The watchman and southron. (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, May 15, 1895, Image 1
THE SUMTER WATCHMAN, Kst&blished April,.1S50*
"Be Just and Fear not-Let all the Ends thou Aims't at, be thy Country's, thy God's and Truth's."
THE TK?E SOUTHRON, Eatabliahed Jane, 12 66
Consolidated Ans. 2, ISSI.
SUMTER, S. C., WEDNESDAY, MAY 15, 1895.
Sew Series-Yoi. XIV. So. 42.
$>k tSBatrjpni S? ?oti?koit.
ta) u o
St?Usked Erery Wednesday,
JM. Gr. Osteen,
SUMTER, S. O.
TERMS :
Two Dollars per annum-io advance.
ADVERTISEMENT:
One Square first insertion.$1 00
Every subsequent insertion?. 50
Contracts for three months, or longer will
be made at reduced rates.
All communicatioDR which subserve private
interests will be charged foras advertisements.
Obituaries and tribntes of respect will be
charged for.
Everybody Votes.
The Registration Law Declar?
ed Unconstitutional.
Judge Golf Enjoins Tne Super
j visor of Hegistration.
As announced in s brief dispatch re?
ceived just as the Watchman and
Southron was going to presss last
Wednesday, Jad se Goff rendered ao
opinion that makes the Registration in?
operative and throws open the ballot
box to every mac of the legal age who
is not disqualified from voting by crime.
The text of his decision is given ia
fall with the exception of a few authori?
ties which he quoted :
Io the Circuit Court of the United
States for the District of South'
Carolina.
Lawrence P. Mills va. W. Briggs
Green-In Equity.
On the 20th day of April last, on
consideration of the bil! in this cause. I
passed an order that the defendant, \V.
Briggs Green, individually and as
supervisor of registration for Richland
county, io the State of South Cardio a,
be eojoioed aod restrained uotil the
further order of this court from the
commission of the acts complained of in
complainant's bill, and I directed that
said defendant show cause before me, if
any he could, at Columbia, S. C., on
Thursday, May 2, inst, why su JD order
should not be continued, or some order
of like purport aod effect be theo grant?
ed, eojoioiog and restraining bim both
individually aod as suoh supervisor of
registration from the commission of
said acts, uotil the final beariog and
determination of this cause.
The plaintiff, a citizen of the State of
South Carolina aod of the United
States, brings his sait against W'.
Briggs Green, a citizen of said State
aod of the United States. The plaintiff
exhibits bis bill io his own behalf and
for all others, citizens of the county of
Richland, io the State of South Caro
Hoa, circumstanced like him, who are
too numerous to be named and made
parties hereto. It ts set forth io the j
bill that the plaintiff was 26 years of
age OD the 5th day of February. 1895 ;
that.be isa resident of Ward Four,
precinct of Columbia, io said county
aod State ; that be is a male citizen of
the United States : that be has resided
io the State of South Carolina for more
than ooe year preceding tbe last general
electioo io that State, aod in the county
of Richland for more than sixty days
prior to said general electioo ; that he
is an elector of the State of South Caro?
lina, possessing all of the qualifications
of ao elector of the mose numerous
braoch of the State- Legi "lat are, aod is
subject to oooe of the disqualifications
set forth in the Constitution of that
State, aod that he is uoder the Coo
stitutioo and laws of the United States
daly qualified to vote at all Federal and
State elections held io said ward,
county and State.
It is set forth io the bill that sectioo
90 of the General Statutes of South Car
olioa of 1882provides as follows : "Ali
electors of the State shall be registered
as hereioafter provided ; aod oo per?
son shall be allowed to vote at any elec?
tioo hereafter to be held unless regis?
tered as hereioafter required" ; that by
sectioo 94 of said statutes it is provi?
ded: "Wheo the said registration (in
certain books to be provided for and
made io the manner provided for io
section 93) shall have been completed,
the books shall be closed and not open?
ed for registration except for the pur?
poses aod as hereinafter mentioned,
until after the oext general election for
State officers. After the said next
general election the books shall be
opeoed for registratioo of such persons
a9 shall thereafter become entitled to
register, oo the first Mooday io each
mooth, to and until the first Monday
io July, inclusive, preceding the fol?
lowing general election, upon which last
named day the same shall be closed and
not opened for registration until after
the said general election and that there?
after the said books shall be opened for
the registration of such electors on the
days abovemeotiooed, uotil the first
day of July preceding a general elctioo,
wheo the same shall be dosed as afore?
said uotil the said general elec?
tion shall have taken place:"
sectioo 137 of said Re*
"After every general election the re
gistration books shall be opened for rc
gistration of such persons as sha
thereafter become entitled to regist ei
on the first Monday io each moot
until the first day cf July preceding
general electioo, wheo the same sha
be closed until such election shall br?
takeo place." that sectioo 97 provide;
"Any person coming of age, aod bein,
qualified as ao elector, may appear be
fore the supervisor, of registration o
any day oo which th books are opeoei
as aforesaid aod take oath as to his ag
and qualifications as hereinbefore prov id
ed, and if the supervisor find him qua]
i fled he shall enter his name upon th
registration book of the precinct where
io be resides." It is also alleged tha
said registration laws provide that th?
supervisors of registration io the sever
al counties shall issue to the voter, whet
registered, a certificate of registration
aod that said voter shall present tb?
same at the polls to the managers o
electioo aod that oo one shall be allow
ed to vote at aoy electioo to be held it
said State, uoless his certificate of re
gistratioo is exhibited wheo he offers tc
vote; aod that it is required by said lav*
that io case a voter shall remove fron
one county to aoother io said State, 01
from ooe precinct to another io the saan
county, or from ooe residence to anoth?
er io the same precinct, that he sbal
obtain a transfer and a renewal certifi?
cate; and that should a voter lose hu
certificate he must obtain a renewal
? thereof, upon furnishing evidence sat
j isfactory to the registrar of the county
wherein he resides that bis certificate
j has been mislaid or lost, and that tin
same has not been willfully or in ten
j tiooally disposed of. The bill also al?
leges that by the provisions and require
j meets of said enactment the voter fail?
ing for aoy reason to comply with any
of the provisions of the same is denied
j the right of suffrage, both in Federal
and State elections. Complainant
claims that the provisions of the said
enactments fixing the time for registra?
tion aod the closing of the books for
that purpose oo the first day of July
preoeediog every electioo, aod the
many requirements aod conditions set
out io the various seotioos of said regis?
tration law were intended, aod that
they io effect do abridge, impede and
destroy the suffrage of the citizens,
both of the State and of the TJuited
States. ,
It is also averred that on the 24th day
of Deoember, 1894, ao Act was passed
by the Geoeral Assembly of South Car?
olina entitled "An act to provide for
callion a Coostitutional Convention, to
provide the number and qualifications
of members of the convention, their
compensation, etc, and to provide for
j the election of the same, and to define
and prescribe the qualifications of the
electors, and the manner of the electioo
and of dedaring the result." That by
Section 4 of said Act it is declared who
shall be entitled to vote for delegates to
said Constitutional Convention, and
that in addition to the qualifications
prescribed for electors by the Constitu?
tion of the State of South Carolina is
provided a further one, viz, "that the
elector be duly registered as now re?
quired by law, or who having been en?
titled to register as a voter at tha time
of the general registration of electors
in the State which took place in the
year 1882, or at any time subsequent
thereto, failed to register at such time,
or who bas become a citizen of this
State, and who shall register as here?
inafter provided in such cases."
The complainant says that he failed
to register at the registration made
after the general eleotion in 1888, and
during the ten days in March, 1895,
provided for in the Act of 1894, be?
cause although be made repeated and
persistent efforts to become registered
he found himself unable to comply
with the, unreasonable, unnecessary
and burdensome rules, regulations and
restrictions prescribed by said uncon?
stitutional registration laws as conditions
precedent to his right to register, and
that he has never been allowed to vote
at any Federal or State election of the
State of South Carolina; that he is de?
sirous of voting for delegates to the
said Coostitutional Convention, and
that the paper writing purporting to
be books of registration now in the
hands of the defendant do not and will
not contain bis name as a registered
voter for the reason before stated; that
he and others like circumstanced with
him will not be permitted to vote at
said special election by the managers
thereof unless their names be found
upon the booka of registration and they
produce the registration certificate men?
tioned; and that if the defeudant be
permitted to cuntinue the aforesaid il?
legal, partial and void registration, and
be a?owed to turn over to the mana?
gers of such election for the county of
Richland the books of registration for
said county he, the plaintiff, will bf de?
prived of his right to vote at said elec?
tion and grievous and irreparable wrong
will be done and damage him, which
can only be prevented by the interposi?
tion of this Court by way of restrain?
ing the defendant from the performance
of said before mentioned acts.
The defendant in bis return to the
rule to show cause, insists that as super?
visor of registration for Rioblaod Coun
I i 11 ul III ?? i
tioD of this Court, and that the mattere
facts and things alleged and complaii
ed of io the bill are matters relating t
the political duties of bis office; tbs
this is io effect a suit against the Stat
of South Carolina, which is prohibite
by the 11th amendment to the Consti
tution of the United Stare?; aiso tba
the bill presents no question aristo
ander the Constitution or laws of th
United States, and that this Court ba
no jurisdiction of the case; that the bil
presesnts no case for equity jurisdiction
as the plaintiff bas a plain and ade
quate remedy at law; that the bill i
multifarious and not properly versified
he denies that the registration law
were intended and that they in effec
do abridge, impede and destroy the sui
frage of the citizens of the State an?
of the United States, and he claim
that they are reasonable and coostitu
tiona!, and submits their proper aoo
straction to the Court. The other mat
ters set up io the return will not nev
be recited, but will be considered ii
substance as the questions arising an
disposed of.
The question of jurisdiction is firs
to be determined. Defendant insists
that this suit is in effect a proceeding
against the State of South Carolina,aac
fbat it should not be entertained be
cause prohibited by the 11th amend
ment to the Constitution of the Unitec
States. It is not my intention at thi1
time to consider separately the manj
cases cited by counsel in argument bear?
ing on this question After carefullj
examining them all I cooclude that il
is the duty of the Circuit Court of thi
United Skates to restrain a State officei
from executing ao unconstitutional
statute of the State wheo the execution
of it by him would violate 01
abridge the rights, privileges and
immunities of the complainant thal
are granted by the Constitution
of the United States. So fat
as this question is concerned it is im?
material if the officer so restrained be
the supervisor of registration, the
Auditor of State, the Comptroller
General, the Treasurer, the Attorney
General or the Governor. We do noi
hare io this country any class of peo?
ple, State or national officials, or pri?
vate citizens who are above the law aod
who are not compelled to respect it.
The Constitution of the United States
is the supreme Ia? of the land, any?
thing in the Constitution or laws of any
of the states to the contrary notwith?
standing. The mandate of tbs Na?
tion's Constitution is addressed to all
the officers of the United States, as
well as to all the officers of all the
States. The Judges of the Federal,
as well as of the State Courts, must re?
spect it, for it declares that the Judges
of every State shall be bound thereby.
As is said by the Supreme Court in
Dodge vs. Wolsey, 18 How, 331: "To
make its supremacy more complete, im?
pressive and practical, that there should
be no escape from its operation and that
its binding force upon the States and
the members of Congress should be un?
mistakable,-it is declared that the Sen?
ators land Representatives before men
tioued. and the members of the several
State Legislatures, and all executive
and judicial officers, both of the United
States and of the several States, shall
be bound by oath or affirmation to sup?
port this Constitution.'' It would be a
strange admission, a startling decision,
that the Courts of the United States
j cannot open their doors to the oitizens
?of the United States, who allege that
they are by the unconstitutional laws
[ of a State deprived of their privileges
j or immunities as citizens of the United
j States, and denied the equal protec
I don of the laws within the jurisdiction
I of such state. I am not aware that
! any Court of the United States has ever
so held. I trust I will oev.-r be ad?
vised of such a decisioo, and I am sure
as I now see the law and my duty that
I will not so rule, nor establish such a
precedent. " ^ - .
Complainant insists u-at his case is
included in the reasoning O? A? Court
in the cases last cited, and also thai, be
is entitled to present his bill to this
Court relative to the matters therein
set forth, because of the provisions of
the Constitution of theUoitedStates, and
particularly the 14th and 15th amend?
ments thereof To the consideration
of this point and of the constitutional?
ity of the registration laws of the State
of South Carolina we now come. Com?
plainant insists that the registration
laws of South Carolina are iu contra?
vention of the provisions of the Con?
stitution of South Carolina, and that
they also violate the Constitution of the
United States, his rights as a citizen
of the United States being so affected
thereby as to entitle him to bo heard io
this Court on the complaint we now
consider. The Constitution of South
j Carolina contains the following provi
; ?ions: Article 1, Section 31. ''AU
? elections shall be free and open, aud
j every inhabitant of this Commonwealth
j possessing the qualifications provided
for in this Constitution shall have equal
right to elect officers and be elected
to fill public offices."
Article 8, Section 2 : "Every male
citizen of the United States of the age
of 21 years and upwards^Bot laboring
under the disabilities ^??ed in this
Constitution, wit bog! ?ioctiotL
I shall be a resident of this State at the
time of the adoption of this Constitu?
tion, or who shall hereafter reside in
this State one year and in the county
in which he offers to vote sixty days
next preceding any election, shall be
entitled to vote for all officers that are
now or hereafter may be elected by the
people and upon all questions submitted
to the electors at any electioo : Pro?
vided, that no person shall be allowed
to vote or hold office wbo is now or
hereafter may be disqualified therefor
by the Coostitutioo of the Uoited
States uotil such dit qualifications shall
be removed by the Coogress of the
United States ; provided, further, that
ur ersoo while kept in any alms house
o. sylum, or of unsound mind or con?
fined in any public prison, shall be
allowed to vote or hold public office."
Article 8, Sectioo 3 : "It shall be
the duty of the Geoeral Assembly to
provide, from time to time, for the
registration for all electors.*'
Article 8, Section?: "Every per
800 entitled to vote at any election
shall be eligible to any office which
now is, or hereafter shall be, elective
by the people io tibe county where he
shall have resided sixty days previous
to such election, except as otherwise
provided in this Constitution or the
Constitution and laws of the United
States."
Article 8, Section 8: "The General
Assembly shall never pass any law that
will deprive any of the citizeus of this
State of the right of suffrage, except
Lr treason, murder, robbery or duel?
ling whereof the person shall have beec
duly tried and couvicted."
Section 2. Article 3. of the Constitu?
tion of the United States is as follows :
"The House of Representatives shall
be composed of members chosen every
second year by the people of the seve?
ral States, and the electors io each
State shall have the qualification
requisite for electors of the most
numerous branch of the State Legisla?
ture."
Section 1. Article 14, amendment is
in these words : "Ail persons born
"r naturalized io the United States aod
subject to the jurisdiction thereof are
Citizen? of the United States aod of
the State whereio they reside. No
State shall make or enforce any law
which shall abridge the privileges or
immunities ot citizens of tbe United
States ; nor shall any State deprive
any person of life, liberty or property,
without due process of law, nor deny
to any person within its jurisdiction the
equal protect^n of the laws.
Article 15 of the amendment to
the Constitution reads :
Section 1. The right of citizens of
the United States to vote shall not be
denied or abridged by the United States
or by any State on account of race,
color or previous condition of servi?
tude.
Section 2. The Congress shall have
power to enforce this article by appro?
priate legislation. The Congress has
given to the Circuit Court? cf the
Uoited States jurisdiction of all suits to
enforce the right of citizens of the
Uoited States to vote in the several
States.
We find now that a citizen of South
Carolina is a citizen of the United
States residing in that State. The
rights, privileges and immunities
belonging to him as a free citizen are
his as a citizen of the United States,
and do not depend upon his citizen?
ship of that State. The plaintiff.
Mills, a citizen of African desceot, is a
citizen of the United States and of
South Caroiioa By the 14th amend?
ment he has been made a citizen of
the United States, and by the 15th
amendment he is a voter io the State
in which he resides. Previous to the
? adoption of t?ese amendments the race
! to which he belongs had no rights that
the white men of this country were
bound to respect, and it was not pos?
sible for anyone belonging to it to be
a citizen of the United States. In the
Slaughter House case9 the Supreme
Court of the Uoited States, referring to
the time immediately preceding and
following the adoption of these amend?
ments, said :
"The- institution of African slavery,
aa it existed in abeut half the States
of the Uoion, and the contests pervad?
ing the public mind for many years,
between those who desired its curtail?
ment and ultimate extinction and those
who desired additional safeguards for
its security and perpetuation, culmi?
nated in the effort, on the part of tuo<t
of the States in which slavery exis-ed,
to separate from the Federal Govern?
ment and to resist its authority. This
constituted the war of the rebellion,
and whatever auxiliary causes may
have contributed to bring about this 1
war, undoubtedly thc overshadowing
and efficient cause was ATiican slavery.
''io that struggle lavery as ai
legalized social relation perished. It
perished as a necessity of thc bitter?
ness and fore?! of the conflict. When 1
the armies of freedom found them- j
selves upon thc soil of slavery they
could do rahing less than free the
poor vic?fgMvbose enforced servitude
was ?4 ?dation of the quarrel, and
whej?HW-essed in the content the. e
m WL^y proved themseUei men
d^^^F^BrHj^01"1^5' offered their eer
HH nnl I Efl
to aid io suppressing the unlawful re- !
hellion. Slavery was at an end I
wherever the Federal Government sue- j
ceeded in tha: purpose. The proclama
tioo of President Lincoln expressed sn
accomplished fact as to a large portion
of the insurrectionary districts when he
declared slavery abolished io them all.
But the war being over those who had
succeeded ia re-establishing the author?
ity of the Federal Government were
not content to permit this great Act of
Emancipation to rest on the actual re?
sults of the contest or the proclamation
of the Executive, both of which might
have been questioned in after times,
and they determined to place this main
and most valuable result in the Consti?
tution of the restored Union as one of
its fundamental articles. Hence the
13th article of amendment to that
instrument. Its two short sections
seems hardly to admit of construction,
so vigorous is their expression and so
appropriate to the purpose we have
indicated :
"1. Neither slavery nor involuntary
servitude, except as a punishment for
crime, whereof the party shall have
been duly convicted, shall exist within
the United States or any place subject
to their jurisdiction.
"2. Congress shall have power to
enforce this article by appropriate legis?
lation. * * * ? '
MTbe process of restoring to their
proper relation with the Federal
Government and with the other States
those which had sided with the rebel?
lion, undertaken under the proclama- j
tioo of President Johnson io 1865, and j
before the assembling of Congress,
developed the fact that, notwithstand?
ing the formal recognition! by those
States of the abolition of slavery, the
condition of the slave race would, with?
out further protection of the Federal
Government, be almost as bad as it was
before. Among the first Acts of legis?
lation adopted by several of the States in
the legislative bodies whioh claimed to
be in their normal relations with the
Federal Government were laws which
imposed upon the colored race onerous
disabilities and burdens, and curtailed
their rights in the pursuit of life,
liberty and property to such an exteut
that their freedom was of little value,
while they had lost the protection which
they had received from their former
owners from motives both of interest
and humanity.
"They were in some States forbidden
to appear in the towns in any other
character than menial servants. They
wrre required to reside on and cultivate
the soil without the right to purchase
or own it. There were excluded from
many occupations of gain, and were
not permitted to give testimony in the
Courts io any case where a white mau
was a party. It was said that their
lives were at the mercy of bad men,
eil her because the laws for their pro?
tection were insufficient or were not en?
forced.
These circumstances, whatever of |
falsehood or misconception may have !
been mingled with their presentation, I
forced upon the statesmen who had |
conducted the Federal Government in
safety through the crisis of the rebellion,
and who supposed that by the 13tb
article of the amendment they had se?
cured the result of their labors, the
conviction that something more was
necessary in the way of constitutional
protection to the unfortunate race who
had suffered so much. They according?
ly passed through Congress the proposi- I
tiou for the 14th amendment, aud they
declined to treat as restored to their full
participation in the government of the
Union the States which had been in in?
surrection until they ratified that article j
by a formal vote of their legislative
bodies.
Before we proceed to examine more
critically the provisions of this amend- :
meut (on which the plaintiffs in error
rely) let us complete and dismiss the
history of therecent amendments, as that
history relates to the general purpose
which pervades them all. A few years' j
experience satisfied the thoughtful men
who had been the authors of the other ;
two amendments that, notwithsanUing
the restraints of those articles on the
States, and the laws passed under the
additional powers granted to Congress,
these were inadequate for the protec?
tion of life, liberty and property, with?
out which freedom to the slaves was no
boon. They were in all those States
denied the right of suffrage. The laws
were administered by the white man
alone it was urged that a race of men
distinctively marked as was the negro,
living in the midst of another -?nd
dominant race, could never be fullv se?
cured in their person and their property
without the right of suffrage.
Hence the L5?h amendaient, which ;
declares that "the right of a citizen ";
the I nired States to vote shall not be de- j
r? i ? il or abridged by any State on
account of race, color, or previous condi?
gn of servitude." The negro having,
by the 14th amendment, been declared
to be a citizen of the United States is
thus made a voter in every State of the
Union.
We repeat, then, in the light of this
recapitulation of events, almost too re?
cent to bo called history, but which are
familiar to us ali, and on the most
casual examination of the language of
these amendments, no one can fail to
be impressed with the one pervading
purpose found io them all, lying at the
foundation of each, and without which
none of them wouM have been suggest?
ed ; we mean the freedom of the slave
race, the security and firm establish
0,4?? 0f that freedom, and the protec?
tion of the newly made freeman and
citizen from the oppressions of those
who had formerly exercised unlimited
dominion over him. It is true that
only the loth amendment, in terms,
mentions the negro by speaking of his
color and bis slavery. But it is ju?t
as true that each of the other articles
was addressed to the grievances of that
race and designed to remedy them as
the 15th.
We do not say that no one else but
the negro can share in this protec?
tion. Both the Iauguage and spirit
of these articles are to have their
fair and just weight in any question
of construction Ua4crabiedly while
negro slavery alone was in the mind
of Congress which proposed the 13th
article, it forbids any other kind of
slavery, now or hereafter. If Mexi?
can peonage or the Chinese coolie
labor system shall develop slavery of
the Mexican or Chinese race within
our territory, this amendment may
safely be trusted to make it void.
And so if other rights are assailed
by the States which properly and
necessarily fall within the protection
of these articles, that protection will
apply, though the party interested
may not be of Africa descent. But .
what we do say, and what we wish
to be understood, is that in any fair
and just construction of any section
or phase of these amendments it is
necessary to look to the purpose
which we have said was the pervad?
ing spirit of them all, the evil whic-j
they were designed to remedy and
the process of continued addition to
the Constitution until that purpose
was supposed to be accomplished as
far as constitutional law can accom?
plish it
The 1st section of the 14th article,
to which our attention is more
especially invited, ?'pens with a
definition of citizenship-not only
citizenship of the United States, but
citizenship of the States. Xo such
definition was previously found in
the Constitution, nor had any attempt
been made to define it by Act of
Congress. It had been the occasion
of much discussion in the Courts, by
the executive departments, and in
the public journals, it had been
said by eminent Judges that no man
was a citizen of the United States,
except as he was a citizen of one of
the States composing the Union.
Those, therefore, who had been born
and resided always in the District of
Columbia or in the Territories,
though within th?? United States,
were not citizens. Whether this
proposition was sound or not had
never been judicially decided. But
it had been held by this Court, in the
celebrated Dred Scott case, only a
few years before fcthe outbreak of the
civil war, that a man of African
descent, whether a slave or not, was
not and could not be a citizen of a
State or of the United States. This
decision, while it met the condemna?
tion of some of the ablest statesmen
and constitutional lawyeis of the
country, had never been overruled :
and if it was to be accepted as a
constitutional limitation of the right
of citizenship, then all the negro
race who had recently been made
freemen were still not only not citi?
zens, but were incapable of becoming
so by anything short of a:: amend?
ment to the Constitution.
To remove this difficulty primarily,
and to establish a clear and compre?
hensive definition of citizenship
which would declare what should
constitute citizenship of the United
States, and also citizenship of a State,
the first clause of the 1st section was
framed :
"All persons born or naturalized in
the United States and subject to tho
jurisdiction thereof at(; citizens ol
the United States and ol the State
wherein they reside."
The first observation we have to
make on the clause is that it puts at
rest both the questions which we
stated to have been the subject' of
differences of opinion lt declares
that persons may be citizens ol the
Highest of all in Leavening Power.-Latest U. S. Gov': Report
PrjVfcvl Baking
lyySri Powder