Race Distinctions in American LawStephenson, Gilbert Thomas
History
Race Distinctions in American Law
Stephenson, Gilbert Thomas
African Americans -- Politics and government; Law -- United States -- History; United States -- Race relations
If the “Grandfather Clause” should be declared unconstitutional on the
ground just suggested or on any other ground, the next question would be
whether that would nullify the other sections of the suffrage laws, such
as the educational and property tests. This depends upon whether the
different sections of the laws are separable, whether the legislature or
the people would have adopted the educational and property tests, etc.,
if they had thought the “Grandfather Clause” unenforceable.[728] North
Carolina prepared for just such a contingency by inserting the following
section in its Suffrage Amendment: “That this amendment to the
Constitution is presented and adopted as one indivisible plan for the
regulation of the suffrage, with the intent and purpose to so connect
the different parts, and to make them so dependent upon each other that
the whole shall stand or fall together.”
MARYLAND AND FIFTEENTH AMENDMENT
In the preceding section it has been assumed that the Fifteenth
Amendment is an integral part of the Constitution of the United States.
Whether or not this assumption is warranted is brought into question by
a recent action of the legislature of Maryland.
As has been said earlier in this chapter, Maryland has made two
unsuccessful attempts to amend its suffrage laws in such a way as would
disfranchise a large number of the present Negro voters in that State.
The letter of the Constitution of Maryland at present restricts suffrage
to _white_ male citizens; but it has been taken for granted that the
word “white” became inoperative under the Fifteenth Amendment.
Out of the discussion of Negro suffrage in Maryland has arisen the
question whether or not the Fifteenth Amendment itself is valid. At the
last session of the legislature of that State, that of 1910, the
so-called Digges Bills were introduced and passed by both houses. The
purpose of these bills was to disfranchise all Negroes who have not
owned five hundred dollars’ worth of property for two years before their
application for registration, upon which all taxes have been paid during
those two years. This disfranchisement applied only to State and
municipal elections. The bills failed to become laws only because they
were vetoed by the Governor of the State.
Upon the failure of the Digges Bills to be passed, a constitutional
amendment[729] was drafted and approved by the required three-fifths of
all the members of both houses of the legislature, which embodied the
same features as the Digges Bills. This amendment is to be voted upon by
the people at the general election in November, 1911. This amendment
provides for the Australian ballot and for uniform election laws
throughout the State. In the event of the amendment being declared
unconstitutional, the laws now in force in Maryland are to be revived
automatically.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account