North Carolina Newspapers

THE CAUCASIAN Vol. XIX. RALEIGH. NORTH CAROLINA, MARCH 28, 1901. No 1 " X i r i TRIAL OF THE JUDGES A OM)KNSKI KKPOilT OF TIIK IMI'EACHMKXT I'Hockkdim;. POWERFUL ARCUMENT FOR DEFENSE. onrlu.ion of .IuiIka Kiirrbra' Toatiuion j .Imil Irva MonlriMiiry tnd Ifcu-la Hfy .lulra not IiiI1uim-I hjr I'olltiral iiail ration-A I'arllaan Trial for I'olil l nl l'urM-a ( 'oiitimiMl from l.t Week.) "How can a rehearing be ar rived itt In cases v hern a case goei off tin- d-icketV" Witiic-M-d explained. t. Vhy did you, the court, not entertain (he request of Harris allu ded to?" A. "Hi cause there was nothing before the court." The rule of prac tice before the riuprcmo Court were then explained, in res (muse toques lions. Continuing, the witness: wild: "If Harris had brought the mat ter up before the court in the way I thought projier I should have de cided in hit favor that the clerk should i-Miie the writ." "While there is no nrinted rule ahout tiling opinions alter court ad journed, there is a rule among the memUrs id" the court that nodissen tiiiK opinion Khali lx tiled after the opinion lnthcioeis tiled, except by consent. I have never filed a discerning opinion in that way, but I believe some Jitive leen hi tlkd by unanimous consent. "My recolUctlou is that the vol ume of the Reports for that term was already printed at the, time the request of Judge Clark was made, and if admitted would in that case have to he printed in a subsequent volume of the Iteporls." H. "iid you have any interest in the White case'." A. "None on earth, except to do my duty as a Jude." "1 did iK,t know Mr. White; nev er saw him, until this week, in my lite, and had no sort of interest in the man. "I never mentioned this ease to Colonel Kenan at any time unless ho mentioned it to me tlrst in his off ice, in confcreiii or auywhere else. "1 never mentioned this case to either Mr. Ayer or Mr. Worth in my life. 1 have nothing to do with their connection with the matter. "It never passed my mind. I never thought Ayer or Worth or any ministerial officer would refuse to obey an ordor of the Supreme Court. I never thought of asking either of them anything on the sub ject." Judge Montgomery said to Judge Clark: "ion have tccn to Treasurer Worth and threatened him if he obeyed the order of this court." Judgn (Mark said he saw him (Worth) at his office at Worth's re (piest. Hut Wortli said Clark did not come at his request, but volun tarily. Judge Montgomery said: "Judge (.'lark said to Mr. Worth that if there be a mandamus 'there will be three vacant seats over yon ( der in the Supreme Court room.' " Judge Montgomery said to Judge Clark: "Worth says you came to hiui of your own accord and not by invita tion." Judge Clark did not deny it. "When refiectable counsel come into our court with record made up, I should take it to le a reflection on respectable counsel to go hunting around and " (Mr. Allen of the prosecution ob jected. Judge lurches stated that he did not desire to inject any remark that was improper or out of order. Q. "In the White vs. Auditor case were you influenced in any way by politital or personal considera tions?" A. "I again answer I was not. I had never seen and did not know Mr. White. I knew nothing of the auditing of the claim of White. I have never seen any or the papers introduced hero the other day from the Auditor's oflice, and know noth tngofthem." This closed the direct examina tion HIGH CHARACTER OF CHIEF JL'ST ICE FURCHES. Tne fiit "character witness" ex amined was Hon. William M. Rob- 5 bins, ex-Congressman, and In years agone considered one of the greatest Democratic campaigners in North Carolina. He was examined by Mr. Osborne of counsel for the defense. I "Do you know David M. Fur 5 ches?" "Yes: for !J5 years I have known . him well, intimately." "What is his character and gener ; al reputation?" "As good as that of any man in ; JSorth Carolina, lor truth, honesty and integrity though I always dif lered lrom him In politic," addec1 the witness. Cross-examined by Mr. Watson "Something of a politician, wasn he has frequently been a candidate s for office, has he not?" "Ye?, he has been a candidate for office. He ran against me once for i congress, I turned him down. He was generally defeated because he resided in a strong I emocratic coun ty. His politics never ioterfenvd with our personal frierid.hiw and I learned to love him!" declared the venerable witness with emotion. Anked by Mr. Wat-on If Judge Furchin was not a "bitter jmrtisan," Major Bobbins repli.d: "No more so than you or I, Mr. Watson I hated hi politics, but loved the man. "Alter canvassing the district once for sixty day together, we were as friendly as brothers person ally, though running against one an other, and we remained so after the canvass was over." Mr. John B. Holman, ex-member of the legislature from Iredell coun ty, was the next witness. He said: "I am a resident of Iredell coun ty, and have represented my ieojIe in the Ijcgislaturo. I have known Judge Furches for 10 years and more. At one time I resided some 10 miles from him, but since lie removed to Ire deli to live I have resided within 12 miles of him. "His general reputation all this time, has leen good." Cro;s-6xauiined by Mr. Watson, witness said in response to question to that effect, that Judge Furches had been a strong party man and some had regarded him as "bitter." 0. "Was he not regarded as so hi tier that gentlemen of opposite polities refrained from mentioning politics In his presence?" A. "I cannot nay that. They did not take the liberties with him, politically that they did with some others, in di-cussing politics." On re-direct examination Mr. Hol man was asked by counsel this ques tion: Q. "You have always been op posed to him In politics. I ask you if he w as at any time 'bitter' that his clitics interfeied with your I rsonal relations at any time dur ing all these years?" A. "No, sir; we have always been and remain on verv friendlv terms." Mr. J. II. Hoffman, another char acter witness, paid that he had been the "next door neighbor" of Judge Furches for many years and a near neighbor for twentjtwo years; had known him well during all that time. "His character and standing is very high as high as that of any man in Iredell county, as to honor and Integrity." Dr. S. W. Stephenson had known Judge Furches intimately fortwen-ty-tlvo years; know n him as well as I do any citizen of our county. "His general reputation and char acter is as nign as that or any man. Mr. Hoi man's character is good, al HO. QUESTIONS MY SENATORS. Through the President of the Sen ate Senators Woodard and Hender son propounded several questions to Judge Furches. Senator Woodard's question was: "If the Supreme Court did not di rect the clerk to issue the writ, what complaint, if any, was made by the court when it ascertained that the writ had been issued?" To this Judge Furches responded as follows: "None, by me. And the evidence here says none of either ......K,,-., - 4 T...1 xv, Ci,uuge opit " i " . . 0 . TT , was that in which he (Clark) order The questions of Senator Hender- niart VanM nM Jiasno L -if son were promptly answered by the ."Why was it necessary to is- sue a mandamus against the Treasur- er before the debt had been deter- mined by the court or Auditor?" .7 " "T01"""" .u.uu . " 4iiou ue oi tu court, uu uuJtdge clafk that hig opinion Q. "How could the clerk of the enurt, know what tho AnUtrr horl , "7 7 t" . . done or would do in detemiininsr the amount of the claim?" A. LA nug TT V lug bUIQ OUU VJKilLJZl UCW tions of like purport the witness stated, in effect, that the court only decided the legal question that White was a State officer and enti tied to his pay, $400 a year, and it was with the Auditor to determine the claim. He did not know how many writs of mandamus had been issued since he was on the bench, or whether the record in this case show ed that the judgment was satisfied. JUSTICE DOUGLAS TESTIFIES. The direct examination of Justice Douglas was conducted by Govern- or Jarvis. The witness said he was born in Rockingham county, North Carolina, and was elected to the Supreme Uourt bench in iU6, entering upon the duties of judge and being sworn in on the first day of January, 1897, the February term being the first term held after his induction into office. Q. "Which was the first office- holding case that was heard after you came in?" A. "The case of Wood vs. Bel- lamy, and those of Person vs. Suth- erland and Lusk vs. Sawyer were argued at the same term the 'asy- lum' cases." Witness then, gave testimony vir- tually repeating the evidence given on the previous day by Judge Fur ches. Asked If the testimony given by Judge Furohes was the same as he understood it, the witness replied that, essentially, it was. In the course of the testimony Judge Douglas said that the same principle as in Wood vs. Bellamy and the Day case also obtained in the White case; that it makes no differ- ence whether the office , taken from White was given to one man or dozen. The. fact remained, that White was deprived of a vested rht. He was then questioned on the White awe' and said that the ca was advanced because State cages were usually w hen the public Inter est was involved. The Supreme Court adjourned in June and witness was aked why it was in session so long. Judge Douglas replied in part: "I w as largely responsible for that, think. My health had not been good and I was kept very busy with some Important cases. The decision in the case of Debnam vs. the Tele phone Company, involving the con stitutionality of the Craig act, was given me to write. The court was left oten so that I could file these opinions, Judges Clark and Mont gomery being here. He said he knew nothing of the White case except as it came np on agreed suit. The case was argued and a majority of the court held that he was entitled to his manda mus. He had not met White until a few days ago. Continuing, he said that after the court left and went home the next he heard of it was when Mr. Harris came into court and complained that he could not get the money. Judge Douglas, when questioned, gave about the same description of the incident In the court room when Col. Kenan asked for instuctions. Col. Kenan wanted the court to in struct him to issue the writ, which the court declined to do then as there was nothing before the court. He told Col. Kenan at the Yar- borough that there was nothing be fore the court to act on, but if he wished to have full protection then he might refuse to issue the manda mus and have notice served on him to show cause why he had not is sued it. Col. Kenan did not wish to do this as It would put him in the attitude of antagonizing the court. At Col. Kenan's request for his pri vate opinion he wrote a note which he then read. This note said he had no right to advise him as an in dividual or as a judge, no matter being before the court, but he thought that being the object of the suit, he thought White was entitled to the writ. In the course of his testimonv Judge Douglas said that he never saw the writ before it was issued; knew nothing about it being served. The witness said that he under stood that Judge Clark wanted his order to the clerk spread upon the minutes, and the dissenting opinion published in the next volume of Re ports succeeding the volume contain ing the other opinions in the case. Witness then stated what he con ceived and understood the purpose and value of dissenting opinions to be, and said that he had known dis senting opinions (filed, of course, at the same time other opinions are) to be adopted as the deciding opinion of the court, the majority adopting it instead of the contrary one pre pared before the dissent was read by other judges, etc. After a case had been decided and gone off the docket, there is noth ing to "dissent" about. "I knew no reason why I should vote to allow another case to be filed at the time this dissenting opinion of Judge Clark was offered." Tha ruTvr wViiph .Tiiflcro ' Tlminrloa " ' e the order of judge Clark Lf mandamus, and stating that the . an if ot. m- . e,',: , TtlHQ nioQ . . . . ence, and I knew nothing about the erasures until the time of the legis lative committee meeting. I told go In the Reports only as his obitu- ro nnttco ' and thftt. htt (thft arif novu I " . . ..... ' would not object to that, it was -j i i a m Lv,:l ' - t gard the absolute independence of the judiciary as absolutely necessary to the proper performance of the du ties. I have never intended to deny any member of the court any right or privilege due him, and I do not think I have ever sought or tried or intended to bring the Legislature of North Carolina into disrepute. On the contrary, I have tried to uphold its rights as a co-ordinate branch of the State government. I was called upon to pass upon the constitution ality of them, have I done so, and even then I have studiously endeav- ored to eliminate only the nnconsti tutional portions of such acts, and to leave all in effect that could be left in force." I. Green vs. Owen (125 N. C, 221) was cited by the witness to prove I the above statement, the opinion in that case being written by him J "It was my desire to give full 1 faith and credit to the acts of the Legislature and uphold them so far as I could in obeyance of my oath of office. j "I have never been influenced by any political or party considerations in rendering any decision I have ever made since I have been on the bench. "I had no predelictions In Ikvor of the Hoke vs. Henderson case, and certainly no party or partisan con- - 1 sideration influenced me in agreeing with a unanimous court In the de- cision of the first cases of this office holding character. My judgment was influenced and I decided against my political friends solely by the I argument and briefs of the counse I for the defendants. Having given my voteHn favor of the doctrine J laid down in Hoke vs. Henderson J I have seen no reason to change my I mind. These briefs I now have." al Governor Jarvis asked that the witness be allowed to file these briefs m a part of hL testimony. Objection by pronecutlon- Mr. Cook, of counsel for the de fence, said lie thought that eooipv tent, because the witness has just stated that the contents of those briefs influenced and controlled hU vote on that case, and yet you ob ject to it. Why, one of the points here Is that if the letter of the law has been violated then the Intent Is very important. Now these brleft are com intent to shor the Intent of this witness defendants intent not only In deciding the case of Wood vs. Bellamy, but those fol lowing it down to this time. Mr. Watson Insisted on the objec tion, and stated the reasons for it. "We don't say that Wood vs. Bel lamy was even decided wrongly, but if these briefs are admitted, tbn even oral argument before the court can be injected here." Mr. Osborne contended that tht briefs were competent, and the wit ness added that he desired to file them because they had influenced his decisions, and therefore as proof of his intent. These briefs are those of counsel in the cases of Wood vs. Bellamy, Lusk vs. Sutherlln and Person vs. ,Tbe court said that after reading article 5 of the impeachment arti cles, where it is alleged that, by a "specious course of reasoning,M etc., he would hold with the counsel for the defence and overrule the objec tions of the prosecution. Continuing, the witness said that he was never influenced by party or partisan considerations; he had be come convinced that Hoke vs. Hen derson was the law of North Caro lina. "As to more recent decisions, if it was the law in 1897 it is still the law." Governor Jarvis then asked the questions propounded by Senator Henderson to Judge Furches at the morning session, which were promptly answered. The witness said that there were two questions, one being whether White was entitled to pay, if so in what amount. Both the Auditor and Treasurer submitted those ques tions to us, and they being parties, it was deemed proper that the man damus should issue. As to minor -details, they could have been left to the Auditor and settled by the Treasurer. Q. "How did the Supreme Court know the Auditor had properly audited the claim?'' Witness said it was not the inten tion to Interfere, because it was sup posed and ought to have been pro perly done. The motive that influenced me by the question presented, whether the pay should be 900 or $400 per year and as fund should be paid out funds set aside for that purpose, and not at rate of $900 as per act of 1897. In other words, we took it that he was to draw his pay accord ing to the act of 1899, because the Legislature had the right to reduce the salary, as we conceived it. Q. "Ought not the court to have requested the Auditor to report the amount claimed to the court before order of mandamus?" A. "It did not so appear to us, iuu uuait iicoouici ciiuuiu yj ttltcl vvttiiaiii was isaueu uy me vuunor that is what I understood to be the order of the court." Q. "Do you think it the duty of the clerk to issue order of mandamus in all cases where orders of court are not obeyed?" A. "It would be the duty of the clerk to obey the order of the court, and to use such methods as were necessary to carry out such orders." Q. "Does the record of the Su- ... ..... .. preme Uourt show that the judg- nient of the court has been satisfied?" A. "I do not know." O.. "Whose business is it?" A. "The clerk of the court's." The direct . examination of the witness by Gov. Jarvis ceased here. Judge Douglas was given a lengthy cross-examination, during wnicn time mere was some sparring between the witness and counsel. The following witnesses, all jrom Greensboro (the home of Judge Douglas) were sworn and testified to his good character and standing: President Dred Peacock of the Greensboro Female College. Capt. J. W. Fry, a banker. Mr. J. J. Hunter, a manufacturer. Mr. J. A. Odell, a hardw are mer chant. Neither of the witnesses was cross- examined, and they retired after merely answering the formal ques- ion put to them by Mr. By num. JUDGE MONTGOMERY ON THE WIT NESS STAND. After Senator Henderson had in troduced a resolution, which was aaopted, providing for the payment ol per diem and mileage ot the char- acter witnesses examined the pre- ceding day, Justice Montgomery of the Supreme Court was called to the witness stand and sworn. . In response to questions oy Mr. Cook, of counsel for the residents, who conauctea tne examination, tne witness said: "1 was licensed to practice law in January, 1867, and since that time, a i . i 1 L uourt, l was eneaged reguiariy in the practice of the law. I took the oath of office as justice of that court in January, 1895, and the first of the office-holding cases tried after I went on the bench was that of Wood vs. Bellamy (120 N. C. Reports). Q. "What was the principle in volved in that case?" A "That a public office was to jNovemper, io, wnen eiecir ment of a dispensary, the Goldsboro able: the closer you get to Nature, the legislature to enact the new elec ed Associate Justice of the Supreme BS.lotyQB aCTee ODen their places of the truest and simplest thing thre tion law, declares: (Continued on Second Page.) WORK OF A DAY. HORRIBLE ACCOUNTS OF MURDER, DEATH AND LAWLESSNESS. DEADLY WORK DONE BY AXE, CLUB AND RAZOR. 8U Children Mardvrvd by MtnUe Mo therMan Shot and Killed by Dtapor do 1b Folk County Threw Chlklrra Brained with Aie. Coal Bi-ook, Maps., March LI. Mrs. Lizzie Naramore, while in a fit of insanity this afternoon killed her six children at her home, a farm house half a mile from this village, and then tried to take her own life. The children ranged from ten years to a baby of ten months, and their lives were taken by the mother with an axe, and a club. She laid the bloxl-drenched bodies on the beds, two on one bed and the other four on a bed in another room and then attempted to take her own life by cutting her throat with a razor. When discovered she was in the bed on which the bodies of the four chil dren were lying. Although she cut a deep gash In her throat and suffer ed the loss of much blood, it is lie- lieved she will recover. Frank Naramore, the husband and father, left his home at the usual hour this morning to go to his work at a saw mill, and at that time his wife did not attract his attention by anything peculiar in her looks or actions. Rutherfordton N. C. March '3 Tom Jones, 40 years old, one of the most desperate white criminals and moonshiners In Polk county, was beaten to death with a double-barrel shot gun yesterday, near Mills Springs by two twin brothers, Ed and Oscar Wilkerson. The three men were hidden on the road waiting for three negroes to return from a still. They had plotted for a shooting match at them. While waiting, a quarrel began as to to encourage early marriages. The w hich one should have the first shot, bill provides that a male itlzen of It ended with the two brothers Penasylvania over forty years of springing upon Jones and beating age making application for a mar his head into a jelly with their guns, riage license shall pay to the clerk His brains were found lying on the of courts a license fee of $100, which ground near the body. is to be turned into the State treas- One of the murderers escaped; the ury for the puriiose of maintaining other is in jail, but refused to talk, homes for old ladies over forty years Jones has been seriously shot in three of age who have not had a suitable snooting anairs. lie has just return- ed from the penitentiary at Albany, New York, where he served one and a half years for moonshining. Both the Wilkerson boys have served a term in the State penitentiary for murder. Clinton, Maine, March 23. Jacob D. Marr, a farmer living eight milts from this village, killed his three children, Alice, aged 13: Elwin, 9, and Helen, 7, with an axe shortly i ai vui tuc lamuji uu iiacu i lum 1110 uiuuer iauie iuu. Mr. Marr had been despondent for some time, but his actions were not such as to make his wife believe that he had any serious trouble to worry over. The oldest daughter was washing dishes at the sink when her father went by her to the shed and got an axe. He came back into the kitchen and struck the girl a single blow on the head, killing her. Mrs. Marr saw this and ran scream- . . ... .. ing to the house ot her husband's father, Samuel Marr. The husband apparently went up stairs to where the vouneer children were plavine and struck each of them with an axe handle killing them both; When Mr. Marr, Sr., came in the younger Marr was washing his hands at the sink. He was asked why he naa aone me ueeu anu ne saiu: "I don't know." Later he was placed under arrest. A Negro Lynched in Halifax Count jr. Richmond, March 23 A rumor which reached here last night of a lynching in Halifax county, has been confirmed. A negro sent on to court by a magistrate on the charge of burning the stables of a Mr. De- Larnette, was taken by some 50 un- St. Paul, Minn., March 23. The and irresiionsiDie nas neoome a men known men from a constable who state Senate has passed the bill pro- ace to the safety and well-being of was taking him to the county seat nd shot irt dpath. None of thft ksuva - .VHV ' mob could be identified. Ore Worth $90 a Ton. Charlotte Observer. Mr. J. M. Kendrick has discover- ed a gold mine on his place near the city. Some of the ore taken from th min will assav as hich as $90 a toni. The vein is a large one and is located in a section of the county that is noted as a cold-producer. Mr. Kendrick exhibited a panning yesterday that was almost pure gold sand. He expects to develop the mine. There's polluted water, and there's Tri ,o, . rof f h Athilh. I "if . . " - - Dusines3 t 5 a. m. and close at 9:30 p. m. The commissioners of Union coun ty have purchased a pair of blood hounds to be used in capturing crim inals. The postoffices at Bed Springs, Robeson countv. and Benson, John- i " -,i i sion county, win ueuouie m tinnal mnnev order offices April 1st. LIT Hi FttltRlBE MIRCS. TW IhxiKtwa to t imIim. Aiming th- irrtty ud.t od cd to U uorn wtth whit hlrt-uUu rv tie of half-inch bhu-k velvet rib bon flnl-h.il at h t ttd wilh a gill vndnt. Th ribtati U cut a yard and a half long, ndut- anud the ueck urn, and ti iu fiat with IwofVfii liiupx and nd. Narrow l'uuriu-hand --riv he the end flight ly gathvred and fltiMi ed with wide fiat pelidnt. ltibbuli X)lUl have the end gathered and thru-t into the n top of a gilt spike. The newest thing in the w ay of a lelt-fa.-.tenr U a buckle in the form of a brooch which piiui the ritUn or velvet U lt iu place In the front. The rage for dangling oruameut Kvnw to lie upon us and belt ut velvet, sdlk and ribbon are tlnihd with ronette of narrow velvet ril lion with from two to eight end from fifteen to twenty-five itch long finished off with gilt jiendant. Black velvet ribbon continue to be iiopular, and where a quantity ol it is ustxi even the mot fashionable drertHinakers uj the cotton I uked. The new and pretty trimming used so much on evening gowns and silk bodices cannot le purcha-il ready-made, but fortunately it is not dilll.-ult to make. It i umd to finish collars, revert, yoke, etc., and is really a tucked ruche of mou-e- line. April IadieH' Home Journal. Southern Kipaiisinu. Chattanooga, Tenn., spt lal A The Chattanooga Mediciue Co., manufacturers of McKlreeV Wine of Canlui and ThedfordV Hlack-Draught, have just completed I the erection of three new buildings ed the franchise by iiiixriiig n trie as additions to their large plant here, tions ujmmi Jews, but that th-xc were Thene building give the company removed about 1 82i. Tho Cat hit over two acres of lloor spaw and IK-h had previously tm-n deprivtl of make the plant the second larg-st the suffrage by the Puritans and la- the world devotel to the proprle-Iter tary medicine business. This great business is rapidly x- I tending to foreign fields, a shipment I of 7500 bottles of Wine of Cardui being recently made to liritir-h South Africa. Penalty for Putting Off. w 9 a a mm k iiarnsuurg, ra., larcn zi uei resentativo Itoth of Iehigh county has introduced a bill in the Houe opportunity or oner ol marriage, Any bachelor over forty years who shall go outside of the State for a w ife shall pay f 100 into the State treasury. Brother or Gen. Botha Killed. London, March 23. A dispatch from Lord Kitchener, dated at Pre- the past, nothing from the hitter toria, March 22nd, says: ness of their own exirienc and "Philip Hotha, a brother of the taking no couiir-el of ju-ti and Boer commandant general was kill - I the Ooorilberg His two sous were wounded. "The Boers of the Orange Itiver Colony have disbanded and scatter- exl. De Wet is in the neighborhood of Heilbron." Fire at Hickory. Hickory, March 23. At 1 1 o'clock Thursday Abernethy & Whltener's new aud well-equipid livery stable 43 ourneu. ine loss is oeiween I ann n .-.,1 e.4 nnn uiit. . inuir. "uv v.vw, ance- Ten fine horses F".hed in ine his "n Bli in "er property This firm lost a stable about 12 months ago, valued at $3,000. Important Trifles q. S. Marden, in April Success Nothing is small which helps you along the line of your career, which legislation is simply a tricky and broadens your horizon, which deep- fraudulent uurpation of power un ens your experience, which makes der the forms of law, and If It had you more efficient in the great work of life. No matter how trivial any duty may seem, it it add in tne slightest way to your efficiency, it ceases to be trivial. I m -n. m. -9. m- . a to ueguiaie juainmony. hibiting the marriage of insane, epi- lot?. .nH tditt. rrcAns and m I lUilV Va a Waxy IfVl irvat aw m quiring a medical certificate of all applicants for marriage licenses. Postoffices Advanced. Washington, March 27. T h e fourth class posloffices at Maxton, N. C, and Clinton, N.C., have been advanced to the presidential grade as third-class offices. After all we mut come back to the old truism: that men and vo- men ate like water; they always find their true level. And where I von live harmiest. that is vour level. clear water. But one law is inexor- , . . . is because it is closest to God, the clearer always will you find the water. April Ladies' Home Jour- nal. TTmv the Beet-Snear Industry Growing" is the subject of an infor - ..41111.1 .tlnla Kw P fttann nrri lll&Lllllll&l Aa LlllU mJ V XPWJ m mm m u a m Baker in the March Review of Re- vsews. The latest facts and ngures I tvi9 tmv.nf inMof Krrcf.n. - , r ted by MX. UaKeX. (MARYLAND SUFFRAGE. a l M KNT ON THE N K W K LEC TIo.N REFORM !.W. CONSTITUTIONALITY IS SISCUSStO. rirnUuJ-lf.lii.. um4 1 lrBl(u(Wt W aai la l(k frl4 uf Ik IV..W. Wa-hingt.n, !. C, Mr. The iilitlcian of Maryland of tth rtie are now tiTtil in the alorblng ubj1 of tie jro ed election law, for the ang of which Governor Smith ha mini mooed the WirUlature in extra --Ion. The legal and ilitil a vts if the fit nation an l-ing f-vt-rl-hly dis u-ril, lu and out of rint, and tly State I- Miril as never U-fore firnv th lav of ci 11 war. The optuMtfnt of the li tloti bill are iuin in evident than it advoratew, who i i- r to I- p!aying a waitiinr lrame. relvlni: ui.n irtv dominance in the lgUiature to ac-tximplL-h their end". John V. I.. Kind lay ol Halt im.. re, in a letter Kittli-hod in the Haiti more News, apH-als to tin manhood of the State to prevent th con-um nation of what h- t rni a crime against fne government. He not that Maryland has iu the -t limit the war vonilitious imposil r- Utrictions upon thousands of the rit iens. One rty and another were swept from Hiwer bcaus' of Its ad- vocacy or practice for rtisan ad vantage of methods of hani4'rltig the free exercise of the right to vote. Mr. Find lay add-: "Under the old system, when tin Jews and the Catholics, and later on Southern fy mint thi !, were dis franchised, there could In no real e- presMou of the jH.pular will, ls au a large iiortioii of the aopI were not jieniilttcd to express It iu the ouly way it could be done through the ballot Imix. Ilut, by the toon retired and subtle plan which took its plaie, this ex predion of the mp ular will was simply nullified and defeated by the men iu charge of the electoral machinery. The law was Used to defeat Its own obj-t, and the kid was pocthed In its moth er's milk. Now it Is a strange, j-s tacle that we behold, showing that men do not so much walk on a plane as revolve In a circle, when Jef, Catholics and old Southern sympa thizers, along with some of their iiersecutors, learning nothing from 1 charity for their fellow-men, are all I alike at the instance of a discredits! demagogue engaged In an effort to rein-at the old exiieriment ofdl-fran- chisement, and, tierhas, in a inure questionable and disgraceful form than has ever yet been attempted. Nothing can be more certain than that the present legi-lature was not elected on anv Issue which would justify it in enacting the legi-Iatlon now promised. WOfMl NOT IIAVK IlKKX AITliMV KH. "Nothing Is clearer than that thousands of men who heltied by their votes to elect the present mem bers of the House and Senate would have voted the other way had they understood at the time they voted that they were actually voting to take from themselves the right to I vote. This being so, the proi-ned j no other badge to indicate the ource j I no one familiar with the ways of ring democracy prior to in jo wouia be at a loss to place his fingers upon the responsible author. I appeal to the manhood of the State. If the m mm a . a XV f A. ballot in tne nanas oi me ignorani commonweaun, wnai me - 1 plain, last ana reasonable course B w worthy of Maryland freemen who have some regard for the right of their fellow-men to pursue? If a large class of our citizens who are unfortunate enough to be unable to read are to be deprived of about the only possession which tbey share in common with their fellow-men and are to be degraded by being placed in the same class as ienitentiary convicts, ought they not at least to be heard before this terrible sentence la I TV rwlaatflM 10 jrvrv CONSTITUTIONALITY QUESTIONED The constitution of the state has I hum hrnnirtit intnnuMibn In this rnn hm. The senate legislative committee, upholding the rieht of I ' " " ..Section 1, article 1, of the con- I stitution .declares that all elections shall be by ballot. There is no de- I finition of the kind, the size, the shape or the character of the ballot. is I The framers of the constitution did 1 not undertake to say how the ballot I ahonld be prepared, by whom it -mm m mi . m ja mr should pe rnaoe up, or in ner suoum yo. The simple I rwiuirement that all elections snail wtoi.f,, fW J "f - atkd Utfemtmiiml to J4-r- tV.m rrry OrUII. hkh la it. lolbt ! a tv u ii.ira!a- U tt trurtunp atvl tl- rUtla rf tha m kK atl t!i uhb t4 41t.f It. If thU cr o th w4 ..trti aa XmlUA Un 1 .. t u4m4 It l i-Jirrly Uv tf- ovltu!.i lm m.t txihiUa.t! Jt 4.ian ttal it al4l.t) a xt.titvtwtat. If llv k-lCalun a It.u U ii! rt-l tl irp mrljf Ut tt t.. tk'.m- hat It d-tiHt ! t a U th aiu ! f IU.i, li t It a hrft I to -I Uro tttat ttvf tI! .t ..Viutl I- iu1- lthUt rOlMrltl if . -ttxf i.fn. and lu tf ay it la rlnt It, atvl if aa a mtt.4u. - .t iUUln,; 4tt.tn tu Um iy it i. MJam1 tc. -ftOt it -f uay i.ot uU' iutel I lk--otly, tlri tU fault i I r fault thr- i) i with ... intM- ortitutl4t in this tlat it ha h CI t.. th Ivilat urr, w Ith.Hit twtrUiil. th- -t-f lj -ri mimr atid I'tiug at-Hit thai -nrl-- r-ult ! lawfully al.'-tit;( u 1. a tU4. t'liltw it can - aal.l il l.a laratiufi that all hali.Ki ahall t- ty tIIot' U tantamount to ri Mlutf that tlx. K-ge'latun ha u wrr lit pnTi! the form of I he lllt. It aiiiM, . d-tiUl that in nwf It.lin; tltr tiu it haa tht ril't to al. 4 thia foriu now naf, iiotw ltttatilliia tl adoption fit may luiala.i(ii r Mtu iu vittlng who anhlii,g it did of. TIm lUltimon Nrws 'iaitK lh riaal law, aitvtr thu mi the oiiit I tutional .lnt: The uitMruinliMw f thia argu ment I inanlfrt. NoUaly haa rvrr pn !eii. that Ihr Utclalaturv ha-1 no rlht lo makr nvulatloti a- to the I .allot; but It I tlirhrult to Imw any j r-.ii In hi nw n -oU-rly maintain t hf prollioi that tavau th- lvi"laturv luayitNi "t i tutional ly make mm rnrulathMi, It follows that It iny ci.n-tltutiMilly mak any other regulation. A very flmpl raH w ill aliow thl. Huf the h-g Mature wen to etja t that all iMlinln mul Ie written In the u Ut' hand writing. In the illiiiK iHHith, without a-Utati and with out the aid of any p-r In tle vt ter' Mwion, and that any lallot omtalnlng an errtjr lu i'llltig J.all be invalid; awarding to the dorirliM of the committee thl ai wuuM la alailutely within tle iwrra of the legislature, though It would have the. eflVvt of prax-lically depriving of the puftiagc uiu tenth ot the mate citi4-naof Maryland un whom that right I ctnlern-tl by the legla latun. It will ! noted that the cillililitte tiowliere JUte that l -laration of the I '.mntltutioti umi w hich alone the argument agalnt lti Pii'"w'd a1ion I found! that every male cit I r-u f th rnitl Stat.- of the ag-of twenty neyr or upward who ha ln a resident of the State for one year and of tle legt-lative dl-1ri t of lUltimore city or ol tlie cMinty inwhih If may offer Ut vote for Ik month- wt pnling tle elei-tlou hall le enti tled to vote In tlie want or el.1ion di-Jrict in which lie rtwldm at all election hen-alter toU held in thU Stale.' " A 4L'llli(l.l. or T I'.M The ra-nate committ.' f'urtlier vanc. the follow ing argument on the h-gal phac: "The fallacy running all through the argument agiln-t tin mure lit, in confuing and omfouMlltig the right to vote with the eerrl of the right, and alo In acriblngto the proKM law a charmtier w hich it attribute do not give it, but which it iall-ged It result luin upon it. The riht to vote exlt under the present law, hut if thu ticket l not prorIy marked tin vote is lot, tau- the right ha not iieen law fully exerril. Unh the legislature ha.1 the authority to do w hat I now projm:l to N-done, where did it get the ower to order that a ticket wrongly marked kIkmM Ije rejetteil? If Ue right to vote and the ererclie of the right are ro ex tensive, how cAild the h-glj-lature rejxl a ballot once catT" The New, in reply, nay: "Thl is a quibble ho hhallow and contemptible tliat one lias a enw of humiliation In condescending to answer it. The two thine i4ared here in the name category are a different from eacn other a honeMy 1 from rascality, an different ma the dealings of an upright buine4 man from the method of a bunco uteerer. Under any law w hatever, owing to the Imti'rf.lion of all human machinery, name things mu-t go wrong; and an election law In no ex ception to the rule. Because ome few casoflofH of vote through accident occur under th ex King law. Hay tbet harp practitioners It inut Ije quite legitimate to make a law exprely designed to caoxe many thouands of voters to lo- their votes. Because, from the na ture of things, Mime individuals will, in every election, through circum stances icullar to themselves, fail in the exercle of their right to vote, therefore it I i?rfectly proper for the legislature deliberately to make that exerd-e irnjioesible, or nearly so, in as many ca.es a It pleases. "The case of the di franchisers would have been infinitely better without any plea at all. It U pre posterous to suppose that such Jug gling of phrases can help at all in covering up the true character of the proceeding contemplated. On the contrary, the bald assertion that the legislature may Interfere with the exercise of the right of suffrage as much as it pleases, provided only it does not nominally deny the right, should serve to awaken the people to the true nature of the Impending legislation. The doctrine set op in defense of the act is far worse than (Continued on Second Page.)