by members of the party seeking nomination tho
ballots are furnished not by the State by the agencies
OF the party the votes the returns made bv
created by the party and the State
zeS ne state convention the organ the party for the
oeclaVoh OF principles and the formulation policies
We are told that in Love VS. Wilcox the sunrens
Court OF Texas held the State within its province IN
prohibiting party from establishing past party Affiliations
VI membership IN nonpotica organizations qualifications
m .sss or paiepauon IN primary elections
sequence issued its writ of mandamus against the members
OF the state Executive Committee of the Democratic nartv
on ne ground that they public functonaries ulfnp
outles imposed on them by law that case it was said
I'VE called upon to determine whether
potca party has power beyond statutory control to
scribe what persons shall participate as voters or candidates
Al s conventions or primaries We have no such state of
facts before us" ~ "a
Committees Power Restricted
Alter referring uhc tho ,e..a.