_1.--That every elector shall be able to read and write, or shall own property at an assessed valuation of not less than $300._ _2.--Lacking these, he shall have been a voter in some state of the Union prior to January 1, 1867, or the son or grandson of such, and not less than twenty-one years old at the adoption of this constitution._ _3.--Every foreigner naturalized prior to January 1, 1898, shall have the right to vote without regard to other qualifications._ The purpose, which was openly and constantly avowed, was to let in every illiterate white man and to shut out every illiterate colored man, and the provision it is thought, is elastic enough for the purpose. The whole law curiously illustrates the triumph of politicians. A distinguished state senator said to the writer: "The convention is in the hands of politicians; the people are not in it." It adjourned May 12. Two members refused to sign the instrument, and a number of others were conveniently absent. Of the convention itself, one of its own members said: "I have never seen such a graveyard of political reputations." The _Times-Democrat_, probably by far the most influential democratic paper of the state, and which has fought the battle for an honest suffrage law with great ability, in its issue of May 13, makes this editorial comment: "No men ever received a greater trust than the members of the convention; and few have betrayed it worse; ... and no one doubts that the constitution would be overwhelmingly beaten if submitted to the popular vote." It also calls upon the people to overthrow it at the earliest opportunity. The new constitution has certainly come into life under bad omens. It stands condemned as unconstitutional by the two United States senators, and by the ablest democratic lawyers in Congress. The State press is almost unanimous in its opposition--some on constitutional grounds, others on account of the clause which exempts foreigners from its operation as to the educational and property requirements; and it is evident that what public sentiment demanded was an honest law based upon intelligence and property with a poll tax prerequisite. In this public sentiment there were some gratifying revelations. 1. A strong opposition to the Mississippi and South Carolina laws, and to everything that savored of fraud. 2. A general respect for the 15th amendment, not so much on account of the principle of it as because it is a part of the supreme law of the country, and as such should be observed in good faith. 3. The confession, hitherto held back, that the evils attending our elections were not due solely to ignorant colored men, but quite as much to ignorant and vicious white men, and perhaps still more to the frauds practised by the election officers and unscrupulous politicians.