Newspapers / The Davie Record (Mocksville, … / May 24, 1899, edition 1 / Page 1
Part of The Davie Record (Mocksville, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
AVI 3RD. E KECK I i it. i i m For President or Governor oi unu. JAS. E BOYA of Guilford. Ff rC'ongrehS, I ILL1-1M A KA1L.1S1, ot uuvie. or brass anil effrontery the edi- ;llin the rosi oi -amy, the climax, me wiea oi me Lot-ratio press boldly proclaim ing object of the amendment i . t "V tl. r'mm itution to 1BUKB -i-Norm oliiui everlastingly Democratic, f v or the Post to have the audac MtJask Republicans to join hands )jthem in ratifying said amend t. Yoi may get Simmons & o -write learned articles in or- to muddy the waters and de. e the people as to the object intent, etc., but we have failed arto see or read anything from profound reasonings which lains or m other words which troverts this simple fact, that uchjit does discriminate against negro, and was so inteuded. ,t the primary object of the 5th ion was to disfranchise the ne , and not disfranchise the white il 190S, then the poor and igno- iint white will be forever elimma- d from participation in the ad ministration of a government which M forefathers helped to make. 3ii want to eliminate enough ne- I . i -r i 1 1 - rrjpes to mate ;Norui 1-aroiiiia e cr- lastingly Democratic, yet leave ini in poUtics so (hat your tlcnio- ogic politicians can usehiui to ride nto power in the iuture. JSo, Democratic friends, the ears of the issaretoo familiar to catch or de ceive 'Republicans. Your howl, al ready raised to rescue the Bast from megro donomination, is too thin, in E1 oi Ubio. " Ijf he face of your neglect to apply the remedy pointed out by a uon-part:-zaa Supreme Court in Harris vs. "VVrt. Had that Democratic gang been a- iuate l by the nutives of smce.nl v on tins tniesuou oi protetting Ibe lixst, it would never lave' adjourned without placing the eastern counties and towns in ihe hands of the whites, bat no, t si: were in vie v an I von a little longer, if by so doing you can make North Carolina everlast ingly Democratic. The case is be fore the court, and you will be tried by the people. Let us hear a lit tle from you, my l)enio:raiic friends, occasionally about that "fair and honest," electiou law .you passed. Stand to the rack, iie fa;r and just, The Democrats of North Carolina may yet learn,a d profit by the ex ample set by the Democeraey of i Ababani-i. The Legislature ot that iState which recently assembled to formulate a new constitution and suffrage cla iseto limit the franchise lii that State, adjourned without doing any thing on that liue. ho; I - n I-v-I f" XT' itlli that April session v - i 1 1 i n mil it uai I will recorded some of i4 s grave blunders. We are of the opinion .1 tint ffiwt -nrrihtpiTv efTe'tiarr the l -111 I'" - - CT j f p-ojlfiH or tne:-e unneu oun should le settled by tne meat at Washington. govern- We give space this week to Mr. Nash's article on the Cosmtitutional imendmcnt, I presume Mr. Nash is a Democrat aa his article Vas -first printed in a Democratic paper, vv e a rt-e with him on the unconstitu aiily f the amendment. Its an1 able article. Head it. N- A N A I1CW ESCA PE. Thankful words written bj' Mrs. fi Ada E. Hart, of Groton, S. D. fl'Wsis taken with a bad cold which j, settled on my lungs, eonprh set in ''and finally tenuiaated iu cousump -'tion. Four doctors ga e me up, say. 4,big I could live but a short tia;e". I sjgave myself.up b mr Savi i', deter mine.l if I could n t stay with my I friends on earth, I would meet ray fa 'sent oi e alo e. M.' husband !vr s advised to get Dr. viu;7s New Discovery for Cm -uimpti'-ir, Coughs m Colds. I trave it a trial, look f.i lisi inalleiirht belCes. It 'hap me. and thank Ood,T'am saved ami now a Tell ntul l.e:nI:V W"m;"!ii. Trial t lies free 1 all J -'nh r si ye "Or :v .' tinig wlon-' LC-O. C HE "LINEAL ANCESTOR" CLAUSE DISCUSSED. Morning Post. Frank Xash, Esq., of Hillsboro, furnishes the following argument from his standpoint, of the grand -father clause, or 'lineal ancestor" section of the proposed Constitution al Amendment in regard to the bearing which the 15th Amend -nient of the Constitution of the Un ited States, in his opinion, will bear thereupon. Introduction. This discussion is one purely of constitutional law. It is entitled to more consideration than the strength of the argument gives it. I know that men of abili ty and character do not reach the same conclusion that I do. Of course these gentlemen are actuated by perfect integrity of purpose. I think thev are mistaken: and. as I commit my reasons for for so think ing to writing. I cannot refrain from demanding that the tribute which I have paid to their integrity of purpose, shall be paid likewise to mine. As, however, the conclusion that I reach is unpopular. 1 think, I owe what follows to myself; certainly that much, if not more. All my sympathies are with the better class of people in North Carolina, who desire the purification of the ballot by an educational, property or tax paying qualification, or by any, or all of tbem. But the reason for my sympathy is this: A Democracy is moved to radical action only by ap peals to its prejudices and pas sions. When thus aroused, it has no prevision and li tl memory. It is regardless of the future and for getful of the past. It has its own short-sighted reasons for its pres ent action, and these, to it, are all sufficing. Insuperable barriers make it fret, and fume in impo tent wrath, lash both the barriers and itself. The makers of our consti tutions. Federal and State, under stood the weakness as well as the strength of Democracy, much bet ter than our modern apostles of the people, so t'iey made ihe breakwa ters so strong that they could with stand all the angry waves of popu lar excitement while providing in- j side the harbor a calm and serene haven. Now it is a fact that one; of the signs of the times, is popular! restiveness against the restraints of i a written constitution, not so much now, it is true 'as in 1893, not so much as it will be in 1900, simply leeause the politician was then and will be next year, moving upon the face of the waters It is true that we have substantial reason to object to botli the Federal and State con stitutions. Candidly, 1 think the greatest political crime committed in the history of our country was j the euactment of the fifteenth a- J mendmeut. I believe it to have boen a product both of hatred and i revenge. Farther, I believe. Leisy j vs. liarum, (ine original package case") and the income tax ease to have been two of the greatest polit- j tunes iu P s history. But i t if.-il -niisfortn f ... . - - . . . I i can i listen witu patience to tne Politician while he tells the people j l OI privilege ro an coiorsami an that the briber had entered the Su- j riices and lt: prohibits directly any preme Court, room and had paid ! discrimination on account of previ Chief Justice Fuller and Judge ' ous condition of servitude. It goes R),irAs fnr their opinions in thpe ! no further. It interferes no more cases? Or shall I believe the politi cian and ioiii with those who, dis r- - mno -n-.v.r.Ma.i i, constitution itself for its amend- inwit. seek bv main forc to hrnaV I down its barr'ers. a proion upon the State to ex- I Conscientiously, then, believing ' eivise its power in the above par ; that seelhm 5 of the proposed suf- ticulars, and only in those while it i fii-ee prevision is obnoxious to the leaves it free to act m other partic- (ir.contii niKPnilmw-t T anhmit ,o ! ulars. Consequently when a gen- following argument, which to mv v ' 'miad is conclusive. Ai.i.t-i i4r mav be stated thus: 1. For the purpose of the argu- ment, there are no restrictions the Federal Constitution upon in the right of the State to regulate the suffrage except those contained in the futeenth amendment 2. Suffrage is a u right. privilege and not i The fifteenth amendment, however, makes it a r-ght, when ever any class is excluded by rea- 1 fi,n of servitude, and it-m.kPR o 8 n oi ra'. e, coior er previous coma I - - - -- -- -7 - dillerence wnctner it is excluded directly or indirectly. The Abgumext. Constitutions are not themes pro posed for ingenious speculation, but fundamental laws ordained for practical purposes, said Judge Gas ton. Baf ire the adoption of the fif teenth amendment there was no limitation on the State'spower over the suiirage in the Federal Consti tution, except that which is con tained in article 1, -section 4, and article IV, sect ion 4 of said consti tution. A mendinent 15 then is a limitation upon the admitted pow er of t!e State ami the question to l-.e (iiscvssed is tl extent of that limitation, and l. ci .enlailj' the ( rw-.Vfrf tli St;lte t rin:l- ifv saiirae. As far as this discus- ,n iacoiur-sed, artitle I, se-tion- Jlanv article IV , section 4 may be put t-y not side, though thejr maj' Tif".', wiiat the future shall bring 'vrtb. meu ent 15 reads thus: be e;ofliel'mled StUes MOCKS Vi L LE N. C WEDN J CS DAY to vote shall not be denied or abridg ed by the United States, or by any State on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude." It is incorporated in our supreme law, and there are few' intelligent white men in North Carolina; who have not taken an oath to sustain it. 1. Who are the citizens of the United States of the fifteenth a- mencimeiitT. The fourteenth a mendment answers: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdic tion of the same are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they .reside." We need not go outside of North Carolina for a defiinition which is as ac curate if not so broad. Says Judae uasron: "the term citizen as un derstood in our country, is Drecise- ly anal ygous to the term subject to the common law. and thechange of phraseology has entirely resulted from the change- of government. The sovereignty has beentrasferred from one man to the collective body of the people and he who was before a subject of the king, is now a citizen of the State." To meet hypercriticism, I remark just here that I know both of the above defi nitions include women and that the Supreme Court of the United States has made one of them include corporations and, I think, very nat urally and very properly so, though there are very strong arguments to the contrary. Further, that wom en, may vote and do vote in some States , v 1UUV.C 111(11' IUU "citizens" of the fifteenth term amendment means the same thing as the term "citizens" of the four teenth amendment, so far as politi cal privileges are concerned. No one, would contend, I suppcse,that the ballot might be conferred upon the white women of the State with out, conferring it likewise cu the ne gro women. This would make a discrimination by reason of race, so M ould offend against the fifteenth amendment. Why? Re:anse the negro women, under these cireum stances would be the citizens pro tected by the fifteenth amendment. The further discussion will make this point plain. 2. What citizens are protected by this amendment in the exercise of this franchise! They are onlv those who are, or attempted to be. disfranchised on account of color, race ar previous condition of servi tude, There is no limination upon ' the general and admitted power of the State except in these particu lars. In other words, the State may confer suffrage upon, (a) Those educationally qualified. (b) Those qualified by ownership of property. () Those qualified by having paid their taxes, All these matters are to be deter- ! mined by tae State. And in addi- tion thereto There is that women may no discrimination vote. of race eolor or Previous condition of servitude. The fifteenth araeud- Tinf-. u-n in! fin tl -rl fn epcurA onu-.il ' wun me ouue power man mis. xi ! does not and was never intended to .11 A T (U.l 1 t LI - T i comer me oanot upon any ciass I A 1 1 11 . J - 1 uPon nomine aie useii naa noi conferred it. It is, in other tords, t r-jj i tft -1 - eriil idW lS pawseu wiiicji aci c.udi- -m -il 1. Z r. 1 1 J 4 r. iv upon ail colors, anu an races is cor.stitutional, though it may dis f ranch ise more of one color, etc . , than of another. The cases liave decided this. The following con siderations must convince anyone independent of cases. The loth amendment protects all races. Suppose a negro State, which at- tempted to disfranchise, directly or indirectly the whites reaming there in; certainly the whites would ap peal to this amendment and would be protected by it. Bat we are dealing now with a gener.il law , , , - , 11 L 1 11 wnicu aeisupou aiiww, mu races, ana we are la-Kingau euuea- .T iional qualification as an i illustra- tion. There are, say 100,000 negro ' A oiers. mix oi a ipui",m "vv 000, Avho are entitled to vote under this educational qualification. There are 250,000 white voters out of a population of 1,250,000 under this educational qualificat ion, which are entitled to vote. That is an. equal proportion of those entitled to vote on electicm dajr. supposing the equal proportion to occur on that day. The next day it Avould be different and the next day after . that it would be still different. So j this eeneral law Avould enfranchise; more men oi one coior one uay man 1 1 A 1 another: This Avould be unconsti- tutiocal one day according to the accident of u rcn instances and con- stitutional the next, which. is a re- duetio ad absurd nm. Constitu- anA .instifiiHonul construe - tion do not run along these fooli. h when a general rcp a jug, law is enacted which acts equally upon all races and colors, and re gardless of their pre viotts condition in restricting the suffrage, that law is constitutional notwithstanding the face that it disfranchises a greater number of blaeks than whites, or whites than blacks.This principle,however, does not extend so far as to permit the State to es tablish a merely arbitrary qualifi cation, though it does not in terms import a discrimination by reason of races, etc., if in fact and in truth it is such discrimination. Courts cannot close their eyes to the his tory of this country. Indeed, in construing constitutional questions, they are bound to take judicial no tice of it. The nesro as a class was a slave until 1S65. As a class, neither he nor his forefathers could vote before January 1, 1867. Is there any other class in North Car olina who could fill the bill that that section 5 describes so well as the negroes? Is there any other elass for whom section 5 was enact ed? The previous sections of the proposed suffrage provisions are plainly constitutional. All of the designated class are disfranchised regardless of race, color previous condition. That class includes quite a large number of white men as well as negroes, whose education does not qualify them to vote. Then section 5 is added- Why? Simply to remove the educational qualifi cation theretofore imported upon all white voters, leavln j it still effec tive against the negro voters. That is what the section does and that is what it was intended to xlo. There is no concealment of its purpose by its, authors. Section 5 was in tended to disfranchise as many ne groes as possible and not a single white man if possible. And the meaning of this section cannot be hidden to a court, that has common sense, by a paraph rastical designa tion of a class which is d( s:gned to f tvor at the ex e ise of the i f ;eenih amendment and the expense of a class which the fifteenth amend ment protects in dire terms. Sec tion f is an exception m both Mr. Rountree's and Major Guthrie's arguments. So section 5 might as veil haAe been incorporated in sec tion 4 as an express exception to its provisions. Putting it down in plain terms as an exception to sec tion 1 and on; milling all paraph r es, would not section 1 read thvs: Every person presenting himself fir registration, except him who was, on January 1st 8 7, or at any time prior thereto entitled to vote under the lavs etc., airv leuieal descendant of anr person who was entitle I as aforesaid to vote under the laws, etc." Does not this form a class and segregate it by reason of its race, color and former con dition of servitude? If it does not, then the Legislature has failed in carrying out the intention, which it has frequently both before and since the passage of the con'stitu-, tional act, announced. If it does, then it is obnoxious to the fifteenth amendment. That amend nent was never intended to secure more than equal it y of privilege in voting, It confers upon neither white or black special exemption from disqualifica tion. It says simply to the State that in makinar your classes are free, provided your classifica- tion makes nby istinction. in reali ty, on account of race color or pre vious condition of servitude. Ev erybody knows that the Federal Constitution is the Supreme law of the land. Everybody knows that such liicial oath is a recognition of this fact. Indee l, the proposed suffrage am n in e it incorporates this oath in its provisions. Shall we like Virginius, let out the life blood of the Federal Constitution with one hand, while with the oth er, we support it? Let us, howev er, examine some of tne argamciits on the other side. First. It is said that if the pro posed suffrage provision does not on its face discriminate against a race ti e courts haA-e nothing to do with the discrimination which re sults from its practical operation; that though section 5 removes the '. euucstional qiialircs :Vnsn trom a j t n.lu,hor ot whites, vet it does. " j u.)t from others, a:i(l though it Uoes I not remove it trom a great numoe' i lfu!UA.K. ;fS uoes from others? , ,eih is n v nrii.ci ide of con ' stitntional law which may De con gkiei.e4as established, so far as to -1.,i-;t om aviom it is this, that the const ituticnality of any law is tobe determine:!, not "by its form, but hy tue en"ects of its operation, iiuieea, to sucn an extent is this f ri1A J ht. M-e have the maxim, (-NTotlln(, r.au i,e done indirectljs which cannot be done directiy." Amj there js not a case wLich lim- ils the state's control OA-er private rjsnt, or limits the police powei of Mf.t w tt-.e inter state com- I "T . 1 ; ,jierce provision of the f ederal r'f,nstntion in the extermination of the courts haA e not gone back of the face of the act, to the results which ensue from its p-acti- cal operation, lmsiawuue, 1 it reouires no citation of authority. Tliere is not a case in our" reports iwmnfl an anthnritv. There k ire none da the United States MAY 24 1899 j Supreme Court Reports. I need only cite Judge Harlan's discussion in Mugler vs. Kansas: '-The courts are not bound by mere forms, nor are thejr to be misled by mere pre tence. They are at libertj,indeed, are under a solunin duty to look at the substance of things whenever they enter upon an enquiry wheth er the Legislature has transcended the limits of its authority." So that it may be considered, certain that the court is construing this sec tion will disregard forms and look at the substance of things. It is said further that under this section some whites, not education ally qualified will still be disfran chised. But how infinitessimally small is their number compared with those whites from whom the disquali ication is rsnic e lf Tlsi is a mere minor incident in the great controlling purpose and effect of this section, to allow the white man disqualified educationally to vote, while the negro so disquali fied shall not. Ah! but, say they. the white was segreggatea into a class by himself from his race, and his former freedom from servitude. He may exercise the franchise there fore, because better prepared for it, than his negro confrere of the same class, educationally. True, every word of it. I have mj'self seen men. white men, who could neither read nor write, who Avere infinitely better prepared from integrity of purpose and honesty, to cast a vote than the man who was addressing them. Why? On acocunt of their race, on account of their heredity. And that is exactly what the fif teenth amendment forbids anj' State to make any discrimination about. If it does not forbid that, it forbids nothing at all. Again, however, the;lineal descendants; of negroes who Avere free before 1835 have not the educational qualifica tian applied to them. True again, but why! Simply because their ancestors were free before 1835. Does not the fifteenth amendmei t read in the last alternative, "or on account of previous condition of servitude." Would the gentlemen who have announced their fixed conviction that section 5 is constitutional, in sist the last alternative applies only to those who have been themselves slaves? Would thej limit thiscon stitutionapamendment to this nar row plane? Ah, I suppose not. That would have been too easy a so lution to the suffrage problem for them to have disregarded it, in formulating the provision to be submitted to the people. But whatever these gentlemen ma y think about it, it is perfectly plain that the fifteenth amendment would cany alont its own death wound if it could be construed as protecting only those who had themselves been slaves. The ar gument here, however, is exactly the same as iu the principle point, with only this . additional matter. It is possible to construe a constitutional provision as strickly as the law requires a criminal stat ute to be construed! All history and all experience show that it is not. Finally the advocates of the con stitutionality of section 5 have this delemma thurst upon them, either the fixing of the, time therein, Jan uary 1, 1867, Avas arbitrary, or it was fixed with the deliberate pur pose to disfranchising as few white men as possible. If it was arbitrary- and its result was to disfranchise the negros while not disfranchising white men of the same class it Avould be directly obnoxious to the fif teenth amendment. And a portion of it wouid be in the second in stance. I have written the above in a very condensed form (too condens ed, indeed, to do full justice to the subject) because I was not willing to let the discussion go by default against those who are neither poli tical i.s nor pa tlsans. I appreciate more, perhaps, than most politi cians, the reason of unrestricted suffrage and particularly of unre stricted negro suffrage. I know that it is a constant source of evil . oil t it T to the white men oi tne ftoutn. l need mention only one particular. His presence as a voter has almost entirely destroyed the indepen dence of-the white voter and the white public man in the South. or you are aiding the "nigger par-, ' tv" stors his mouth many a time j where he should speak out, and hampers him, if it does not enslave him when he desires to vote bia honest convictions or aid his follow ! citizens in arriving at an honest conclusion, is o, the negro is not a slave any longer. He is leading by the nose to the ballot box too many white men for him to feel that he has no power in this country. His presence is makins: Jefiersonian ' 1 1 C i II. , uemoe-racy in tne ooiun a cruts ue tween Federalism and Kadicalism, and I fear it is making us forget our ancient respect lor law; wniie it reA'ives our still more ancient re gard for force. Yet neither the ne ero nor ourselves are to blame for this condition. Let us bear our . burdeh bravely and as far as Ave can be just to him, THE BEST STOCK OF LADIE'S Cor, 4th and Liberty Streets. GENTS FURNISHINGS. I HAVE A DPIXTHL Tailor-Made Clothing Also Gents Furnishings, SHOES, CUFFS, FIXE NEGLIGEE SHIRTS. Come around and look at our Sample and Price List. E .H. Morris, sales agent For Wanamaker & Brown. have your Clothes Strauss Bros. AMERICA'S LEADING TAILORS . NEW YORK-CHICAGO-CINCINNATI LOW1S8T X VICES T ASSORTMENT n LATEST STYLES A PERFECT T AND HIGHEST QRADE OP WORKMANSHIP GUARANTEED You ar Invltsd to toot at thalr aamplaa at E II. MORRIS, Sales Agene,;MoksvUle X. o. Go WILLIAMS For anything in tho Dry A First class BOTTOMPRICES Hring on Your Produce also Agaats for tb3 Lychburg Chilled Plows We wtll 7roit yox Right. fiOS We have. Our. M10ES MADE. , H YOU GETTIIEBEST FOR YOUR MONEY WHEN YOU DEAL WITII.US. Sh mos 25c to $1.00 a Iiir. OXFORD TIES IN WINSTON 98c To $3.25 A Pair. THE REGULAR SHOE STORE. . t NEELY k CRUTE: WllN ST OUST 1ST- O and S-EXjIuCTSID OF LINE HATS, CAPS, COLLARS AND made to order by To BROTHERS, Goods f.n.l Giocery Lino. lot of Go at and Kxa'iiino our St elf, Williams Bros: BJ -a .'fj... - ; .... .
The Davie Record (Mocksville, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
May 24, 1899, edition 1
1
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75