:d3;i. 
 
 m 
 
Cornell University Library 
 JK 1924.D92 
 
 The negro issue; 
 
 3 1924 014 468 395 
 
 iftntt College of iSlgricultuire 
 iSt Cornell tHnibemitp 
 
 Hibrarp 
 
The Negro I 
 
 JACOB P 
 
 
 DATE DUE 
 
 
 'f^^^ 
 
 ISSJi 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 s, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 DEMCO 38-2S 
 
 7 
 
 
 

 ' iC' 
 
 r^y 
 
THE NEGRO ISSUE. 
 
 Iij the present campaign the American people are confronted by 
 an unique issue. For the first time in the history of the country 
 a great political party has come before the voters with a proposal to 
 do an unlawful act in the name of law; a proposal to violate the Con- 
 stitution under pretense of enforcing it; a demand that the legisla- 
 tive department shall usurp the powers of the judiciary and over- 
 throw the published decisions of the Supreme Court of the United 
 States ; a demand that Congress shall summarily destroy the high- 
 est political rights of sovereign States of the TJnion, without even 
 the formality of a legal hearing for the States concerned. These 
 monstrous and revolutionary propositions are embodied in the fol- 
 lowing plank of the Eepublican National platform adopted at Chi- 
 cago June 22, 1904 : 
 
 "We favor such Congressional action as shall determine whether 
 by special discrimination the elective franchise in any State has been 
 unconstitutionally limited, and, if such is the case, we demand that 
 representation in Congress and in the electoral college shall be pro- 
 portionally reduced as directed by the Constitution of the United 
 States." 
 
 To this extraordinary proposal, evidently intended as a more 
 economical method of holding the negro vote in line than has been 
 commonly used heretofore, the ISTational Democratic Platform re- 
 plies : 
 
 "The race question has brought countless woes to this coun- 
 try. The calm wisdom of the American people should see to it that 
 it brings no more. 
 
 "To revive the dead and hateful race and sectional animosities in 
 any part of our common country means confusion, distraction of 
 business and the reopening of wounds now happily healed. North, 
 South, Bast and West have but recently stood together in line of 
 battle from the walls of Pekin to the hills of Santiago, and as 
 sharers of a common glory and a common destiny we should share 
 fraternally the common burdens. 
 
 "We therefore deprecate and condemn the Bourbon-like, selfish 
 and narrow spirit of the recent Eepublican convention at Chicago, 
 which sought to kindle anew the embers of racial and sectional 
 strife, and we appeal from it to the sober, common sense and patri- 
 otic spirit of the American people." 
 
It is indeed urgent that "the sober, common sense and patriotic 
 spirit of the American people" should be called to the consideration 
 of this question, for in addition to the revolutionary and unlawful 
 character of the action proposed, the race problem in the United 
 States, thus forced into the arena of politics by the Republican 
 party, is too serious, and the results of any ill-advised action would 
 be too far-reaching, to Justify the disposal of it as a mere side issue 
 of party preference and political prejudice. 
 
 And we of Indiana are under especial obligation to give sober and 
 sensible consideration to it, for this Eepublican proposal is an In- 
 diana conception, and has tieen forced to the front by the insistence 
 of an Indiana man. For several years past Mr. Edgar D. Crum- 
 paeker, Eepresentative in Congress from the Tenth Indiana Dis- 
 trict, apparently inspired by a desire to find some substitute for the 
 discarded "bloody shirt" issue, has persistently pressed this scheme, 
 and has at length succeeded in having it made a national issue. 
 
 Let us look for a moment at the legal status of the suffrage ques- 
 tion, for that is the central point of the whole matter. In the first 
 place it is conceded that the Constitution and laws of the United 
 States do not confer the right of suffrage on anybody. The courts 
 have so decided, and nobody questions their decision. 
 
 (Minor vs. Happersett, 21 Wallace 163; United States vs. Eeese, 
 93 U. S. 314; United States vs. Cruikshanck, 93 U. S. 544; in re 
 Kemmler, 136 U. S. 436.) 
 
 Suffrage is left by the Constitution to the control of the States, 
 and the only limitation put on them is by the fifteenth amendment, 
 which provides that "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 servitude." 
 Outside of those limits the States are left free to act, and as a result 
 there is a great variety of qualifications for suffrage. Most of the 
 States exclude idiots and lunatics, and it is commonly held that they 
 have no right to vote even when not excluded expressly, because vot- 
 ing implies an exercise of will, and they have no will. Most of the 
 States exclude convicts, but there is a wide variety of provisions as 
 to the crimes for which conviction shall disqualify the voter. Kan- 
 sas, Michigan and Virginia exclude duelists. Idaho excludes biga- 
 mists and polygamists. Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, Missouri, 
 iSTew Hampshire, New Jersey, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, 
 and West Virginia exclude paupers. A number of States, North 
 and South, exclude persons who have not paid their poll, or capita- 
 tion tax, and a few require the payment of all taxes. But no State 
 has made any exclusion on account of "race, color or previous con- 
 dition of servitude," excepting that California, Nevada and Ore- 
 gon all exclude Chinamen. There is no Southern State whose con- 
 
stitution or laws provide for the exclusion of a negro voter on ac- 
 count of "race, color or previous condition of servitude," and there 
 is no Southern State in which negroes do not vote. Louisiana and 
 Mississippi are considered strong examples of negro disfranchise- 
 ment, and yet it was admitted in the debate in the House in 1901 
 on this question that in the first election in Mississippi under its 
 new constitution there were 16,334 negro voters, out of a total of 
 125,57'1, or 12 per cent, of the total vote ; and at the first election in 
 Louisiana under its new constitution there were G3,-103 negro voters 
 out of a total of 136,535, or 45 per cent, of the total vote. (Cong. 
 Eecord, 2d Sess. 56th Cong., Vol. 1, p. 602.) The chief mode by 
 which the masses of the negro voters are excluded in the Southern 
 States is by tlie provision of an educational qualification for suf- 
 frage. The constitution of Mississippi requires that the voter shall 
 "he able to read any section of the constitution of this State; or he 
 shall be able to understand the same when read to him, or give a 
 reasonable interpretation thereof." The constitution of Louisiana 
 provides that the voter shall be "able to read and write, and shall 
 demonstrate his ability to do so, when he applies for registration, 
 by making, under oath administered by the registration officer or his 
 deputy, written application therefor in the English language or his 
 mother tongue." The constitution of North Carolina provides that 
 every person presenting himself for registration shall be able to 
 read and write any section of the constitution in the English lan- 
 guage." The constitution of South Carolina admits anyone "who 
 can both read and write any section of the constitution." Virginia 
 requires the voter to "make application to register in his own hand 
 writing, without aid, suggestion or memorandum in the presence of 
 the registration officers." Alabama admits on ability to read and 
 write "any article of the Constitution of the United States in the 
 English language." 
 
 In other words, in any Southern State any man, white or black, 
 can be admitted as a voter if he can read and write, and it is only 
 the illiterate who are excluded. And even of these certain classes 
 are admitted. Louisiana, South Carolina and Alabama admit the 
 illiterate, white or black, who pays taxes on $300 worth of property. 
 And Virginia, Alabama and Mississippi admitted to their original 
 and permanent registration anyone who had served in the time of 
 war in the army or navy of the L^nited States or of the Confederate 
 States. 
 
 These educational qualifications are no more stringent than those 
 in force in the Northern States. Massachusetts adopted an educa- 
 tional qualification half a century ago, and its provision has been 
 adopted by Maine and California, all three excluding any person 
 "who shall not be able to read the constitution in the English Ian- 
 
guage and write his name." Delaware has had the same educa- 
 tional provision since ]897. Connecticut excludes those who are 
 not "able to read in the English language any article of the consti- 
 tution or any section of the statutes of this State." Wyoming re- 
 quires that the voter shall be "able to read the constitution of the 
 State,'' and the Supreme Court of Wyoming has ruled that this 
 means that he shall be able to read it in the English language. 
 (Rasmussen vs. Baker, 50 Pae. Eep., p. 819.) None of these North- 
 ern States makes any exception on account of owning property or 
 of military service, or ability to read in other than the English lan- 
 guage. 
 
 It is on account of these educational qualifications that the reduc- 
 tion of representation of the Southern States is demanded, and the 
 argument employed is this: The fourteenth amendment of the 
 Federal constitution provides : "Wien the right to vote at any elec- 
 tion for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of 
 the, United States, Eepresentatives in Congress, the executive and 
 judicial officers of the State, or the members of the Legislature 
 thereof, is denied to any citizens of such State being twenty-one years 
 of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, 
 except for participation in rebellion or other crime, the basis of rep- 
 resentation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the 
 number of male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citi- 
 zens twenty-one years of age in such State." Illiteracy is neither 
 "participation in rebellion" nor "other crime,'' and, therefore, rep- 
 resentation should be reduced if illiterates are excluded. 
 
 ■This looks plausible, but until Mr. Crumpacker started this agita- 
 tion nobody pretended that an educational qualification for suffrage 
 was either a denial or an abridgement of the right to vote, for the 
 simple reason that any illiterate otherwise qualified who desires to 
 become a voter can qualify himself by learning to read and write if 
 he be not an idiot or a liTnatic. I know of no higher authority on 
 constitutional law than Judge Thomas M. Cooley of Michigan ; and 
 not only is his reputation established as an able jurist, but also as 
 a man who could not be suspected of conniving at any system of op- 
 pressing the negro. In his work entitled, "The General Principles 
 of Constitutional Law in the United States of America,"' at pao-e 
 375, discussing the fourteenth amendment, he says : 
 
 "To require the payment of capitation tax is no denial of suf- 
 frage ; it is demanding only the preliminary performance of public 
 duty, and may be classed as may also presence at the polls with reo- 
 istration or the observance of any other preliminary to insure fair- 
 ness and protect against fraud. Nor can it be said that to require 
 ability to read is any denial of suffrage. To refuse to receive one's 
 vote because he was born in some particular country rather than 
 
elsewhere, or because of his color, or because of any natural quality 
 or peculiarity which it would be impossible for him to overcome, is 
 plainly a denial of suffrage. Bat ability to read is something within 
 the power of any man ; it is notdifficult to attain it,and it is no hard- 
 ship to require it. On the contrary the requirement only by indi- 
 rection compels one to appropriate a personal benefit he might other- 
 wise neglect. It denies to no man the suffrage, but the privilege is 
 freely tendered to all, subject only to a condition that i:^ beneficial 
 in its performance and light in its biarden." 
 
 But furthermore, the question of the validity of the provisions of 
 the Mississippi constitution and the statutes enacted in aid of it, 
 was taken before the Supreme Court of the United States in 1897, 
 and the court upheld them. (Williams vs. Mississippi, 170 U. S. 
 p. 220.) The court says : "The question presented is, are the pro- 
 visions of tlie constitution of the State of ]\Iis;-issippi, and the laws 
 enacted to enforce the same repugnant to the Fourteenth Amend- 
 ment of the Constitution of the United States? That amendment 
 and its effects upon the colored race have been, considered Ijy this 
 court in a number of cases, and it has been uniformly held that the 
 Constitution of the T'nited States as amended, fori)i(ls, so far as 
 civil and political rights are concerned, discriminations by the gen- 
 eral government, or l)y the States, against any citizen because of his 
 race." And after considering the case at length the court held that 
 '"The constitution of jMississippi, and its statutes, do not on their 
 ■face discriminate between the races, and it has not been shown that 
 their actual administration was evil, only that evil was possible un- 
 der them." The new constitution of "Mississippi, thus passed upon 
 by the Supreme Court, not only provided the educational qualifica- 
 tion above mentioned, but also required that the person applying for 
 registration should produce evidence that he had paid all taxes as- 
 sessed against him for two years previous; that he had never been 
 convicted of "bribery, burglary, theft, arson, obtaining money or 
 'goods under false pretenses, perjury, forgery, embezzlement or big- 
 amy," and that he had lived in the same election district for one 
 year; and the registration system required affidavit to these facts, 
 and also left large discretionary power in the registration boards. 
 It was expressly charged, and supported Ijy affidavit, that the whole 
 system, "is but a scheme on the part of the framers of that constitu- 
 tion to abridge the suffrage of the colored electors of the State of 
 Mississippi on account of previous condition of servitude," that it 
 "has abridged the suffrage,'' and that "since the adoption of the said 
 objectionable laws there has been no reduction of said representation 
 in Congress." 
 
 To this the Supreme Court replied : "There is an allegation of 
 the purpose of the convention to disfranchise citizens of the colored 
 
race, but with this we have no concern unless the purpose is executed 
 by the constitution or laws or by those who administer them." _ 
 
 Furthermore it was shown to the Supreme Court that the ultimate 
 purpose of the convention to disfranchise the negro race was so no- 
 torious that the Supreme Court of Mississippi had taken judicial 
 notice of it in a remarkable suit for the enforcement of a levy on 
 property, formerly exempt, for the collection of poll tax. (EatlifE, 
 Sheriff, vs. Beale, 20, So. Rep. p. 865.) The Mississippi court an- 
 nounced in its decision that the poll tax "was primarily intended by 
 the framers of the constitution as a clog upon the franchise, and 
 secondarily and incidentally only as a means of revenue. It is evi- 
 dent that the more the payment of the tax is made compulsory the 
 greater will be the number by whom it will be paid, and therefore 
 the less effectual will be the clause for the purpose it was intended." 
 And so it held that this levy was illegal. It will be noticed that the 
 principle announced is the same as that of the protective tariff tax, 
 which is levied not for revenue, but to prevent the importation of 
 foreign goods. 
 
 The following language from this decision of the Mississippi 
 court was brought to the notice of the Supreme Court of the United 
 States, and is quoted by it in its decision : 
 
 "Within the field of permissiblo action under the limitations im- 
 posed by the Federal Constitution, the convention swept the circle 
 of expedients to obstruct the exercise of suffrage by the negro race. 
 
 "By reason of its previous condition of servitude and dependence, 
 this race had acquired or accentuated certain peculiarities of habit, 
 of temperament and of character, which clearly distinguished it as 
 a race from the whites. A patient, docile people, but careless, land- 
 less, migratory within narrow limits, without forethought; and its 
 criminal members given to furtive offenses, rather than the robust 
 crimes of the whites. Restrained by the Federal Constitution from 
 discriminating against the negro race, the convention discriminates 
 against its characteristics, and the offenses to which its criminal 
 members are prone." 
 
 But, taking all this as true, the Supreme Court of the United 
 States says : 
 
 "But nothing tangible can be deduced from this. If weakness 
 were to be taken advantage of, it was to be done witliin the field of 
 permissible action under the limitations imposed by the Federal 
 Constitution and the means of it were the alleged characteristics of 
 the negro race, not the administration of the law by the officers of 
 the State. Besides, the operation of the Constitution and laws is 
 not limited by their language or effects to one race. They reach 
 weak and vicious white men as well as weak and vicious black men 
 and whatever is sinister in their intention, if anything, can be pre- 
 
vented by both races, by the exertion of that duty which voluntarily 
 pays taxes and refrains from crime." 
 
 In other words a prescribed qualification for suffrage that bears 
 more heavily on one race than another, and was imposed for that 
 reason, is no denial or abridgement of suffrage so long as any person, 
 of any race, can attain that qualification by his voluntary effort. 
 
 With this decision before him, and admitting in debate that he 
 was familiar with it, Mr. Crumpacker, as a member of the census 
 committee, at the second session of the Fifty-sixth Congress made a 
 minority report (No. 2,130), in which he proposed to reduce the 
 representation of the States of Mississippi, Louisiana, North Caro- 
 lina and South Carolina three members each on the ground of de- 
 nial or abridgement of sufl'rage in those States, and also submitted 
 a bill for that purpose. (House bill No. 12,222.) Of the thirteea 
 members of the census committee no one joined with him. There 
 was some discussion of it, cliiefly of the "buncombe" order, and it 
 reached a vote only on a motion of Mr. Crumpacker to recommit the 
 apportionment bill for amendment in line with his proposal, which 
 was defeated by a vote of 136 to 94 in a Eepublican House of Eepre- 
 sentatives. But Mr. Crumpacker was not discourged. He has re- 
 newed his proposition by bill and. resolution at every session of Con- 
 gress since then and with equal lack of success. This year he ap- 
 pealed from Congress to the Kepublican national convention, or 
 rather to the little circle at Washington which prepared the Eepub- 
 lican platform, and sent it to Chicago with President Eoosevelt's or- 
 ders for its adoption, and his appeal received favorable considera- 
 tion. 
 
 'Consider the cold-blooded atrocity of this Ecpublican program. 
 Tt demands "such Congressional action as shall determine whether by 
 special discrimination the elective franchise in any State has been 
 unconstitutionally limited." Why should not the courts determine 
 it? There are two reasons: First, the courts have already deter- 
 mined it, and second, Congress can be induced to do things for polit- 
 ical ends that courts will not do. Everybody knows what a Con- 
 gressional inquiry as to anything of a political character means, even 
 when the inquiry is within the legitimate scope of its powers. The 
 result is simply a matter of "Who has the majority ?"' and "Is it our 
 scoundrel or your scoundrel?'' Is it possible that any sane man can 
 favor this Congressional usurpation of judicial power in so moment- 
 ous a matter as this ? Is it possible that any can favor making such 
 a precedent for arbitrary and unconstitutional exercise of power,, 
 even if there were any possibility of a conscientious decision? 
 
 Our Eepublican opponents profess fairness. Their "Campaign 
 Text Book," at page 420, declares "It is a mistake to suppose that 
 this plank refers to the Southern States alone. Many other States 
 
10 
 
 exclude from their electorate substantial portions of their male citi- 
 zens twenty-one years of age, notably the States of Massachusetts, 
 Connecticut and California. It is clearly just that any reduction 
 under the fourteenth amendment which Congress may adopt should 
 apply equally to all of the States of the union." Aye, aye, it is just, 
 but what man imagines that Congress would do it? When did any 
 Republican who has championed this mea.sure ever propose to do 
 anything of the kind? Did Mr. Crumpacker do it? Never. 
 
 Wlien he submitted his report and bill in 1901 he had oppor- 
 tunity. The apportionment bill adopted in that 3'ear was bassd on a 
 ratio of one representative for every 194,183 of population, and on 
 that ratio California was entitled to seven Eepresentatives, with a 
 surplus of 124,230, for which she was given an additional Repre- 
 sentative. But j\Ir. Crumpacker's bill was based on a ratio of one 
 Representative for 199,374 of population, and under that ratio Cali- 
 fornia was entitled to seven Representatives, witli a surplus of only 
 87,866; and Mr. Crumpacker's bill gave California an additional 
 member for that minority fraction although by the census of 1900 
 California had 58,959 illiterat<'s over ten years of age, and 45,753 
 Chinese, all of whom are excluded from suffrage by the Constitution 
 of California. He gave Connecticut an additional R?presentative 
 for a surplus of 110,859, although Connecticut had 42,973 illiterates 
 over ten years of age. He gave Massachusetts foiirteen Representa- 
 tives, although she had a surplus of only 14,110 above the quota for 
 fourteen Representatives, and had 134,043 illiterates over ten years 
 of age. That is the sort of justice that is dispensed l)y Congress 
 when it acts judicially, and no intelligent person looks for anything 
 else. How can any man favor submitting a judicial question of 
 such moment to such a tribunal, wlien the highest court in the land 
 has already passed on the question, and the evident purpose of sub- 
 mitting the matter to Congress is to override that decision? 
 
 What excuse is offered for this proposal? Merely that the South- 
 ern States ha\'e done indirectly what the Fourteenth and Fifteenth 
 Amendments prohibit them from doing directly. I do not desire to 
 be unfair or to minimize the action of those States. I do not ques- 
 tion in the least what was conceded by the Supreme Court of the 
 United States in the Williams case, and by the Supreme Court of 
 Mississippi in the Beale case, that the primary object of the South- 
 ern legislation was to exclude the ignorant and criminal negroes. 
 But they kept within the law in doing it, and they had good reason 
 for doing 'it. 1 ask no stronger statement of that reason than the 
 one made by Mr. Crumpacker himself in his report of 1901. In 
 discussing the reconstruction laws (p. 152) he says: 
 
 "By these provisions about a million men, largely unfitted for 
 the responsibilities of suffrage, were given the ballot, and it is no re- 
 
11 
 
 flection upon them to say that in a large degree they became the 
 helpless tools of demagogues and political intriguers, and in most of 
 the Southern States was inaugurated a reign of political corruption 
 and misgovernment' that constitutes one of the most shameful pages 
 in the history of the States. Men of the South — men of intelli- 
 gence and character who had at heart the welfare of their States — 
 looked with dismay upon the wreck and ruin to their institutions 
 that was being perpetrated by this irresponsible flood of ignorance 
 anl illiteracy. As might have been expected, there was reaction, 
 and intelligent citizens set about to devise some method of checking 
 the saturnalia of political corruption and mismanagement. They 
 felt justified in adopting methods for the protection of their affairs 
 that were condemned by the people of other sections of the country. 
 There was resort first to force, fraud and intimidation, and the 
 methods gradually refined with time and experience through the 
 tissue-ballot stage until they have culminated in systems so carefully 
 and ingeniously contrived that elections can be controlled by arti- 
 fice; or in enactment of laws that practically disfranchise the col- 
 ored citizen without conflicting with the letter of the Constitution." 
 
 ''This irresponsible flood of ignorance and illiteracy," admits Mr. 
 C'rumpacker ; and vet he would punish these people for establishing 
 an educational basis for suffrage. I submit to you, my friends, that 
 there is not one Northern white man in a thousand who blames the 
 Southerners for what they did, or who would not have done as much 
 under like circumstances. No sane body of Americans is going to 
 submit to "a saturnalia of political corruption and mismanage- 
 ment" if there is any possible way to avoid it. Why even the Re- 
 publican party has done some d'sfraneh;s!ng to get rid of negro dom- 
 ination. Do you know why it is that in all this land of ours there 
 is less than ten miles square — the District of Columbia — that does 
 not have local self-government ? After the war the negroes flocked 
 in there and after the adoption of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth 
 Amendments they had the same political rights as the whites. In 
 1870 one-third of the population were negroes, and a much larger 
 proportion of them than of the whites were voti^rs. By 1874 the 
 conditions had become so bad and the local "Boss" Shepherd govern- 
 ment was so rotten, that the decent people petitioned Congress to 
 take away the right of self-government, and a Eepublican Congress 
 did it. And with the population as it is there has never since been 
 any demand from the people to have self-government restored to 
 them. When Americans are willing to surrender self-government, 
 it must be to escape something that is pretty bad. 
 
 But, it may be objected by somebody that there was no danger 
 of "negro domination" in some of the Southern Stales. Mr. Crum- 
 ]tacker made this point also. He says : "Only about 33 per cent. 
 
12 
 
 of the population of North Carolina is colored, and with the boasted 
 superiority of the white man it would seem that there is small dan- 
 ger of negro supremacy." True enough, as to State government. 
 But in North Carolina, as in most of the Southern States, the masses 
 of the negroes are gathered in what is known as "the black belt," 
 and local misgovernment is quite as intolerable as State misgovern- 
 ment. Do you know what led to the adoption of the educational 
 qualification for suffrage in North Carolina? In 1896 local condi- 
 tions became so bad in eastern North Carolina that a mass-meeting 
 of over 8,000 people assembled at Goldsboro on October 28th and 
 determined to abolish local negro rule. They adopted resolutions 
 declaring that "there are now in office in counties and towns of east- 
 em North Carolina nearly 1,000 negroes, there being nearly 300 
 negro magistrates alone. That as a consequence of turning these 
 local offices over to the negroes bad government has followed, homes 
 have been invaded, and the safety of women endangered. Business 
 has been paralyzed and property rendered less valuable. The 
 majesty of the law has been disregarded and lawlessness encouraged. 
 In many localities men no longer rely upon the officers of the law for 
 protection, for they are known to be incompetent or corrupt. Con- 
 ditions have become so intolerable in these communities that they 
 can no longer be tolerated or endured." On November 9 th over 
 1,000 people assembled at Wilmington and declared that "the time 
 has passed for the intelligent citizens of this community, owning 95 
 per cent, of the property and paying taxes in like proportion to be 
 ruled by negroes." Prom these extracts it will be seen that there 
 was actual "negro domination" in North Carolina, and it is no cause 
 for wonder that the people determined to be rid of it. 
 
 But complaint is made that the Sotithern States made discrimina- 
 tions — that they excluded the ignorant blacks, but did not exclude 
 the ignorant whites — while the Northern States made no discrimi- 
 nation whatever. This is only partially true. What the Southeni 
 States aimed at was to exclude the ignorant blacks without exclud- 
 ing the ignorant whites who were then voters, and no Northern State 
 has adopted an educational qualification without exempting from it 
 all who were voters at the time. We have heard a great deal about 
 "the grandfather clause," so much that one would naturally imagine 
 that it was in force in all the Southern States. In reality it exists 
 in but one of them — Louisiana — and its application there has been 
 grossly misrepresented. Louisiana held her constitutional conven- 
 tion in 1898, but the grandfather clause does not apply to grand- 
 children of men who were voters in 1898. In order to exclude the 
 negroes it was necessary to carry the point of exemption from the 
 educational qualification back to January 1, 1867, and the exemp- 
 tion was of those who were voters at that time — thirty-one years 
 
13 
 
 earlier — and of their sons and grandsons. There were of course 
 numhers of voters in Louisiana in 1898 whose grandfathers had 
 been voters prior to 1867, hut whose fathers had not, and the phrase- 
 ology was needed to cover their cases. Of course, it carried the ex- 
 emption beyond 1898 as to new giandchildren. Under the average 
 of longevity, as is established by mortality tables, it is certain 
 that the large majority of these grandchildren will have come of age 
 within ten years after 1898, though of course there may be some 
 stragglers coming in fifty years later. This rule of expectancy 
 seems to have been adopted in North Carolina, which exempts "lin- 
 eal descendants" of those who were voters on January 1, 1867, but 
 limits that exemption at January 1, 1908, after which date 'all new- 
 voters, black or white, stand on the same footing. 
 
 These two are tl:c extreme limits of discrimination. In Virginia 
 the two races have been on equal footing as to new voters since Jan- 
 uary 1, 1904; in Alabama since January 1, 1903; and in Mississippi 
 and South Carolina since 1898. 
 
 But some Eepublicans say to me : "It is all right for the South 
 to shut out the ignorant negroes; I don't blame them at all. I 
 would do the same thing. But if they don't let the negroes vote 
 representation should be cut down. It isn't fair that a voter in the 
 South should have more power than a voter m the North.'' A fav- 
 orite way of putting this argument is that used by Speaker Cannon 
 at Terre Haute a few evenings ago, September 16, 1904. He said, 
 as reported in the Indianapolis News : 
 
 "The States of Arkansas, South Carolina, Mississippi, Louisiana 
 and Georgia together have forty members of the national House of 
 Eepresentatives, elected by a total vote of 160,000 while four dis- 
 tricts in Indiana, the Ninth, Seventh, Sixth and Fifth, elect their 
 representatives in Congress by a vote of 191,000." 
 
 That is the cheapest kind of cheap humbug ; and nobody knows it 
 better than your Uncle Joseph G. Cannon. In those States of Arkan- 
 sas, South Carolina, Mississippi, Louisiana and Georgia as shown by 
 the Eepublican census of 1900, there is a voting population of 1,- 
 211,960 men, exclusive of illiterates, all of whom could have voted 
 for the forty congressmen if they had wanted to. Mr. Cannon is 
 simply working the old trick of comparing the vote in States that 
 are all one waj^^ politically, with the vote in a close State, which is 
 always much heavier. You do not need to go to the South for illus- 
 tration of that. In the year 1900 Indiana cast 664,094 votes out of 
 a voting population of 720,200. The 664,094 people who voted 
 elected thirteen congressmen, or an average of 51,084 votes to the 
 congressman.' In the same year Massachusetts cast 414,801 votes 
 out of a voting population of 843,456. But the 414,801 people who 
 voted in Massachusetts elected fourteen congressmen, or an average 
 
14 
 
 of 29,G25 votes to the congressman. In the same year Maine cast 
 105,720 votes out of a voting population of 217,663; and the 105,- 
 720 persons who voted elected'four congressmen, or an average of 
 26,430 votes to the congressman Both of these States have an 
 educational basis for suffrage, and by Mr. Cannon's logic their repre- 
 sentation ought to be reduced one-half. If you want an extreme 
 case take Nevada, which had a voting population of 17,710, out of 
 which it excludes over 1,000 Chinamen. (There were 1,352 Chi- 
 nese in Nevada, over sixth-sevenths of whom were adult males, the 
 proportion in the United States being 103,00(; Chinamen of voting 
 age out of a total Chinese population of 119,050.) But Nevada 
 cast only 10,196 votes, and those 10,196 people who voted elected a 
 member of Congress, besides the two Senators and three pre^idential 
 electors. In other words, so far as national government is con- 
 cerned, one voter in Nevada has fifteen times as much power as a 
 voter, in Indiana. 
 
 But there is another reason why the vote i.< small in these South- 
 ern States. Every one of them requires the \'()ter, black or white, 
 to have paid his poll tax before he is allowed to vote, and the poll 
 tax is from $1 up, and goes into the common school fund. Of 
 course voters are not in demand in these States, and the political 
 parties do not pay their poll taxes for them, as is sometimes done in 
 Pennsylvania, or hold out other inducements, as is too commonly 
 the case in close Northern States There is not a man in Indiana 
 who has any acquaintance with politics, who does not know that if 
 in this State the voter had to pay $1 or more of taxes before he could 
 vote, and did not receive $2 or more for voting, there would be a 
 "disfranchisement" in Indiana that would knock I'ncle Joe Can- 
 non's statistics silly. 
 
 But the essential point in tliis connection is tbat representation in 
 the United States is not based on the vote, and never has been. In- 
 deed no sane statesman ever advocated tbat it should be, because it 
 is too fluctuating a basis. When the Union was formed no two 
 States had the same basis of suffrage, or of re]iresentation in their 
 Legislatures, and the Federal constitution left the matter of suf- 
 frage to the States providing that the qualifications for voters for 
 Congressmen should be the same in each State as the State required 
 for voters for members of its most numerous legislative house. It 
 put representation and direct taxation on the basis of population, 
 allowing the slave States representation for three-fifths of their 
 slaves, who, of course, did not vote — and in fact negroes and mul- 
 latoes were excluded from suffrage in nearly all the Northern States 
 until the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments were adopted and 
 representation was put on the exclusive basis of population. 'And 
 that is the basis it should be put on if there is any truth in the 
 
15 
 
 maxim tliat "Taxation without representation is tyrannj'," for not 
 only are direct taxes proportioned to population, but also indirect 
 taxes, both tariff and internal revenue, are practically the same, be- 
 cause they are paid by the consumer. And in taxation as in all 
 other governmental matters, the Congressman repressnts all the 
 people of his district, whether they are voters or not — the vcomen, 
 the children, tlie insane, the paupers, the convicts — all of these look 
 to him to protect their interests as wdl as those of the voters — so 
 much so that in some States vs^omcn are allowed to vole. 
 
 But my friends, in addition to the illegality and unconstitution- 
 ality of this proposition, there arc two reasons why tlie people of' 
 Indiana, and of the whole country, should stand against it. The 
 first is that it is an unwise step in the solution of the race problem, 
 and that is one of the most serious problems that this country has. 
 In what I say on this subject I wish it to be understood that I am 
 no mere ''nigger hater." I m^vn- had the slightest syrhpathy with 
 slavery. I believe it was a crime against mankind for which the' 
 whole country was more or less responsible, and for which the whole 
 country has alread)' been terribly punished. The end of that pun- 
 ishment has not been reached, and possibly the worst may be yet to 
 come. 1 do not wonder that, in discussing this quci^tion, Thomas 
 Jefferson said, "I tremble for my country when I reflect that G-od is 
 just." I wonder only that the masses of his countrymen did not see 
 it in the same light. And this problem is not one that concerns 
 the negro alone nr the Soutli alone. The people of Indiana, and of 
 this city, are beginning to reali.zc that it is a matter of s?rious con- 
 cern to them, and one that calls for the fullest exercise of that 
 "sober common sense and patriotic spirit'' for which the Democratic 
 platform asks. 
 
 Furthermore, I was educated at a Quaker college, in years shortly 
 following the civil war, and I think there was no plea for the negro 
 with which I was not made familiar. I favored negro suffrage con- 
 scientiously because I believed ;t would have the effect of elevating 
 the race, as it had done with otlier races. But in the light of ex- 
 perience since then I am fully convinced that it has had, on the 
 whole, exactly the opposite effect; that negro suffrage as adopted in 
 this country Jias been a failure — a most woeful mistake. 
 
 It is the usual course to offer statistics in proof of this, but I do 
 not care to go into that argument. To anyone who may be inter- 
 ested in it, I commend the book, "The Plantation Negro as a Free- 
 man," by Philip- A. Bruce ; "The Negi'o in .^.frica and America," 
 being Vol. 3, No. 2 of the publications of tlie American Economic 
 Association, by Joseph Alexander Tillinghast ; and "Negroes in the 
 United States" being Bulletin No. 8, for the current year of the 
 Census Bureau. 
 
16 
 
 As to statistics I will say only that their testimony everywhere is 
 similar. In this city the best statistical showing for the negro was 
 under the administration of Mayor Bookwalter, and certainly no 
 one can claim that there was any undue severity towards the crimi- 
 nal negro in those two years. And yet, in the year 1902, with a cen- 
 sus population of 169,164, of which 15,931 or 9 per cent, were 
 negroes, the police records show that out of a total of 7,640 arrests, 
 1,810 or 24 per cent, were negroes. 
 
 Of course this does not mean that all negroes are criminals or bad 
 citizens. It applies only to the masses. I have met numbers of 
 colored men, and have had the misfortune to become acquainted 
 with a number of "white niggers." There are bad people in every 
 race. But I am dealing only with averages, and there could be no 
 stronger testimony on this point than that of respectable colored 
 men themselves. Why, we had in this city only a few weeks ago a 
 national convention of the Negro Business Men's League, which was 
 devoted especially to showing the progress of the negro race. And 
 among the achievements there dwelt upon nothing was given more 
 prominence than the organization of the Afro- American Realty Com- 
 pany, with headquarters in Broadway, New York City. In an inter- 
 view published in the Indianapolis News, of September 2, 1904, 
 Mr. Philip A. Payton, jr., general manager of this company, ex- 
 plained its purposes as follows : 
 
 "No race-loving negro objects to living among his own people, 
 providing they be respectable, but the curse of negro colonies lies in 
 the fact that 99 per cent, of the white owners and agents regard all 
 negroes as being alike. 
 
 "What is the result of this?- Living to the respectable colored 
 family has been made almost unbearable. They are disturbed at 
 night after retiring from a hard day's work by the carousing, curs- 
 ing and fighting of the low-class, shiftless negro, who has slept awav 
 the day and comes out at night to work his evil. 
 
 "How to rear children so that they will become virtuous and re- 
 spectable amid such environments is indeed a problem. They are 
 surrounded while at their play in the streets, and even in their verv 
 houses by all manner of degrading scenes and things. These neigh- 
 borhoods are allowed fairly to run over with all kinds of houses of 
 ill repute. For some reason, I know not what, the police allow these 
 houses to flourish in these districts, while in white neighborhoods 
 they stamp them out. How any fair-minded person, be he white or 
 black, can blame the negro for trying to change these conditions, for 
 trying to make it possible for respectable, law-abiding negroes to 
 live in respectable, law-abiding neighborhoods, I am at a loss to 
 know. 
 
 "In New York we are leasing and buying flats and houses in re- 
 
17 
 
 spectable localities for our morally clean and progressive people. 
 An opportunity is being given them, and this should be done in all 
 cities." 
 
 Blamo the respectable negro for his desire to get away from the 
 masses of his race? Certainly not. What the whites object to — 
 and the objection is not on party lines — is that if respectable negroes 
 come into a neighborhood the others will probably follow. And 
 where could you find any stronger testimony to the bad citizenship 
 and undesirable character as neighbors o f the masses of the negroes 
 than in this colored man's statement ? And the recogftition of these 
 facts is universal. If there were any place where you would ex- 
 pect the whites to welcome the negro it is in the Eopublican political 
 clubs; but, as you all know, no negro crosses the threshold of the 
 Columbia Club or the Marion Club except as a hired servant. But 
 this is not the worst feature of the situation. Suffrage has debased 
 the negro, on the average, instead of elevating him. It has given 
 him false ideas of citizensbip. It has made him insolent and quar- 
 relsome instead of self-respecting. It has turned his ambition to 
 small polities instead of to earning of a living. It has created the 
 delusion that civil equality means equal license instead of equal re- 
 sponsibility as a citizen. And the- truth of this does not rest on sta- 
 tistics. It is shown by a simple ftict that is known to every one who 
 has eyes to see and ears to hear. The worst negroes are those of 
 the younger generation. Test it on any line yoy. will and you will 
 find it true. On the line of industry, they wijl not work if they 
 can avoid it. On the line of thrift, they spend ajl they can get hold 
 of. On the law-abiding life, they furnish most of the negro crimi- 
 nals. Remember, I speak of averages, not of exceptions, and if you 
 doubt the truth of my remarks walk up Indiana ave. any bright day 
 and note the crowds of young negro loafers in front of tbe saloons 
 and other resorts. There is no other part of the city, among any 
 other class of population, where you will find such a proportion of 
 young, able-bodied men using their time in such vays. 
 
 With this result of thirty years of negro sufi-'rage before you, is it 
 wise to extend that experiment ? Is it wise to brgak over the safe- 
 guards of the Constitution and punish States whiqh say to the negro, 
 "Before you vote you must show some fitness for pitizcnship. You 
 must 1-earn to read and write, and you must abstain from crime." 
 
 Understand that I refer merely to what would be the result if this 
 Crumpacker construction of the Fourteenth Amendment were 
 adopted, and not to what the law is. Indeed, m&ny lawyers hold 
 that this clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is annulled by the 
 Fifteenth Amendment, so far as the exclusion of the negro is con- 
 cerned, because you cannot at one and the same time hold that the 
 exclusion is void under the Fifteenth Amendment, and punish for 
 
18 
 
 the void act under the Fourteenth Amendment. The inconsistency 
 is the same that was recognized- by the Supreme Court of the United 
 States in the case brought to test the constitutionality of the Ala- 
 bama exclusion of the negro. (Giles vs. Harris, 189 U. S. p. 475.) 
 In that case the plaintiff claimed that he and other negroes had been 
 excluded from registration in violation of the Federal Constitution, 
 and asked for an order on the registrars for admission. The Su- 
 preme Court in refusing the order (p. 48G) says : "The plaintiff 
 alleges' that tlie A\hole registration scheme of the Alabama constitu- 
 tion is a fraud" upon the Constitution of the United States and asks 
 US' to declare it void. But of course he could not maintain a bill for 
 a mere declaration in the air. He does not try to do so, but asks to 
 be registered as a party qualified under the void instrument. If we 
 accept the conclusion which it is the chief purpose of the bill to 
 maintain, how can we make the court a party to the unlawful scheme 
 by accepting it and adding another voter to its fraudulent lists?'" 
 
 And on the same ground, how can Congress accept an exclusion 
 of the negro and become a party to it by reducing representation in 
 proportion to the negro population, when sxicli exclusion is declared 
 to be void by the Fifteenth Amendment ? 
 
 It cannot be questioned that the Eepublican leaders are willing to 
 take this course. They are ready to throw the negro overboard, and 
 take compensation in a reduction of representation in the South, for 
 they say expressly in' their platform that if the franchise is "uncon- 
 stitutionally limited" the representation shall be reduced. Their 
 proposal is to let the claimed constitutional right of the negro go, 
 and take the political advantage in place of it. Even if the pro- 
 posal were legal and constitutional, what would be said to such a 
 proceeding by Charles Sumner, George W. Julian or any of the old- 
 time Eepublicans who advocated negro suffrage from principle? 
 What would they say^enforce the Constitution if it is violated, or 
 let it be violated and cut down representation ? Xo one can doubt 
 their answer, and no one can doubt any man's answer, if he wishes 
 to support the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. Blaine recognized that the Fifteenth Amendment annulled 
 this provision of the Fourteenth Amendment so far as the exclusion 
 of the negro was concerned, though he seemed to think. it mio-ht 
 apply to other exclusions which he says were not considered' at*all 
 at the time of its adoption. In his "Twenty Years in Conoress" 
 ("Vol. 2, p. 418) speaking of the Fourteenth Amendment, he siU's ■" 
 
 "Its prime object was to correct the wrongs which mio-ht be en- 
 acted in the South, and the correction proposed was direct and un- 
 "mistakable, viz.: That the Nation would exclude the neo-ro from 
 the basis of apportionment wherever the State should excfude him 
 from the right of suffrage. When, therefore, the nation liy subse- 
 
IS) 
 
 quent change in its constitution declared that the State shall not 
 exclude the negro from the rigi.it of suffrage it neutralized and sur- 
 rendered the contingent right before held, to exclude him from the 
 basis of apportionment. Congress is thug plainly deprived by the 
 Mfteenth Amendment of certain powers over representation in the 
 South, which it previously possessed under the provisions of the 
 Fourteenth Amendment. Before the adoption of the Fifteenth 
 Amendment, if a State should exclude the negro from suffrage, the 
 next step would be for Congress to exclude the negro from the basis 
 of apportionment. After the adoption of the Fifteenth Amendment 
 if a State should exclude the negro from suffrage, the next step 
 would be for the Su]irenic Court to declare that the act was uncon- 
 stitutional, and therefore, nu^ll and void." 
 
 In other words, any question of exclusion of the negro is a ques- 
 tion of constitutionality of the exclusion law, to be decided by the 
 courts, and if the law be unconstitutional it cannot be made a basis 
 for the reduction of representation by Congress. But if the Four- 
 teenth Amendment is to be diverted from its original purpose — if as 
 declared by the Eepviblican campaign text-book (p. 420) it is to 
 be made the pretext for reducing the representation of any State 
 that limits its suffrage for any reasorj— if even it is to be merely a 
 cover for demagogy and political agitation — then it should be re- 
 pealed expressly, and removed as an instrumentality for mischief. 
 
 And this brings us to the second reason, why this proposal should 
 he condemned, which is, that if v(ui adopt the Crum]irtcker construc- 
 tion of the Fourteenth Amendment, and vote to overrule the decision 
 of the Supreme Court that an educational qualification is not a 
 denial of suffrage, you will place a formidable obstacle in the way 
 of elevation of suffrage. There is a growing realization in this 
 country that suffrage should be put on a more enlightened basis, and 
 there has been a notable movement in that direction in the past 
 decade in the Xorthern States as well as in the Southern States; 
 yet this Eepublican proposition, if fairly administered, would pun- 
 ish every State that joins in the movement. Eight here in Indiana 
 we have by the census of 1000 40,016 illiterate voters, a body hold- 
 ing the balancL' of power politically in this State, and you all know 
 that the mass of our purchasable voters is to be found in that forty 
 thousand. If this Eepublican proposal were adopted and Indiana 
 should disfranchise these illiterates, it would cost a representative 
 in Congress and a vote in the electoral college. Can you, as intelli- 
 gent men, afford to put such an obstacle in the way of what you 
 know to be a step in the right direction? You may ask if I would 
 favor disfranchising them ? I do not know that I would. No State 
 has ever disfranchised its present voters for illiteracy. But I would 
 favor preparation to avoid the continuance of such a condition. 
 
20 
 
 Just consider the matter. We are paying in this State over $8,000,- 
 000 a year for public schools — ^putting the rudiments of learning 
 within the reach of every child in the State. Further than that, 
 we have made education compulsory, thereby recognizing fully the 
 importance to the commonwealth of intelligent suii'rage. And yet 
 we say to the boy who manages to grow up illiterate under the sys- 
 tem, "You shall be allowed to vote even if you will not learn to read 
 and write." Could anything be more stupid ? Don't you think we 
 had better imitate the example of these Southern States, instead of 
 Toting to punish them for their sensible action ? 
 
 And another thing. We of this country are prone to regard the 
 action of our public men as actuated by political or selfish motives 
 only, but I say to you that you do grievous wrong to the people 
 of the South if you apply that measure to all of them, for some of 
 them are of the highest intelligence, patriotism and virtue. Let me 
 give you an example. You may have heard of Governor Aycock of 
 North Carolina, and that he is the man from whom was drawn the 
 character of the hero of that powerful novel, "The Leopard's Spots." 
 He has a much higher title to fame and to respect. He was the 
 leader in the North Carolina movement to adopt the educational 
 basis of suffrage — the man who was nominated for Governor and 
 triumphantly elected on that issue, by the largest majority ever 
 given to a candidate for Governor in his State. When the victory 
 was won there were hot-headed men who wanted to go to extremes — 
 who urged that the taxes paid by the whites should go to the sup- 
 port of the white schools, and that the black schools should receive 
 only the taxes paid by the blacks. There was an appearance of fair- 
 ness in the proposition, and if Aycock had favored it, it would have 
 been adopted; but he said, "No, you cannot afford to do this. It 
 would mean practically that the blacks would have no schools. You 
 cannot afford to shut the door of hope to them. Their education is 
 their salvation, and it is our salvation." And so the school money 
 has been ratably divided between the schools ; and other leaders, in 
 other States, stood with equal' firmness against this proposal, and 
 secured its defeat everywhere. I wish I might read to you all that 
 this man said on this subject of education to the Democratic State 
 convention at Goldsboro, on June 23d of this year, but I can take 
 time now to present only the following extracts : 
 
 He said : "Coming into office at a new period, when our Consti- 
 tution had been amended in such fashion that after 1908 no person 
 then Coming of age could vote unless he could read and write, my 
 iriind has naturally been much occupied with this all-important 
 question. As one should do who is charged with the enforcement 
 of the law, I turned for guidance to that document, the product of 
 the great thoughts of your fathers and mine — the Constitution of 
 
21 
 
 N"orth Carolina — and I read there : 'lleligion, morality and knowl- 
 edge being necessary to good government, and the happiness of man- 
 kind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encour- 
 aged.' I read again and found "that the people have a right to the 
 privilege of education and it is the duty of the State to guard and 
 maintain that right/ 
 
 "I have earnestly endeavored, with the co-operation of my asso- 
 ciates to carry out these high provisions of our ■ constitution. I be- 
 lieve with Thomas Jefferson that 'intelligence should ever preach a 
 crusade against ignorance as the enemy of liberty and of moral and 
 material progress.' 
 
 "Believing this ; pledged to it by the platform upon which I ran, 
 committed to it from my early loyhood, I have. spent the greater 
 part of my time since I have been Governor in proclaiming this doc- 
 trine and urging -upon the people the importance of universal edu- 
 cation. I have not stood alone in this work. I did not originate 
 it. I cannot even claim the credit of having adequately presented, 
 it. * * * When the fight had been won I felt that the time had 
 come when the negro should be taught to realize that while he 
 would not be permitted to govern the State his rights should be held 
 the more sacred by reason of his weakness. I knew that our own 
 passions had been aroused and that we were in danger of going too 
 far. I realized to the fullest the peril of antagonizing the dominant 
 and prevailing thought in the State, and yet I believed that the peo- 
 ple who had chosen me Governor did so in the hope that I would be 
 brave enough to sacrifice my own popularity — my future, if need 
 be, to the speaking of the rightful word and the doing of the gen- 
 erous act; I have therefore evervwhere maintained the duty of the 
 State to educate the negro. T have proclaimed this doctrine in 
 many places and in doing so I have frequently met the condemna- 
 tion of friends whose good opinion I esteem and whose loyalty in 
 the past I appreciate; but, holding my views I could not have been 
 worthy of the confidence of the great people of this State if I had 
 contented myself to remain silent. * * * The danger which I have 
 apprehended and which I now apprehend is not that we shall do too 
 much for the negro, but that becoming unmindful of our duty to 
 him we shall do too little. Having taken from him the power to 
 vote it becomes a sti^ong people to safeguard with the utmost care 
 every right which the negro has. 'We hold our title to power by 
 tenure of service to God,' and we can never hope to win His ap- 
 proval if we do injustice to the weak." 
 
 I do not know this man. I have never been in his State. But 
 I have learned from those who have how he has not only taken this 
 stand constantly and bravely on the rostrum, but also has traveled 
 through the mountains week after week, alone, on horseback, visiting 
 
23 
 
 the mountaineers in their cabins and preaching the gospel of edu- 
 cation to them. In all this broad land I know of no man who has 
 performed higher or nobler service. It is folly to say that such a 
 man is a mere politician, scheming for temporary advantage. You 
 do not believe it. You cannot believe- it. His heart and his con- 
 science are in the work he is doing; and when the historians of the 
 future shall make up the rolls of the real statesmen of this genera- 
 tion there will be no name writlen higher than that of Charles 
 Brantley Aycock of Forth Carolina. 
 
 It is urged that we should not expect too much from the negro — 
 that his weaknesses are largely the result of slavery. I concede 
 this. But suffrage is based primarily on the welfare of the State, 
 and it is no kindness to the negro or to others to give him a right 
 that is injuring him and injuring the State also. Nor is there any 
 injustice in denying a vote to the negro who remains illiterate, shift- 
 less or criminal. The Man of Nazareth gave us the parable of the 
 talents to teach us that even under the infinite mercy of the Al- 
 mighty he who failed to improve his opportunity should forfeit op- 
 portunity. But He gave us another lesson that is far more import- 
 ant to the American people now. It is found in the admonition, 
 "Cast not your pearls before swine." What does that mean ? Cer- 
 tainly not that salvation should be placed out of the reach of any 
 man, for we are told elsewhere that the call was to "all men, every- 
 where, to repent." It meant only that the offer of salvation was not 
 to be cheapened — that it was not to be put down in the mire to at- 
 tract the attention of the beast that grovels there — that he who 
 would receive it must look up and not down. The American people 
 have one pearl of great price to offer to mankind. It is the right of 
 suffrage — ^the full fruit of American citizenship. We have already 
 made the mistake of cheapening it so much that it is not valued as 
 it should be. We have already reached the state where many men 
 will do worse than sell their Ijirthright for a mess of pottage, for 
 they barter their high privilege for a few paltry dollars when they 
 are not pressed by hunger as Esau was. The American people can- 
 not afford to make any further mistakes in the same direction. The 
 path away from this evil leads to the uplands and not to the swamps, 
 and no man who loves his country should aid in putting any ob- 
 struction in it. But least of all will he join in an assault on the 
 constitution and the powers of the Supreme Court, that can only 
 result in weakening the safeguards of all our liberties. 
 

 Date Due 
 
 
 3an30'54L 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Library Bureau Cat. No. 1137