This would appear to have been only another way of stating that those who did have seven-eighths or more of Caucasian blood were entitled to social and political equality with the whites. But Reconstruction, as has been shown, swept this legislation out of existence, in the attempt then made to place all upon one plane of social equality, and to punish as severely as a law could be framed to, such as might be accused of any discrimination of a social nature. This preposterous piece of legislation was in its turn done away with when Reconstruction passed away, and in its place there was enacted the law which penalized marriage between whites and Negroes. In the South Carolina convention of 1895, an attempt was made to so frame the law, as to make it conform to the view held in South Carolina and Mississippi in 1865; but to this there was opposition in the shape of an amendment reading as follows: “Sec. 34. The marriage of a white person with a Negro or mulatto person who shall have _any_ Negro blood, shall be unlawful, and the parties to such marriage, upon conviction shall be punished as the General Assembly may direct.”[246] Over this amendment to the report of the committee much discussion arose and among other expressions of opinion, was one from Mr. Sligh of Newberry, that it would be better to allow any one with only one sixteenth of Negro blood to raise white, rather than force such, to raise colored children. Sentiment was, however, against his view, and the proposed amendment was accepted as above outlined. But in two weeks, after many renewals of discussion as to the wrong and injury which might result from accusations apt to be based upon a proportion so indefinite, according to press report: