Evening star., 1944-04-03
Primary Ban
On Negro Upset
By High Court
Roberts Is Only
Dissenter in Ruling
On Texas Case
BY ]. A. FOX.

versed 1885 ruling and held
that Texas Democrats could not
bar Negroes from party prima-
ries.
The court, in a decision delivered
by Justice Reed, specifically over
ruled the 1885 case-Grovey VS..
ToWnsend-and held that the pro-
scrlption violated the 18th amend
ment through the States abridge-
ment of citizens right to vote.
The vote on the decision was 8
to l, with Justice Roberts, who wrote
the 1885 opinion, dissenting. The
1885 decision was by a unanimous
vote
Justice Roberts, in dissenting. COM
planned that the decision overruled
previous opinions on the issue and
said he was concerned because it
tends to bring adjudications Of
this tribunal into the same class
as restricted railroad ticket, good
for this day and train only"
The first reaction on Capitol Hill
to the courts ruling came from Rep
resentative West, Democrat. Of
Texas, who said: Il don't think the
supreme Court has any more right
10 say who can vote in a primary
than it has a right to say who can
belong to a church or a lodge"
The present case originated in
Houston Tex, where one Lonnie E.
Smith sued two election officials for
$4,000 damages, declaring they re-
fused to permit him to vote in the
primary of July, 1910, when Demo-
cratic candidates for the Congress,
Governor and other State Offices
were nominated. He contended the
refusal to give him a ballot was
solely because of his race and color
and contended that this discrimi-
mated against the rights guaranteed
him by the 14th, 18th and 17th
amendments to the Constitution.
Cited Grovey Case.
The lower courts upheld the Texas
State officials on the basis of the
principle laid down by the Supreme
Court in the Grovey case. It was
the fourth time the issue had come
before the court, which said in 1885
that the barrier was the act of the
party rather than the State and,
therefore, proper.
On the two previous occasions. the
court had. invalidated State stat
utes designed to insure all-white
primaries, declaring they contra
vened the 18th, or equal rights,
amendment to the Constitution.
Justice Roberts dissent was
couched in sharp language, and re-
ferred to recent opinion in which
he had rebuked the court for what
he said was tendency to fiout
precedence.
I have expressed my views with
respect to the present policy of the
court freely to disregard and to
overrule considered decisions and
the rules of law announced in
them" he said. This tendency. it
seems to me, indicates an intoler-
ance for what those who have COM
posed this court in the past have
conscientiously and deliberately
concluded, and involves an assump-
ton that knowledge and wisdom re-
side in us which was denied to our
predecessors. I shall not repeat
what / said there for I consider it
fully applicable to the instant de-
cision, which but points the moral
anew"
Called Breeder of Doubt,
In concluding Justice Roberts de.
clared:
1T is regrettable that in an era
marked by doubt and confusion, an
era whose greatest need is stead
fastness of thought and purpose, this
court, which has been looked to as
exhibiting consistency in adjudica-
ton, and a steadinesS which would
hold the balance even in the face of
temporary ebbs and flows of opinion,
should now itself become the breed
er of fresh doubt and confusion in
the public mind as to the stability
of our institutions.
Observers have said that should
the court outlaw the Texas bar
against the Negroes, other Southern
States would have difficulty in legal
ly setting up all-white primaries.
The principle laid down by the
court today was: 1T may now be
taken as a postulate that the right
to vote in such a primary for the
nomination of candidates without
discrimination by the State, like the
right to vote in general election,
is right secured by the Constitu-
ton. BY the terms of the 18th
amendment that right may not be
1See SIIpREA1E COIrRT paun A21