*1 America, UNITED STATES Plaintiff, LOUISIANA, Da- Jimmie H.
STATE OF vis, Jewel, Aycock, J. Thomas C. C. Registration Board of Members of the Hugh Louisiana, E. of Cutrer, the State of Jr., Director and ex officio Sec- Registration retary of the Board of Louisiana, the State of Defendants. A.
Civ. No. 2548.
United States District Court Louisiana, D.E. Rouge Baton Division. 27, 1963.
Nov.
Dissenting Opinion Dec.
West, Judge, District dissented. *3 Kennedy, Marshall,
Robert F. Burke Washington, C., Lacour, D. Louis New La., Orleans, Doar, Washington, John C., plaintiff. D. Buck, Gremillion, F. Jack P. Carroll
Harry Kron, Jr., La., Rouge, J. Baton Henry Roberts, Jr., Cousins, Weldon Jackson, Orleans, La., John New Thomas McFerrin, Rouge, La., W. Baton for de- fendants. WISDOM, Judge,
Before
Circuit
WEST,
CHRISTENBERRY and
District
Judges.
Judge.
WISDOM, Circuit
A wall stands in Louisiana between
registered
eligi-
unregistered,
voters and
wall
ble
voters. The
is the State
requirement
ap-
that an
plicant for
“understand
give
interpretation
a reasonable
section”
Constitutions
Louisi-
or of the
ana
United States.
It is
kind,
wall of its
but
since
Supreme Court’s demolishment of the
primary,
highest, best-guarded,
been the
has
most
Negro voting
barrier
effective
Louisiana.1
Chambers,
following
(1938) ;
History
are cited
authorities
Louisiana
only:
Davis,
page
(1925);
History
of Louisiana
author and
Angry
(1959);
Evans,
Carter,
(1960);
Study
Scar
Cas-
Louisiana
A
key,
and Reconstruction
State Government
Secession
reg
601(b)
Rights
Congress
When a Louisiana citizen seeks
the Civil
Act
may
Registrar
specifically
ister,
of Voters
When
the Parish
authorizes such a suit.
interpret
provi
applicant
officialof
ask the
or of
subdivision
the State
sion,
Supreme
the Court
the State is
found to
discriminat
**
against
judges
Appeal,
ed
United
in viola
and each of
States citizens
juris
respective
may
1971(a),
of 42
act
also in aid
their
U.S.C.A.
“the
§
super
practice
dictions,
appellate,
original,
shall also be deemed that
mandamus,
visory,
joined
cer
issue
State and the
writs
warranto,
tiorari,
quo
party
prohibition,
and a
defendant”. 42
U.S.C.A. §
regis
(c).
Or,
Alabama, 1960,
all other
See
needful writs”.
United States v.
*4
interpret
602,
982;
applicant
924,
a 362
trar
to
U.S.
ask the
80
4
S.Ct.
L.Ed.
provision,
Dogan,
1963,
United
less technical but more difficult
States v.
5
314
Cir.
as, “Every person
767, 771; Kennedy
Cir.,
constitutionally,
Lynd,
F.2d
such
v.
5
1962,
worship
222, 228,
1963,
ac
God
306
has the natural
F.2d
cert. den’d
500;
cording
952,
507,
371
his own conscience.”U.S.
the dictates of
S.Ct.
9 L.Ed.2d
reg
giving
Atkins,
1963,
In
United States
2
this
5 Cir.
clearly appro
F.2d
istrar
section
selects the constitutional
Section 601 is
priate
explan
legislation
he must
satisfied with
under
the Fifteenth
registrar
many
Amendment,
parishes
say nothing
ation.
In
other
easily
authority,
is not
constitutional
sources
satisfied with
interpretations
1962,
applicants.
Fox,
United
from
States v.
E.D.La.
F.Supp. 25, appeal
pending,
court
wall,
hold:
this
to bar Ne-
We
built
summarily rejected
attack on
the State’s
groes
franchise,
from
must
access to the
constitutionality
See
section.
understanding
come down.
clause
Raines, 1960,
also United States v.
literacy
test is not
17,
519,
U.S.
80 S.Ct.
federal
to
to
Supervis-
“appropriate
legislation”
prevent
tration offices.
also In re
See
to
Election,
1878,
equal protection
ors
Fed.
denial of
C.C.Ohio
laws:
spe-
(No. 13628).
Amendment,
2,
Cas. 430
States
the Fifteenth
United
Section
grants
Congress
F.Supp.
cifically
pass
Manning, W.D.La.1963,
power
v.
registra-
guarantee
272,
legislation”
277,
“appropriate
upheld
Rights
provisions
not be
Act
to vote shall
of the Civil
language
“[N]othing
abridged
parte
or
1960:
race. Ex
on account of
gives
history
339,
Virginia, 1879,
of the Tenth Amendment
25 L.Ed.
U.S.
sovereignty
676,
“appropriate
over
State exclusive
makes it clear
against
legislation”
processes
election
Federal
Fourteenth
clause of the
government’s
ex-
is as
otherwise
Fifteenth Amendments
broad
power.”
clause”,
v.
“necessary
proper
ercise of
McColloch
as con-
See
Maryland,
316,
1899,
1819,
Maryland,
17 U.S.
Wheat.
strued McCulloch v.
316,
316,
316,
361
Congress
Congress
authority
propositions. They
are full
are not
are
abstract
Rights
ap-
expressions
arising
policy
other
Act or
out of
enact
Civil
regulate
legislation
specific
propriate
elections
situations and addressed
*
**
1,
(including registration)
particular
under Article
attainment of
ends.
integrity
4,
protect
problem
Section
And so the
What
bottom
is:
process
Four-
under the
is
the electoral
below the
words and
surface
yet fairly
Frankfurter,
part
Amendments.
Fifteenth
?”
teenth
them
Reading
Classic, 1941, 313 U.S.
States v.
Some
on the
United
299,
Reflections
1368;
1031,
Statutes,
527,
(1947).
Bur-
61 S.Ct.
L.Ed.
85
47 Col.L.Rev.
533
roughs
States, 1934,
Purpose then,
290
v. United
U.S.
or
“true reason” for
287,
484;
parte
law,
objectively
534,
78
Ex
54 S.Ct.
L.Ed.
determined as
663,
possible,
Yarbrough, 1884,
651,
part
4
110 U.S.
is an essential
of the con-
152,
read,
text within
S.Ct.
Darby judicial Daniel, v. held review. insulation But such understanding power is constitutional clause carried over state when distinguished Schnell, part Davis v. used as an for instrument circum venting right. plaintiff federally protected because the to show a had failed understanding Mississippi’s principle many appli clause This has had against recognized long was Negroes. cations. It intended discriminate has been prohibited
in cases which exploiting power ac D. It is for courts not unusual knowledged to iso absolute in an beyond look statute. of a face imposi justify lated context to an condi ‘unconstitutional may A court law non-dis- find that a tion.’ What has said the Court criminatory on face is discrimina- here, equally applicable those cases is “Though torily law administered. viz., generally that ‘Acts lawful impartial in fair on itself be its face and become when done to ac unlawful appearance, yet, applied ad- if it complish end, an unlawful United by public authority an ministered Reading 324, Co., States v. 226 U.S. practi- eye hand, unequal evil so 243], 90, 357 S.Ct. L.Ed. [33 57 illegal cally unjust discrimi- to make power and a cannot be constitutional cir- persons of similar nations between by way used attain condition to cumstances, rights, the to their material an unconstitutional result.’ Western justice equal is still within the denial Telegraph Foster, Union Co. 247 v. Yick prohibition of the Constitution.” 105, 438, [439], 114 U.S. [38 S.Ct. 356, Hopkins, 1886, 6 118 U.S. Wo v. 1006, L.Ed. A.L.R. 1278].” 1064, 30 L.Ed. S.Ct. 347-348, 130, 5 U.S. at 81 S.Ct. at legislative purpose and inevitable L.Ed.2d 110. non-discriminatory on law effect Grosjean Co., In v. Press American determining may be its face decisive 1936, 233, 444, 297 U.S. 80 L.Ed. S.Ct. unconstitutionality the law. 660, appeared a Louisiana to be sim- law Lightfoot, 1960, 364 v. U.S. Gomillion 339, graduated ply newspaper and tax 125, 110, the Su- 5 L.Ed.2d S.Ct. advertising. theatre Underneath preme it an Alabama Court had before surface, showed, as the was the evidence changed shape of Tus- statute legislative purpose punish Or- New keegee square uncouth “from a to an newspapers leans criticism Gov- figure.” twenty-eight-sided has No one Long. Huey nothing in the ernor With legislature has a state doubted that ever object statute to show of the tax municipal power bound- to determine and little to show record how going long cases, aries, back line generated, worked, or how it Borden, 1849, How. v. to Luther Supreme beyond appearanc- Court went through continuing Cole- L.Ed. es and struck down tax effect grove Green, 1946, 328 U.S. abridgment of First Amendment strongly ar- 90 L.Ed. S.Ct. press in violation freedom gerryman- gued the conclusion process due clause Fourteenth “politi- dering election districts was a Amendment. Cases too numerous to holding law problem. un- cal” newspapers. sustain taxation of cite As Fifteenth under Court stated: Supreme Amendment, Court based statutory objective because, tax] on the bad “[The decision *10 light pres- removing history its from and of Tuskee- the effect and of of Negro setting, it gee of its 400 is seen be a delib- four or five ent all save and in the erate calculated device voters:
363 1806, Legislature of 33 of the Territorial guise circula- limit of a tax to Negroes. Louisiana be- disfranchised information tion of came a in first Consti- 1812. Its con- state public of entitled in virtue pattern. tution set limited the It guarantees.” at 297 U.S. stitutional 250, citizen[s]” franchise male “free white 449, L.Ed. 660. at 80 56 S.Ct. paid purchased who had state taxes or go in case, too, must we In this within land from the United States setting” of “history” “present For prior months six to the election. In non-discriminatory face. on its a law thirty-three years this lim- quot doing so, a maxim we in mind bear kept chiefly itation the hands the ballot in many appropriately circuit in this ed merchants, of disfran- landowners and years, from maxim in times recent electorate, chised two-thirds of the out Supreme decisions favored New Orleans and southern lawing grandfather clause: the Oklahoma parishes over of the rest the State. sophisti nullifies “[The Constitution] 1845, many respects Constitution in of of simple-minded modes as cated as well progressive broadly democratic proce onerous discrimination. It hits document, away tax-paying did with the effectively requirements which dural qualification for voters and established handicap franchise of exercise suffrage males, universal regardless for white free although abstract race colored literacy, of wealth and but right unrestricted remain vote limited the vote to United citizens 1939, Wilson, 307 as to race.” Lane States who resided Louisiana for had in L. 268, 275, 83 59 U.S. S.Ct. years, paupers two and barred the vote Ed. 1281. military and men in The next service. Constitution, adopted broadened IV. suffrage lowering qualifications by necessary pages his- some To obtain requirement state residential to one logic, tory, than volumes more valuable registration year, and introduced of vot- brevity. said, has we sacrifice Holmes ers, progressive many years step The Louisiana advance of most states. This Constitu- citizenship variant, its current required for Orleans latest, but best understood leg- optional Parish made it long, final, perhaps of a members parishes. islature other socio-politi- logically connected series Thus, from the Code of 1724 un- Noir cal are rooted events. These organic til law of the state or- policy and the historic dominant State’s dained free males could white determination white citizens’ firm or hold office. This in a supremacy in and vote state maintain white state government by denying local where were thousands free men vote. Many color. these were well edu- course, Except was, problem and owned slaves. cated suf- A. There times; frage, possessed legal civil in colonial and territorial rights Noir, Act of white citizens.9 1724 Code to Codes 000,000. Carter, person 8,001 A 253. color New Orleans had 9. In 1810 presumed 5,727 color, persons persons, to be free. Adelle v. Beaure free (O.S.) gard, 10,824 Aggregate 1 Mart. 183. Bureau Amount slaves. Negro Census, Population, 1790- Within United States Persons general (Wash.1918). p. In (Wash.D.C.1811) see Rous 82. A bat- 24-29, seve, Negro fought gens in Louisiana 44- de couleur talion of at Stahl, (1937); Negro Rousseve, The Free New Orleans Battle Louisiana, Negro La.Hist.Quart. Ante-Bellum in Louisiana 24-29 Woodson, (1942); persons 16,710 Free col- Heads free 1830 there 109,588 of Families the United States slaves in Louisiana. or and Layola Burns, (1925); Code, The Black free men of color own- (1923). Historically, therefore, property $50,- L. J. ed and slaves valued at real *11 legislature extending pass suf- Convention of “to laws The Constitutional frage persons, to such citizens was in Louisiana other the first convention Negro During military service, suffrage. States, the United as consider Government, Orleans, support occupation Gen- taxation to federal of New fitness, 11 Banks, Gulf intellectual be deemed N. P. Commander of the eral “Negro” Department, entitled Presi- thereto.” word at the direction Lincoln, was not as of dele- contained in resolution dent an election ordered proposed gates in or- convention. the Convention or in the to a constitutional delegates time, adopted and, Negroes dinance as for the at could not vote adoption represented which in Conven- was before and were not general- by delegates Amendments, Civil War tion. It was was attended ly thought federally part occupied not citi- eighteen only: Nonetheless, zens. southern in debates over Orleans and recognized delegates parishes Hahn the resolution de- Michael a number “nigger resolution”, (Henry nounced it as a Governor. W. Allen delegate at least stalked out of the for rest Confederate Governor against Negroes protest State.) Convention in of 1864 The Constitution being slavery provided free allowed to for vote.12 abolished public between schools for all children required The Constitution of 1864 eighteen regardless years, six and registration of all voters the State. race, previous but limita- retained the Registration, In 1867 the State Board of suffrage tion of males. white making report, 45,189 its first showed early stages of the convention Negro 84,527 registrants. white and strong against grant- sentiment existed age population voting male ing suffrage Negroes, and the 94,711 in 1860 was Louisiana whites delegates actually adopted a resolution 92,502 Negroes.13 declaring legislature should Racial pass authorizing Negroes in Louisiana deterio relations never law rapidly. rated In the fall of 1865 the session, vote.10 the dele- Later adopted Democrats Louisiana gates voting resolu qualification, established a tions “that this is a of white amending suffrage Government ordinance without people, perpetuated for restricting and to made males. This the vote to white race”, intelligence the exclusive benefit of the test, in on an based suffrage. 1864 a Negro declared the Constitution of permitting interest Republi creature of fraud.14 Radical question authorized the The resolution Evans, gress approve anything 42. did not it. else color and not education or Supreme always held that Louisiana a voter’s been determinative of has legislation un- qualifications of 1864 and Constitution in Louisiana. only “provisional in character”. der it was 71; Caskey, 128; Carter, Ficklen, 10. 253- Jury Burthe, 1869, 21 La.Ann. Police 255. 325. Lincoln, keeping 1 with his 1. President 450; Convention, 12. Debates gradual plan reconstruction Ficklen, 72. by stages, suggested suffrage had to Gov “private consideration, Hahn for his ernor Registration Report Board of 13. people may some of the colored whether Assembly the General very in; instance, be let not intelligent Woodward, (1869). See History The Burden especially those who have Southern gallantly fought in our ranks.” See 1 Rights 2, 1867, Act of March The Civil (Biographical Fortier, Louisiana Edition 428, required 14 Stat. Carter, 485-7; 1914) 253-255. Presi color, race, of “whatever all voters pub devoted most of his last Lincoln dent previous No condition.” one could be 13, 1865, address, April to reconstruc lic however, registered, participat- “who had urged approval He in Louisiana. rebellion”, loyalty and a ed in the oath government as a means of new state registrant. had to be taken each again proper getting into “a the State Ficklen, practical relation with the Union”. Con-
365 18 existing refusing recognize dom” and intensified the activities of cans, Republicans and for Louisiana Northern radicals in Government Democratic Negro suffrage. 30, 1866, bloody theory July adopting and the Sumner place riot took in Me- status New at Orleans Louisiana was reduced to the territory Institute. chanics This “massacre” was as entitled and such was Congress, provoked, delegate said, met it has been “the at- a territorial tempt irresponsible radi- some white and in convention called an election delegate. cals to transfer the franchise from Con- November elect Governor, Clay Henry Warmoth, federate veterans men”.19 to freed In later legislature rejected regarded his 1867 generally the Louisiana Louisiana in carpetbagger, Fourteenth was elected Amendment. “There tories as night followed, military delegate opposition.15 day, re- as the —without was, election, for the construction.” such as it In that State, history first time Philip In 1868 Sheridan, General H. Negroes freely. voted Military Commander of the Fifth Dis- Texas, trict progressively in of Louisiana and called a Ominous events constitutional races convention to meet the friction creased between Congress imposed years conditions on the for- between the Constitutions Confederacy: suffrage relatively peace mer States 1864 and 1868. regardless attempted Party of race fully, and ratification of the Free State government “responsive to Fourteenth Amendment. In the election establish a delegates convention, loyal people; Con demobilized Confed- federates, erate veterans and which would Democratic an administration officehold- polls. ers were barred from con This Louisiana to its ante-bellum was restore replace peonage dition, except first and last would Negro delegates By slavery”.16 convention to veter which Confederate admitted; president and in an were returned number ans had con- forty-nine year ninety- orderly and vention defeated election eight delegates Negroes. gained and control Free Staters Negro mainly legislature, by opposing finally 1868 Constitution re- legislature police suffrage.17 ceived the vote and to hold office. juries promptly per- Black Codes This Constitution new disfranchised enacted all directly participated “condition sons had to a who which reduced in- peonage directly lay and serf- between the War21 on which the Confeder- 94; 109-115; Fortier, killed, along thirty-four Negroes; Ficklen, Bow- 15. 1962) Congression ers, Tragic (Sentry. Era over 200 were wounded. The autobiography, Report self-serving al Select Committee on Warmoth’s See (1930). War, Politics, Orlemis Riots and Reconstruction New concluded that meaningless, plotted perpetuated Ironically, “massacre” the election was H.R.Rep. Cong. Sess., except on career. for its effect Warmoth’s cold blood. 2d (1866). recognize Congress did not either War- No. 16 No historian has en judgment. Shugg, two Louisiana senators. dorsed that or the 217. But moth DuBois, Black see Reconstruction Shugg, 211. 16. (1935) Reed, America Life of Powell, 211; Shugg, (1868). 369. 17. Dostie 286-330 A. P. Shugg, Howard, 218. Shugg, 20. See also severe laws 213. most 73. 18. police juries, pro- reconstruction of Louisiana not the were enacted longed Fleming, Documentary civil war legislature. between North His- precipitated tory within South the state Reconstruction 279-81 Randall, a social first revolution then a coun- also 724-30. See phase ter-revolution. by Each was marked 216; Kendall, Shugg, McGinty, 6; 19. changed, a new constitution di- Ficklen, 175; Caskey, 305-314; 219- rectly indirectly, dispensation Dostie, an Free A. P. active white Shugg, power.” leader, Republican cam who Stater paigned Congress, suffrage unsuccessfully, 21. “The new law was the most Revolution”, stringent, perhaps, defranchising “Robespierre and, pouring open thirty-two senators, ninety-five ate side salt state wounds, *13 required, representatives, as a condition state and one United voting, Senator, seated;24 a from Confederate certificate States who was not soldiers and Democratic officeholders that B. briefly P. S. Pinchback served as Gov- “morally “the late and rebellion” was ernor. wrong”.22 politically The Constitution years 1864 from to 1876 in Loui desegregated schools, adopted of 1868 years disorder, of violence and siana were rights, rejected literacy bill of a notwithstanding presence of federal prohibited public and discrimination in during years. troops In 1873 at these conveyances public places and accom- Parish, fifty-nine Negroes Colfax, Grant modation. This was all “that Avasneeded persons killed.25 and two white were strengthen the determination of South- fed After the Colfax riot additional supremacy, ern whites to establish white troops sent to Louisiana and eral were at whatever cost. The Constitution points to aid officials stationed at various 1868, therefore, closing instead of keeping order. Louisiana in became an blacks, breach between whites and served camp. Repub armed In 1874 six white only to widen it.” of Red lican officeholders River Parish disfranchisement killed, As a result after had surrendered were many soldiers and agreed Confederate former and had to leave the State.26 Negroes, the 1868 farce, enfranchisement Elections were a since “Gover in the election of War- [Kellogg] appointed registrars, resulted nor election Dunn, Governor, and of Oscar J. through as moth and them returned his friends ex-slave, Gover- legislature”; Lieutenant “politicians to the bribed 1896, a number legislators favors, 1868 and party parish Between nor. for and high office in the State: held corporations and and business men high officials, congressmen, six state politicians privileges”. two bribed economic acknowledges in constitutions found tbe to be clauses the late rebelEon that he Evans, politicaBy 45. morally states.” Southern all tlie been to have regrets any wrong, and that he aid and provided: part, in 22. Article given it; comfort he and he prohibited following persons shall be shall file the certificate the office of holding any voting office: from secretary state, shall * * * estopped persons AE who are journal.” published in the official This suffrage claiming from prohibit Article was amended 1870 to allegiance abjuring to the United their only persons voting holding or those by notoriously Government, or States treason, office who had been convicted of it, adhering against levying to its war punishable by imprison- or of a crime comfort, enemies, giving aid or them penitentiary. ment in the expatriated them- who have but any selves, nor have been conA'icted of Powell, 23. 370. para- crimes mentioned the first Kellogg legislature 24. In 1873 elected article, hereby graph restored Pinchback to the United States Senate. right, following: except said extending many After a contest over office, mEitary, held civil or Those who years gave $20,000 the Senate him year more, organi- under the for one expenses, but refused to seat him. styled ‘the Confederate States of zation “[Ejducated mulattoes such as Oscar America;’ registered those who them- type Dunn and P.B.S. Pinchback [were] States; as enemies of tbe United selves peeuKar product which was the of ante- guerriEa who acted leaders of those racial relations bellum Louisiana.” during rebellion; the late bands those Shugg, 221. advocacy who, treason, wrote or published newspaper preached articles or 675; Chambers, Simkins, 287; Lonn, during rebellion; sermons the late 240-45; 76; Howard, Carter, 202-209. signed those who voted for and an ordi- Lonn, 265-67; Chambers, 682; of secession in nance State. No Sim- person exceptions 287; Howard, kins, 76; Carter, 225; included in these shall Sen.Exe.Doe., Cong., Sess., vote or either hold office until he shaE No. by voluntarEy Repts., Cong., Sess., have relieved himself writ- House No. ing signing setting a certificate forth 773-80. organiza League, years During be the White statewide most 27 supremacy gov openly tion which advocated white two there were 1866 and 1877 tween Sep platform. Repub published legislatures. and two ernors 29 (New City tember asso the Crescent governors their elected lican League, Orleans) or which was White office maintained ciates ganized militarily, troops, citi led influential Returning federal Board fought zens, pitched successfully battle considered Representative citizens against belong Orleans Kel first New duty28 civic it a *14 logg’s Metropoli Negro militia, Camelia, a secret Knights White Longstreet, Klux tan Police30 under General organization equivalent to the Ku join troops. later, and, The states, several hundred federal and in Klan other Lafayette, New Shugg, 224, New Iberia. and 226. 27. League was formed Orleans White were soon men of the 28. best organized the same men who had League] ranks.” [White in its enrolled City Club in 1868. Crescent Democratic Phelps, General when 376. society composed This was secret the White leaders called the Sheridan Club, social members the Chalmette “banditti”, League Archbish- Catholic merged club which with Boston Club Episcopal Orleans, Bish- op in New City in League, Crescent 1873. The White Bishop Louisiana, op Methodist Ogden, under General Fred N. leading Orleans, Rab- Jewish New at organized regiments was fantry in- into two Presbyterian leading in Rector and the bi regiment artillery; and in promptly their de- came to Orleans New leagues parishes were often joint public 4 For- statement. in a fense tier, political clubs. Associated with Cres- people after, long 175. Not City League cent White was the First Lou- stepped to the tune New Orleans in Regiment, isiana known as “Louisiana’s and Banditti” Louisiana of those “March Own”, organization a secret intended Step” Rights “People Quick danced part McEnery’s serve as of Governor Landry, League Waltz”. the “White and (The recog- militia. Federal Government 80. Kellogg nized William and not John Mc- impossible to estimate Enery Governor.) Landry, 29. “It See 52- importance exaggerate strength 68; Lonn, 254-307; 359-375; toor 1 Kendall League. organization the White Chambers, like 679; Phelps, 376; Fortier, of an 1 132-62; put Bulletin, Fortier, (Biograph- New Orleans When Louisiana men, thousand fourteen 1914) 605-609; Carter, at enrollment ical Ed. armed’, ‘organized North 224-229; Davis, 271; Lestage, and August Democrat, paper League [Minden Participation White and Its in at least were Riots, there claimed 1874] Reconstruction 18 La.Hist.Quart. belonged in to it ; (1928) Repts. men who 43, Cong., thousand ten House According Shugg, region.” 230. Sess., No. Part ii. 206-7. organization Chambers, was the first Republicans and radical formed Landry Opelousas in in St. Loyal League, League at (under formed the Black Carter, April that it at states Antoine, Negro 1874. Caius Caeser Governor), Lieutenant- (2 originated Parish. Cross in “Republican Winn was Biographical Alliances” 57. Memories protective and Historical organizations, and other organized but 1892) Goodspeed, Caddo. claimed it for leagues comparable with the organizations, Leagues. a number However-, Loyal were There White loosely organized, very League be- discipline some the “strictest was en- Leagues associated personal or were injury, death, White came forced even League in voting New penalty formed the White with a Democx-atic tick- example, July 2, Fleming, Documentary History For et.” Orleans 57,300 Club or Caucasian Man’s The White Reconstruction 350 Ne- Franklin, Mary’s Club, organized groes clubs, St. were enx-olled in 94 under Judge discipline. Ficklen, Blanc as Alcibiade De Parish strict In 1867 leagues 1867; League early Winn Clubs of the Union New York July 1874; Philadelphia organizei's “Bulldoozers” sent in to Lou- Grant Feliciana, Feliciana, Liberty Leagues Ba- East West to form isiana Union East Morehouse, Ouachita; Negroes. Landry, Rouge, among 10; Carter, ton Innocents, Lonn, 52,62; whom were most 255-57. Leagues The White extraction. Italian military Metropolitan strong especially Police was a 30. The Southwest Lou- were equipped guns cannon, Martin, Mary, isiana, Landry, urn St. force St. St. League complete managed privileges, White took over con- their constitutional City, Capitol enough trol of then attract ballots to win Louisiana, substantial, contested, and established in the State- if vote. Gov- later, Acting and, Kellogg’s and, Returning house ernor Governor Penn Board later, McEnery. Republican Legislature, Grant President Governor de- troops clared came to sufficient the rescue with S. B. Packard Nicholls elected. regime, Kellogg’s support inaugurated. Packard Governor were each Leaguers January 9, 1877, League returned to and the White the White num- bering 6000, Some homes without incident. their marched on the Cabildo in years later, Liberty Orleans, Place Monument New troops where Packard’s memory six- was erected to the troops stationed. The surrendered. League Grant, who unwilling teen members of the President White to take sides September offi- 14 is still pending Hayes-Tilden were killed. because of the con- cially annually troversy, Or- celebrated New ordered quo pre- the status day public as the leans with ceremonies served. For four months armed White *15 against Leaguers patrolled tide turned streets New scalawags Negroes, carpetbaggers, and Orleans.32 lo- who had in control of and been state Louisiana was the last of the Southern government.31 cal gov carpetbag States freed from to be Liberty an im- The Battle at Place had April Hayes, ernment. 1877 President portant 1876 part Hayes-Tilden effect on the election of compromise, as “Redeemers”, Demo- the White when the troops removed federal from Louisiana Nicholls, recognized under T. defeated crats Francis and administra the Nicholls Negro candidate, Republican B. legal S. government tion as Throughout State, es- Packard. state.33 These events foreshadowed the Orleans, pecially armed members “lily in New primary, white” marked emer League policed the election. the White gence party Democratic Nicholls, who ran as the White Governor south as “the institutionalized incarna League’s prom- 34 who had also choice but Supremacy,” tion the will to White Negroes enjoyment of ised continued “grandfather” inexorably and led to the including five, three der a commission of (1906); Woodward, Reunion and Reac- jurisdiction Negroes. Originally tion; had it Compromise The of 1877 and the Orleans, City, and Jefferson New over (1951); Carter, End of Reconstruction Later, the Gov- 326-341; Parish. op. Saint Bernard Simkins, 293-94; cit. 4 anywhere it to use Fortier, 191; ernor was authorized Randall, ; (1953) Lonn, 876 McGinty, Phelps, 366; 9; in the State. (1918) ; McGinty, 495-525 55-151. The 1 669. appointed by Chambers Hayes Commission President investigate the Nicholls-Paelcard elec- though September, 1874, 31. 14th of tion, Nicholls, declared the Democratic really results, apparently barren candidate, elected, legally gave but imposed blow that broke the fetters Hayes, electoral votes to instead of to upon Acts of the Reconstruction 1867. legislature, Tilden. The Nicholls January 9, 1877, people rose On recognized, the President’s commission again achieve the freedom their Henry Spofford elected M. to the United State, chains, and the half-sundered Senate; unrecognized States Packard ground.” Fortier, fell to the legislature Kellogg. elected William P. Liberty Place in “The Battle 162. Spofford The Senate refused to seat brought opinion, changed the tide of Kellogg. Hayes pen- seated President South, in the end of Reconstruction sioned off Packard as a United States Con- people on their and started Southern sul. way great prosperity which enjoy.” Landry, opin- Cash, 193. Those now 34. The Mind of the South 128 typical appraisal the views all the For an ions of these events Louisiana historians. which most white orthodox Louisianians would re- gard unorthodox, Howard, see 77-83. Landry, 190-192. example: For “[T]he became the Woodward, 23-30; Haworth, object primarily The of white terror based on Hayes-Tilden Disputed grounds. political inescapable Election con- clause, understanding interpreta- upon race, same, straint on account of registration ap- tricky previous color condition shall made plication techniques avoid form as law.” another Reconstruction. Negroes eighties In the and until firmly in Louisiana continued to vote parties. League, have their all vote solicited another control of the White surprising. This adopted. ob- is not In 1888 “Its chief Constitution was 127,923 Negro 126,884 were jectives put voters and apparently, ‘white registration rolls in' on supremacy’ voters firm foundation back Louisiana; taxation, population state bring oppressive to an end the Negro. fifty per corrupt was about public spending, cent excessive peo- plagued the administration that had ple 1892, the Louisiana In the election of This was before a decade.” Lottery split parties. Mur- both issue understanding invented. clause was phy Democrat, Foster, the suc- J. Negro problem devised solution for the governor, cessful Negro but candidate for pow- to transfer the Convention was a decisive factor Gov- vote was legislature ers to from the the Governor many parishes, ernor Foster’s favor police juries (county commis- and the necessarily disquieting a regarded circumstance sioners).36 public accommodations blessing. In four- mixed provisions in the section most of the 79,- race, polled man the Democrats against favorable Constitution 98,647 cast 388 votes a total of *16 eliminated, of the Constitution but organ- newly Republicans for the and the Negro’s did restrict not the people’s Populist party.39 next ized The fear vote. This because of been turning election, point in the was be- of or another federal intervention directly that led disfranchisement the Negro-White cause the unification move- Negro the In that elec- of in Louisiana. Beauregard had col- ment under General lapsed.37 running tion, Foster, for re- Governor 188 of that Constitu- Article Pharr, election, defeated N. John any provided, qualification tion “No of party of “National” choice of a Fusion suffrage office, re- kind or nor Regular (Radi- (Lily white) Republicans, Republican clusion is in appointive powers. extraordinary party given free ballot in a was not of- named all local and state Governor * * * planter fair election. A suffrage by popular —mer- ficials whose election po- itself in the chant elite re-established enjoined by specifically was not the Con- stay sun, litical but it co'uld there appointed of stitution. He the members through gaining groups support of farmer police jury every parish, a select portion Negro groups, and a body upon representative citizens through intimidation of either or both.” developed enacting whom of laws and Howard, 82. affecting parish affairs, ordinances just determining well as the what Powell, 386; McGinty, 35. 152-180. rate of local taxation would be to meet parish Chambers, yet needs.” See 697. 36. “The South had not solved the Evans, 53, Woodward, problem also disfranchising illiterate, 54. ignorant Negro by organic law nonviola- Beauregard 37. General P. T.G. was chair- tive of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth pledged man of a biracial committee to ob- Amendments to the United States Consti- political equality Negroes, desegre- tain tution. Until such a solution was arrived gated public schools, desegregated at, employed-in- other means had to be places public accommodation. Wil- timidation, permission, suggestion subtle liams, The Louisiana Unification Move- to vote the white man’s ticket was ment 2 Jour.Sou.Hist. most inconducive to the black man’s * * * health, you call it what will. partly [The met] Constitution of 1879 Registered 38. Statement Voters in the possible the threat of a return to black State of Louisiana. * * * [by] domination the constitu- provision lodged tional which Report Secretary 39. of State hands of the chief executive of the state 562. sugar- Mississippi: cal) Populists, as it was Republicans, read earlier Negro something growers had tariffs done about with low dissatisfied Suffrage. fought is- bitterly elec- Local issues national 1894. It awas *** party split was sues could the Democratic issue tion.40 “The main suffrage.”41 open, giving Negro problem wide bal- ecology power. political ance of And the Again Negro decisive vote was of Louisiana made factionalism inevita- many Again, Poster, ran parishes. who n ona “white Louisiana, Mississippi ble. as in supremacy” platform, had Alabama, majority were, are, where parishes his heaviest and still funda- there Negro registration heavi- was mental social and economic differences (cid:127)est.42 planta- between the controlled areas handwriting economy point, areas controlled
At and the this easily economy. potent read a small wall could be farm Two parishes maintain who those the number of votes exceeded 40. “There are *** Uzee, was day registered Pharr the number N. voters. that John *** suc really near 339. New elected. editor of the Orleans * * * shap party] uneasy: Fusion was “It is true [of cess Times-Democrat heavy Demo course win [of future that we but at ed these elections [the] cost, repugnant Louisi elections crats] the end the use of methods honesty vote political to our idea must, ana should be determined Chambers, times, people demoralize the black.” Governorship Times-Democrat, January 11, in 1896 Louisiana.” over contest vote 1898. Woodward comments: “The rem- until showed that electorate, edy, dis- declared the was the eliminated from reformers ** * Negro. (cid:127)always danger aof election franchisement some apparent remedy Governor, suggested punish Republican and made ‘The here is to * * * advisability injured man leaders who has been to the Democratic Marr, prevent officials the Democratic election (cid:127)of a new Constitution.” Woodward, stealing Judge chairman their H. Marr was votes’ ”. Robert *17 sponsor Seventy, which 327. of the Committee People Shugg, Howard, Key, Woodward, of As the White ed the “Convention Rouge, many pointed out, [Leagues] Heard and in Baton others have of Louisiana” struggle only 1874, August 24, in an was for su- and constituted not white League. premacy, struggle He “which but a as to the White ner circle of League Howard, supreme.” meeting whites of the should be called the White Clay Henry predominantly Statue on Canal 105. Louisiana order at Liberty parishes fighting, just white gro were Ne- the Battle of Street before oligarchic domination, but also dom- Place. of ination New and Orleans Havard, Howard, p. Herb also 41. 99. See parishes. greatest the southern Pharr’s ele, Howard, and Elections The Louisiana strength lay parishes hill-farmer (1963) ; Fortier, 1960, Louisi 1 23-25 Louisiana, parishes, Northern the Florida 1914) (Biographical Edition 427-432. ana sugar-bowl. and the per Foster received 90 proposed legislature had amend The an parishes, cent of the vote in the delta literacy adding ment to the Constitution Feliciana, from Madison south to West voting. requirements property The and for upper parishes and in the Red River against Uzee, were it. See Fusionists and A Caddo Bossier. similar situation Party Republican in the Louisiana The Mississippi existed Alabama 1896, (1961). 2 La.Hist. Election of 332 cleavage sharp where between counties in Pharr all but a of the white the Black Belt and those 42. carried few State; country. parishes Howard, Hill in the See Foster carried 23 82- Negroes 105; Havard, Herbele, Howard, parishes in of the 27 which more registered 1960, were to vote. “The The Louisiana Elections of than whites 21-25 ; Vines, (1963) Negro Regis- were sure the Democrats had Fenton and Fusionists Louisiana, the ballot boxes insured vic- tration 51 Am.Pol.Sc.Rev. stuffed Republican tory.” Every (1957). Uzee, Party Howard, 99. election com- Negro parishes 1896, ma- in the Louisiana Election of missioner in the 2 La. (1961). jorities Fortier, Hist. 332 See also was a trusted Foster Democrat. History opened up special (Biographical Ring a of Louisiana office Edi- purchase Negro 1914) New Orleans to votes at 429-432. Uzee, many per vote.” $12.50 332. aggra- Judge February 8, political order life 1898. Thomas- additional facts of (1) Semmes, Judiciary J. Chairman of Louisiana: vate divisiveness Protestant, solidly Committee for- Convention North Louisiana Catholic; president predominantly mer of the American Bar As- South sociation, purpose (2) described the of the- the rest Orleans and New Fen- See Convention: like oil and water. State are “We here [meet] estab- Registration supremacy race,, Vines, lish ton and white (1957). Louisiana, Am.Pol.Sc.Rev. race constitutes the Demo- By 1898, party dollar-and- cratic as well as of this moral State.” Con- victory polls buying “interpreted at vention of cents costs its mandate- finally purchasers 'people' be, were more than to disfranchise- willing many pay. as and as as- few whites possible.” important Promptly election after understanding clause, invented requested 1896, Foster Governor Mississippi years as al- few before an Legislature con- a constitutional call strongly literacy test, ternative to a Nicholls, vention. Former Governor delegates.45 by many advocated of the Supreme Court then Chief Justice debate, however, After “per- considerable Louisiana, the Convention called “There was revolution. is no man- There Conven- 43. Constitutional Journal honesty attempting hood nor to dis- tion of guise. people Our said to the miserable up (Bossier) summed 44. J. A. Snider ignorant Negro and their hucksters dupes, policy, “disfran- one to as Convention’s great ‘You shall rule State no get many Negroes whites as few chise * * * longer. down, Come out!’ possible”. Times-Demo- Orleans New get And did come down out and' year later, crat, Thomas A Feb. people Mississippi the white took distinguished Kernan, mem- J. charge Calhoun, polity.” of her The- Convention, iden- used these bers of Calling Causes and Events that Led to the object of the to describe tical words Convention of Constitutional Kernán, The Constitutional Convention.’ 6 Miss.Hist.Soc.Pub. 105 “Of' Ass’n for Proc.La.Bar Convention Mississippi two ills chose the lesser. She- p. moral di- 51. Conscious at exchanged organic malady lias paradox, also ob- Kernan and the lemma functional disorder. The Convention sub- fate, “By irony ultra : served stitutes desiccated diseased elec- upon was called convention conservative * * * torate. Southern civilization no- duty rad- the most to do chief as its first longer requires good! evil acts secure falsify ; legislation thing known to ical *18 government.” McNeilly, The Constitu- history teaching accepted roll the tional Convention of 6 Miss.Hist.. political revolution wheels back the (1902). Soc.Pub. 136-38 Senator J. Z. away bloodshed; the bal- to take without George usually origi- is considered the as majority quite, almost, if not lot from sponsor nator or chief of the clause- Ibid, at 56. State.” of the the voters delegate The from Grenada was en- * * * on tak- B. Kruttchnitt “Ernest thusiastic about the contribution Sen- pur- great ing chair, the stated that George proc- ator Z. J. the electoral pose had been the Convention which mephitic vapour :ess “The that arises- * ** together the elimina- was called actually from the section stinks in the- vote, granting Negro while tion of nostrils an honest man and makes-- every suffrage man in the State”. white stuffing registration- one feel like Man-, excellent is brief but 219. There press books.” The state was- Eaton, in The convention of the account filled with editorials letters which Suffrage New Louisiana of the Clause provision an dubbed tion”, “odious sec- (1899). Constitution, Harv.L.Rev. 279 fraud”, “a shameless “a dis- Fortier, (Biograph- Louisiana also 3 See graceful absurdity”, mongrel “the hotch- 1914) 262-264. Ed. ical suffrage scheme”, potch fly- “the or any Wharton, Negro- never doubt was blown section”. There The 45. “understanding Mississippi (1947). purpose clause” of the in See also 2' Rowland, Mississippi, Southern States The Heart of the- in Calhoun, (1925). adopted Judge Presi- 246-255 it. S. S. South the South Convention, Mississippi adopt Convention of Carolina next dent clause, 1890, wrote, understanding regard Ben Tillman- to the Convention: understanding rejected ‘grand- suaded that clause was it and invented the fraud’, ‘based Conven- father clause’ ”.46 * * * problem justice, with characteris violates law dealt with the [It] morals, have said there is and I have faith that such tic candor: “Some understanding inexorably clause. Some violation evolves in the ful- fraud in this very salutary poisons punishment upon are ness violator, of time its own small doses * * * man, party, be it and valuable medicines. or a responsible [registration] Journal, is State”. Constitutional Conven- officer God; Hart, tion of his Ms he is re conscience and 142. William O. nobody sponsible lawyer, against eminent else. There is no voted it because illegality particle he in it. It 5 in “consider[ed] of fraud Section conflict just partiality, perhaps, showing with the Constitution United discriminating. you (laughter) Ah, agreed: States”. Id. 144 H. W. Wise grin.” added.) unconstitutional, (Emphasis “Section Journal of 5 is and vi- cious, principle.” undemocratic in Convention Id. Constitutional Carolina, (1895). against 147. Charles T. voted State of Soniat South “glaringly Virginia because it was al, undemocratic, Car unconstitution- In the Senator Convention * * * equally outspoken: ter “Dis unAmerican. Glass was Why discriminating against precisely You are crimination'. that certain very propose; exactly colored what citizens in the what we that teeth of the * ** law, Constituí [ion] toas elected this convention Pro con- for”. ceedings ceived in secret and born in of the Constitu the still and Debates * * * night Convention, 1901-02, II, hours of last will tional 3076. breed strife, Woodward, discord and years and will Mon- be in a few See net, See also 332-35. very parties execrated Phase of Dis who Latest support passage.” now franchisement, (1912); it on final 26 Harv.L.Rev. 42 Id. Judge thought Smith, Negro Suffrage South, 141. Coco that the sec- History transparent tion was a “weak and Studies Southern and Politics sub- terfuge unmanly (1914); Porter, History evasion 231-56 A the Con- Suffrage stitution States, of the United States”. Id. in the United 208-18 146. press highly was Times-Democrat, critical. The New Orleans March 1898, reported “indignation Woodward, that over the a del P. Stubbs, 46. Frank suffrage say Ouachita, quoted ordinance is limited to egate no section Again, 29, 1898, understanding the State”. ing March adopt clause : “To joins registrars “North Louisiana hands with Cen- word’ to the would ‘to send yourself. protest.” you tral and Southern Louisiana in not do We what will to do protest per Part of this honorable to based on the more are told that it is robbery many persons fear highway that too than hen to rob a would mit also be disfranchised. The either”. New Or Times-Demo- roost. I see no honor February 8, 26, Times-Democrat, crat March 1898 re- leans ported op understanding of Naehitoches Mr. Phanor Breazeale clause was rejected grandfather posed plan certain instrument of favor as a clause, Avoyelles Judge delegates V. Coco of because fraud. A. most very Picayune, place pow- feared reason it would wrote to the too much morals, is, dishonest, registrar. er in the hands this Convention purposes Senators, MeEnery to do in an indirect for its Both Louisiana * * * directly. way Caffrey, opinion expressed do what we cannot *19 pro suffrage provision measure we This unconstitutional Louisiana was uncon- through pose History Porter, Suffrage constitutional to enact and stitutional. of Well, say (1918). States, I it cannot be honest means. in the United through constitutional and honest done “Most of the discussions of the Con- Suffrage Eaton, The means.” Clause in vention seemed to have been about Sec- grandfather the New Louisiana Constitution 13 Harv. 5 of [the Article 197 (1899). Many gentlemen clause]. L.Rev. of the ex- explaining against pressed his vote the view that that section was grandfather clause, Bruns, Dr. H. Dickson in conflict with the Amendments of appeal Semmes, whose father wrote the the Federal Constitution. Mr. pre- voting suffrage of Orleans” ordinance, “Citizens cipitated New * * * Liberty Place, scruples the Battle of said ‘that he had no * * * against morality. voted because he con- of Section conscience as to its sidered it an “unAmerican doctrine that of view the fact these amend- constitutionally a man voter adopt- shall be a because his fa- ments were never ed, grandfather possessed ques- ther or once it is hard to understand what twenty thirty of 1898 Consti- and some to thousand Article of Under appli- Fortier, register, of tution,47 white voters.50 Alcée to in order historians, prop- respected Louisiana’s most and meet educational cant had to by writing leg- 1904, succinctly exempted erty stated qualifications —unless grandfather purpose islative of “grandfather” educa- The clause. applicant to be clause: required the tional test and demonstrate and write able to read section, purpose this of ap- filling ability out do to so known as the ‘Grandfather Clause’ The assistance. plication form without many towas and in- allow honorable to applicant required property telligent men to but illiterate white property at $300 own assessed suffrage, retain and the property.48 paid on the taxes due have purpose prop- or the educational per- exempted grandfather The clause erty qualification disfranchise was to January or before sons entitled vote ignorant negroes had been who grandson of such 1, 1867, son or or the of the menace to the civilization exempted adoption provision the Fif- person.49 A State since similar country teenth Amendment the Constitu- immigrants this who came forty tion of the United For- time, States.” 1,1867. January At the after tier, History of Louisiana 235. registered Loui- voters per cent of Ne- most illiterate siana were accepting On the chair as President property re- groes not meet Kruttschnitt, could Convention, B. Ernest disfranchise- The result quirement. leading lawyer in Orleans and New Negro voters League, all of almost veteran of the White did ment of registra- the ad- apply involved date at which he shall conscience tion of tion, of which registered means vocacy measures accord- shall prior amendments two operation of those ance with article the terms the may question September person 1, 1898, sole no defeated. practicable register most shall surest be entitled to under this is the what bring Mr. way defeat.’ about section after said date.” prophesy would with- [that Semmes' 48. males over twen- ful- has attack] been stand ty-one property in who owned excess of suffrage justified ly the results. $300, qualified regis- thus and were of 1898 provisions the Constitution ter, Report numbered 5900. of the Sec- authority Under well. have worked retary of State 559 Law, Primary annex Election disfranchising character of the party qualifications for suf- additional complicated application form was also of frage, State Central Democratic great importance. form This has num- qualification added has Committee traps unwary. for the ber One re- wiped politically out thus ‘white’ and quirement applicant is that the state his Marr, Negro”. 245. age years, months, days. “It was provides in 5 of Article 47. Section per estimated that not more than ten person part: on Jan- male who “No negroes voting age cent of would bo any prior uary 1st, date at satisfactorily pass able to this test.” thereto, under Con- to vote Evans, entitled Kernan, 57-60. See. any or statutes stitution qualified who Persons under this sec- resided, States, he then of wherein United and September 1, 1898, tion before when it grandson per- such son expired, 37,877 were: whites twenty-one years of than son not less Report Negroes. Secretary adoption age of this the date at (1902). Later, State 558 person Constitution, for- and no male grandfather under the clause was extend- *20 prior eign birth, who was naturalized September 1, ed to Act 1913. 24 of day January, 1898, be the first shall register and vote denied the by of his this State reason failure 50. “One fourth of the white voters had qual- possess property discouraged the educational or been disfranchised or from Constitution; prescribed by registering. 40,000 ifications Almost less white provided, people registered he shall have in this resided had in 1900 than years preceding Howard, State for five next 1897.” his words: have no mince “We here tion part par- as a fundamental antagonism political organic I am called cel of instrument, that upon that, preside more too, over what little subterfuge no or other meeting family of the Democratic great than a principle evasions. With this * * * Party firmly of Louisiana. of the State thus imbedded in the Consti- tution, honestly are all aware this Convention We enforced, * * * principally to longer has been called need be fear to the * * * question honesty to elim deal one purity with our future mass of the electorate the inate from elections.” have corrupt illiterate voters who Following example Mississippi,, degraded during century quarter the last respect Constitution,. to its 1890 politics.”51 voted our The Convention Louisiana did not submit the 1898 Con- considered ordinance should be that no stitution people.54 to vote report on Suf until the Committee finally upon frage To make the and Election was acted disfranchisement effec- tive, legislature complete- Near the end the Convention. directed a registration Registra- Convention, an new Kruttchnitt President all voters. adoption rolls : before and after nounced of the- Constitution prompt show the the- effect free; we have have not been “We grandfather Negro clause had on voters.. Constitution the exact drafted drafted; should like to have we January 1,1897 March 1900-» have inscribed otherwise we should Negro Number of 130,344 5,320 Voters it, popular if I know the sentiment Number of 164,088 125,437 White Voters State, White Man Universal Negro registration drop con- Suffrage, exclusion hood and the tinued, only so that 730 or less- suffrage every man with from the per than 0.5 cent of the adult male Ne- of African blood in his veins. a trade groes registered. * * * sixty par- were In the it What care I whether existence, ishes then in there were no- ridiculous- or not? more or less registered Negroes twenty-seven par- it meet the case? Doesn’t Doesn’t in; only Negro registered ishes and vote, man ánd doesn’t it let the white parishes. Only each another nine ten- negro stop Voting, parishes Negro reg- had than more ten for ?” came here isn’t what we n By 1918, istered voters each. when there message legislature, to the Gover- his sixty-four parishes, thirty-seven, say: nor Foster was able parishes registered. had no supremacy Eight which we parishes single other had struggled long so at the cost of on the voter rolls.55' treasure, precious much blood and so adoption “With the Constitution crystallized is now into the Constitu- Louisiana became in fact and. 52. Journal 54. The Constitution 53. La. Senate Joum. 51. Journal of the without under an was voted tion, 380. people. osity among might tion, 9. so voting, agreed declare the Constitution referring “This act act upon the acts the Constitutional Conven- Constitutional it back of 1898 was called [*] * * calling Legislature people, who, the Convention 33-35. again constitution- Conven- adopted a curi- 55. These used in this Hist. Quar. Constitutions of 1879 was submitted to the ports ana, those in 1845 and 1852.” ratification or “only al conventions.” Clause in the New Constitution of Louisi- people 13 Harv.L.Rev. constitutions figures in a Secretary opinion rejection. and most of the others- proper Eaton, wholly are taken from Re- Louisiana, The Constitution State, compiled election were (1899). submitted Hart, peoi>le Suffrage The- La. < n
375
preme
its
as
famous
as
declared the
practice
[had]
state
far
man’s
a white
* *
*
‘grandfather
clause’
politics
invalid.
went.”
Already several
substitutes
have been
change
did
The 1913 Constitution
proposed, among them the ‘understand-
suffrage
Con-
provisions
the 1898
of
* *
*
ing
Mississippi
clause’ from
stitution.
plan
Pleas-
of
R. G.
Ex-Governor
States,
1915,
v. United
in Guinn
suffrage
ant
of
confine
Supreme
Oklahoma
Court declared
those
of
who inhabited the earth North
grandfather
unconstitutional.
clause
degree
North,
of
latitude
twentieth
White,
Douglass
Edward
Justice
Chief
prior
12, 1492,
when Colum-
October
fought
“Louisi-
Louisiana,
who
purpose
bus discovered America.
Liberty
Battle
at
ana’s Own”
Negro.”
plan
of his
is to shut out the
manager
campaign
was the
Place57 and
handicapped
1888,
We
are
wrote
Nicholls in
for Governor
studying
legislative history
opinion.
because,
Constitution of 1921
at the re
Against
background,
a constitu-
this
Pleasant,
quest
former
of Ruffin
G.
Al-
in 1921.
called
tional convention
Governor,
was Chairman
the Com
who
good
though
reasons
several
were
Suffrage
Elections,
mittee on
constitution,
revise
for Louisiana
secrecy
Committee
and no minutes
met
reported
understood,
was well
kept of
debate.
discussion or
Times-Picayune:
“Revi-
New Orleans
newspaper
proceed
accounts
nec-
suffrage provision [was]
sion
ings,
evidence,59 quote
next
Gov-
best
Su-
essary
United
States
because
accuracy.”
v. Har-
character and
Morris
Registered
Voters
as “Statements
Lessee, 1833,
553,
mer’s Heirs’
7 Pet.
Louisiana”.
the State of
Story)
558,
(J.
61. New Orleans March University, ident of Southern John G. 27, 1921, p. 10. Lewis, Baranco, B. V. and Walter L. Times-Picayune, February 62. New Orleans quarrel objective had Cohen with an p. 8; Looney, Suffrage in the requirement. educational Loyola 1921, 6 Louisiana Constitution Powell, 66. 485. L.J our. (Baton Rouge) Times, May 67. The Times-Picayune, March 63. 1921. The 9, 1921, p. 7, col. 1. See also New Or- Times-Picayune of March 1921 re- Times-Picayune, 27, 1921, leans March ported Judge Pugh “holds these p. 1, col. 1. requirements qualifications judi- cially bombproof.” Powell,
377
ap
registered
fact,
per
B. As an historical
and
of one
cent
the total
vot-
of
interpreta
ers, although
Negro
pears
evidence,
population
from
rarely,
ever, applied until
tion
state then
test was
if
about one-third
constituted
early
potential
only
The
fifties.
It
not needed.
In 1942
957
voters.
regis Negroes
primary
registered
Democratic white
in Lou-
made
were
to vote
Negroes.69
Negroes
registered
tration futile for
Demo
isiana and
The
in
acting
Committee,
fifty-one
sixty-four
cratic State
parishes
Central
granted
by
authority
under
to it
the Louisiana.
State, restricted all candidates and vot
1944,
primaries,
those
white
even
Party primary
ers in the Democratic
by
political
conducted
party
not
pers
elections for state officers to white
State,
were declared unconstitution
ons.70
nomi
from
“[D]ebarment
Allwright, 1944,
al. Smith v.
321 U.S.
nating process is in effect disfranchise
649,
757,
64 S.Ct.
88 L.Ed.
Aft
987.71
par
privilege
ment. Denial
primary,
er
demise of the white
ticipating
means,
primaries
in
es
also
Negro registration
rapid
in Louisiana
sentially,
ineligibility
party
to
member
ly
rising
increased,
1,029
from
in 1944
general
negro
ship in
and excludes the
7,561
1946,
22,576
1948,
to
in
to
in
party proceedings
all
from
such as mass
120,000
in 1952.72 In 1956 there were
meetings, conventions,
caucuses
vot
161,410 Negro voters,
per
15
cent of
delegate
precinct
ers
con
in the
from
registered
Louisiana,
total
vote in
nothing
larger areas,
say
ventions in
highest percentage
Negro
voters
party
offices
in the
and candidacies
any
region
in
state in the southeastern
party primaries.” Weeks,
White
The
country.
Primary,
135,
(1935).
8 Miss.L.J.
136
effectively
primary
only
The
pri-
The white
decline
fall of
white
Negroes
mary,
kept
Negro
voting
from
in
return
from
soldiers
significance
II,
tempo
election that
in
World War
had
intensified
activity
organizations
process
Negro
Louisiana electoral
but
it also
after
correspondingly
regis-
Segregation
depressed Negro
1954,
School
Cases in
rights
insignificantly
explosion
tration
the civil
low numbers.
worked
all
During
Negro
period
increasing
toward
1921
1946
interest
in vot-
from
Negro registration
ing. These
in excess
made
was never
correlative factors
(1957);
Sindler, Huey Long’s
Supreme
69. “Until
its nullification
Louisiana
1944,
(1956); Ewing, Primary
primary
the white
was a
34
Elections
important
component
system
(1957); Note, Negro
more
the South 4
Dis-
franchisement,
76,
than formal
limitations
on the
47 Col.L.Rev.
77
Negroes
(1947).
vote.
were excluded as
party
primary;
from the
could
70. Minutes of the Democratic
Cen-
State
legally
general
excluded from the
elec-
Committee,
meetings,
6,
tral
various
Oct.
only by
indirection.
Invalidation of
7,
1931
Oct.
primary,
therefore,
brought
the white
Herndon, 1924,
71. See also Nixon v.
273
again
prominence
literacy
into
536,
446,
759;
U.S.
47 S.Ct.
71 L.Ed.
and other methods of disfranchisement
Classic, 1941,
United States v.
299,
313 U.S.
Key,
Politics,
indirection.”
Southern
555
1031,
1368;
85
S.Ct.
L.Ed.
Ter
(1949).
ry Adams, 1953,
461,
345 U.S.
73 S.Ct.
Weeks,
Primary,
See also
The White
809,
1152;
Rice,
97 L.Ed.
Elmore v.
E.D.
(1935); Weeks,
8 Miss.L.J.
S.C.1947,
F.Supp.
516,
aff’d 4 Cir.
Primary:
1944-48,
White
42 Am.Pol. Sc.
387,
den’d,
165 F.2d
cert.
333 U.S.
(1948); Harris,
R. 500
The Quest
68 S.Ct.
S79 registrars adopt pro- ing Thomas, their States v. U.S. gram. 535; S.Ct. 4 L.Ed.2d United States v. Association of Citizens Councils of Carrying phase first out the Louisiana, al., 1961, W.D.La., et 196 F. their program, Councils and local Citizens Supp. 908; Wilder, United States v. purges, extensive conducted members 1963, W.D.La., F.Supp. eight parishes .principally 1956-58 early Seg- late 1958 and 1959 the provi- state,76 -throughout under regation Committee and the State Board challenge statute, Louisiana sions Registration jointly sponsored meet- The evidence (1950) LSÁ. 18:133 R.S. ings congressional Reg- each ¡shows *25 district. re- Negroes were primarily that istrars required were attend; sheriffs, to although fewa rolls, from the moved police jurors, parochial officials, n whites were and other ef- token purged ain also officers citizens councils also at- of nondiscrim- air maintain an fort to meetings. tended meetings registrars At these co- inatory Most treatment. the Citizens “Key Victory” Council’s to mem- fully operated Council with Citizens officially was regis- to distributed conducting purges when in bers trars. Rainach, Senator at that time white Innumerable requested do to so. still Segregation Chairman of the Com- registration showed cards persons whose mittee and President of the Association Ne- to those similar (cid:127)deficiencies Council, Citizens was the chairman at registrar groes purged. not One were meetings. Shaw, these n said her Mr. at time that parish her deposition in that in was Segregation still counsel for conducting n Com- members Citizen Council mittee and still counsel for Associa- they made errors purges corrected They vigorous- meetings, tion. led these n ontheir own applications, registration ly emphasizing importance of main- challenging Ne- time at the same while taining segregation. Many purges groes mistakes. similar for interpreta- regis- Senator take Rainach for to would tell were failure trars, though fight had integration even school tion * * * fight the time at South has shifted been administered to a óf ” * * registrant’s application. contest- for the When voters of the masses purges pointed registrars were court, He out these to federal dur- ed ing illegal deprivations of Period, the Reconstruction when Ne- found to be groes rights. permitted United vote, Negroes’ public were E.D.La., F. integrated, McElveen, schools of Louisiana were States v. that, Negroes representing nom. United sub with the 'Supp. modified 15, 1956, popu- April voting Beginning Citizens ville Parish out of white challenged which, according all Parish lation cen- to the 1960 of Ouachita Council 5,782 these, Negroes. sus, 5,617. registered Of was parishes required special the rolls. from Some ef- were stricken no all but 595 Attorney example, Carroll, sent of Louisiana fort. For General in East representative special Madison, Tensas, Feliciana, as a Shaw West Mr. Registrar registered Negroes voters of Ouachita there no were and in advise 1962, Negro of December As Claiborne there were a few Parish. on the 1,038. up parishes registration Webster, rolls. in Ouachita such as registra- permanent Morehouse, Franklin, Carroll, Parish In Bienville and West purge. adopted periodic registration, All after where there was registered persons purge since Janu- had who there was need for a because permanent put ary 1, automatically on the were the rolls were cleared. Ne- purged. gro rolls, except registration dropped who were those in Webster from nearly Negroes, 1,776 However, all whom For to 83 purged, purges parishes test was were even some prerequisite periodic registration, while had coln, such as Lin- nearly registered whites, Biver, had all of whom Bed Richland Parishes. Thus, it, prerequisite. Negro registration dropped was not before Bed Biver 4,825 1, 1955, 1,360 there were October to 16 in 1958. registered persons vote Bien- intelligence per state, population of the cent native most while again Negroes easily do what do not.” could Era, they during did the Reconstruction Mary Flournoy, Regis- Mrs. C. former they registered vote. if should become Parish, gives trar Winn us some indi- meaning “correctly cation of the Rainach, According “In to Senator fairly [ing]” administer start- the test. She in Louisiana our forefathers stated Rainach, that Senator he program qualification law while was ed voter Segregation Committee, Chairman pro- knowing enforcement, such told her to discriminate on of race gram account provide their would the solution processing applications: problems.” present qualifica- voter * #* pres- adequate our solve tion laws “are “Rainach told ifme I ” * * * problems Rainach ent Senator [Negro can’t fail applicants] them “registrars become stressed that way, other pull could I those * * * critically important officials reading Constitution cards on them. point focal “ have become the * * * Rainach wanted me to problems.” solution to our *26 pull those hard cards on colored registrar’s explain the Mr. would people.” Shaw “key part. our to the The solution of D. The Louisiana Codes Noir of Col- interpretation problem whole lies in the onial times and the Black Codes of the Constitution,” told Shaw Mr. eighteen sixties; pre-Civil denial War urged registrars registrars. He Negroes, wealthy of the vote to even to require interpret applicants con- color; and educated free ofmen the ebb provided test stitution and them with 25 Negro rights and flow of in the Consti- purpose. Mr. cards to used for this 1868; tutions 1864 and the 1879 trans- registrars: instructed the Shaw political power police juries fer of from and their test “[T]he legislature Governor; and the to the ability to understand the duties close election of 1892 and vic- republican responsibilities under a tory grand- supremacy; for white government, is anoth- form which regis- complicated father clause and the basically tests, a test er one of the is application tration form in the Constitu- understanding, person’s of a which 1898; invalidity grand- tion of intelligence you can in that is native consequent father clause and the resort you’d fool, a have but still educate Mississippi’s understanding and inter- nothing fool when but an educated pretation clause; the effectiveness of the you get through, and he wouldn’t be primary as a means of disfranchis- therefore, qualify. And able if ing Negroes; invalidity of the white correctly fairly ad- primary consequent and the need to re- key ministered —that’s interpretation vive enforcement of the thing fairly whole —directed —then test; League the White and the Citizens’ ability, it will amount to test Councils; League the Black and the understanding, person’s is N.A.A.C.P.; Liberty the Battle Place ability. It is not education. native voting purge in 1874 and the Ouachita merely can refine native Education of 1956—these are all related members understanding. you na- If have no series, dy- all reactions to same understanding with, to start out tive produced interpretation namics that (Emphasis refined.” add- it can’t be speak eloquently test and purpose. of its ed.) sum, interpretation test registrars: also told the Shaw Mr. grandfather is another pur clause. Its pose “Constitutional tests are a history. test is rooted the same It intelligence objective delegates native and not ‘book has the same learning’. Experience teaches the Constitutional Convention of 1898 en visaged people grandfather our most of own white have for clause. It following parishes: capable producing to the Plaquemines, same effective Negroes today Feliciana, Webster, Bienville, that East Bed disfranchisement sixty-five Biver, produced Jackson, grandfather clause Ouachita. years ago. registrar all, A. First of a Louisiana power has the in- use or not to use the y. terpretation parties to test. The stipulated Having true case had determined that the test never largest parishes interpretation in its used in the been four test for the reason why state, Caddo, Jefferson, setting, to the East Baton we turn historical discriminatory Bouge, parishes and Orleans. These is used as a how the forty per almost cent of the total number device. registered voters in the State. for a court are two reasons There United introduced evidence that States how law administered. consider test was used twen- regulatory is that obvious reason ty-one parishes.77 No mention was made unfairly. may be administered statute thirty-nine parishes other may enjoin so, unfair court If state. evidence shows the test validity passing on the acts without seldom, ever, anywhere applied if another rea- But there is the statute. 78because, pre- Louisiana before 1954 actually a law used how son. Just viously pointed pri- out, until the white administering charged with it is those mary was invalidated was no need guide purpose proper of the law majori- This for the test. ty means that the necessary Here, find we effect. registered Louisiana voters now un- *27 registrars that dis- evidence the massive permanent registration the der law have against Negroes not as iso- criminated taken test. never unpredictable accidental or acts lated or twenty-one parishes where it In by individuals, particular of unfairness interpretation shown has been that the policy pat- matter state in a but as a used, been test has as December regular, consistent, on the tern based predictable only per 8.6 of the adult cent Ne- unequal application of the registered against groes were 66.1 inescapable This is the of a test. effect regis- persons per of the adult white cent subjective requirement as an un- such interpretation Before the test tered. derstanding interpretation bar- test 25,361 use, put into total of Ne- was safeguards, ren of standards and ad- registered twenty-one groes in the were ministration of which uncon- rests August using By parishes the test. registrar. discretion trolled Negro registration total these great The United States introduced a During 10,351. the same parishes was record, of evidence mass but with registration was not period, white dis- diligence digestible commendable made it cernibly affected. by well-prepared indices and well-or- ganized summaries. The evidence of dis- The decision to enforce the inter- B. criminatory application interpreta- thirty years test more than pretation aft- especially accompanied, well adoption test documented al- its er by supported testimony respect every parish the test has where most parishes Bienville, agreed parties 77. are: test; Clai These however borne, DeSoto, Carroll, East Felici East does not use it. Caddo Jackson, Franklin, LaSalle, Lincoln, ana, Morehouse, Ouachita, Plaquemines, twenty- Rap depositions taken of were ides, River, Richland, Helena, registrars registrars Red who St. and former Union, Webster, Carroll, interpretation West The earliest West Fe test. used liciana, by any registrars and Winn. The Director of the of these use Registration reg- Board of The former State testified that in November 1955. Plaquemines parishes certain other use but Parish testified the test istrar personal knowledge using he had no the test late this. that he started He that Caddo uses the said also Parish actually purge interpret by constitution, used, of Ne- been a wholesale gro by registration ability periodic so that he have the voters or do so. The Registration Negro required re- Board of State voters were maintained register interpreta- use. at into one time that the test came correct after challenged applicant tion was that demon- Citizens Council members must large ability has, strate his in all numbers of cases. It changed ground they however, understanding not had in- voters on the terpretation very requirements of the satisfied all of the this section of the qualification at the Louisiana voter laws Constitution. After the institution of they registered. Actually, suit, prescribed time the chal- the Board another lenged registrars Negroes instructing re- had all the satisfied to cease re- registrar quiring change quirements imposed interpretation. at registered. interpretation given they interpre- voters the time White registered provision standards had under the same tation-test of the Constitution Negroes agency charged procedures their as the with enforc- registrations ing variety interpreta- al- from the same it and wide suffered Negroes leged adopted by registrars who as the tions deficiencies reaffirm parishes, achieving purged. impossibility objective at least two were ground Feliciana, interpretation and East standards for an Ouachita they Negroes challenging acceptable was that Constitution State. Pity interpreted applicant interpret not able or were asked to had not section, interpret even a constitutional test! though had not been used the test D. Louisiana Constitution con- purge. parish either before sections, against tains 443 56 sections parishes where there was most Constitution, United States purge, were unable since longest is the and the most detailed of pre- gain in the manner reinstatement all state printed copy constitutions. The law, they re- scribed published State, unannotated, con- re-register. so to do quired And pages, counting tains 600 an index *28 interpretation The pass test. had to pages. clearly of 140 The evidence dem- having challenged, voters, been white great onstrates abuses in the selection of exempted from the test. effect were in sections constitutions to inter- be brought by the about The discrimination registrars preted. Some have favorite interpretation use of the purge and the they apparently sections which use re- system par- into the was frozen gardless applicant’s of an race. Some Jackson, Bienville, DeSoto, such as ishes open containing a volume the United perma- Rapides, have which Ouachita and, and Louisiana States Constitutions using pe- parishes registration. nent soothsayers seeking help like divine from purges registration had a de- riodic flight birds, require ap- random of Negro on effect terrent interpret plicant the section on the still felt.79 is which Segre- page opens. the book where registrar’s gation regis- whim Committee distributed C. alone deter- applicants twenty-four cards, mines which will of be trars sets each con- tested. merely taining ap- The Constitution states three sections of that the Constitu- plicants “shall be able to instructions that with used understand and tion be administering give interpretation” interpretation a reasonable of a test. sec- Registrar registrars, a constitution. of of Some Ouachita Parish used a containing example, LaSalle, Lincoln, those test cards sections chos- of for set Regis- parishes, by interpreted have Citizens’ and Webster Council. The en applicant Plaquemines mean that used cards and an- this need not of trar Thus, very purge. River As of December Red Parish few tlie fore 1962, Negroes registered. Negroes applied 1956, although have since were 31 there 1,362 registered Negroes be- there were responsive Perez, se- prepared Leander text Mr. swers accepted lected have Attorney from for the Parish. been whites District Negroes. than Compounding from fre- that the record is It evident with the fact often were has difficult sections of choice quently the given more interpret, difficult sections to ap- many impossible for it made bias favor of the whites becomes applicants were pass. plicants White readily apparent. many sections, easy given more often short, parishes stock Some answered administered could be written speech”, kept examinations “freedom phrases records such rights”, religion”, questions responses accept- asked and the “States’ “freedom oth- Negro applicants, registrar ed. on the In these examinations so on. usually given employed parts the Louisi- hand, one or more of several were er VII, containing sets of cards § such as Article selected sections ana Constitution XIV, 16; space X, § Article Constitution and a for the 41; § § Article applicant’s interpretation of it. Even the 24.2.80 § cursory glance most at records gross process, the selection E. As parishes heavy these underscores the bur- appear evalu- in the discretion abuses Negro applicants den under which were reject- interpretations. One ation laboring. cards, set reg- Negro applicant stated ed great disparity difficulty right, saying was I was “said what istrar questions regis- asked. This enables say tome wanted she like but wasn’t simple trar to select cards sections it”. applicants for white and difficult cards tests Most of Negroes. for There unmistakable evi- precluding orally, thus been administered many applicants dence that white on aas check records of written the use sample cards with accepted shown answers registrar reasonable what Nevertheless, applicants this, rec- them. Some admitted interpretations. interpretations less far shows an instance ord and there even in which purposes “All eases reads: fixed 80. Article for State classification may labor hard at not he punishment be the valuation classification shall by law, provided shall, taxing purposes; otherwise until hut au- local Oases, jury. judge may without tried the local subdivision thorities of adopt punishment hard be at percentage in which labor, such val- a different five, jury all purposes be tried shall of local taxation.” uation ver- render a City must concur whom 14 reads: “The of New Or- Article *29 punishment cases, dict; by the in which of three-fourths of all leans a vote jury by labor, of necessarily a Sewerage at hard of the and Water members twelve, concur Orleans, must approved of whom by nine of New a Board pun- verdict; in which the cases a render of of all the vote three-fourths members by jury may capital, of a City Debt, be Liquidation, ishment of of the Board twelve, ren- must concur to by of whom approved all and resolution of the Com- reads: “The Council, Article der power verdict.” or its mission successor as the vested the governing body shall be municipality, of taxation of said surrendered, Legislature; by never be adopted shall a vote of of two-thirds all the away; suspended Council, and all governing or contracted of said or members upon power hereby same body, be uniform the shall taxes shall have and is au- subjects throughout the terri- of class thorized to issue bonds the amount of authority levying the ($9,000,000) of the limits torial Nine Million Dollars of said tax, styled ‘City City and collected for Orleans, be levied and shall of be New only. property public purposes Sewerage, Drainage No shall Water and Serial Bonds’, cash for more than its actual assessed be value, and to bear such rate in- Gold by law, Liquidation, City and as directed ascertained as the terest Debt, Board may tax-payers the shall have fix from time to all testing time said sale, of their assess- the correctness are offered for bonds as hereinafter purpose provided, constructing ments tile courts at the domicile for the before assessing authority, may extending sewerage, be of the or the water and City.” by drainage system of directed law. The valuation and said signed right peaceably people by mistake, have to as- having, applicant registrar Negroes rejected not semble.” A fol- sample were card. answer lowing may answers, interpretation: let acceptable “That one allowed to see the belong club, pattern group, Similarly, assemble or copy alone them. regis- organization long he chooses as as it that the indicates of the answers applicants cur- is within the law.” told white trars often phrase- rently acceptable answers. Each of these incidents could conceiv- par- every ology in one answer of almost ably indicating event, per- be an isolated regis- along changed right with ish regret- registrar, sonal dereliction one wording ac- change trar’s table, general basically but trivial in the ceptable answer. interpretation administration test. Registrars easily satisfied were However, great number these and in- from white voters. answers examples, other illustrative of con- “FRDUM FOOF stance SPETGH” decision, conclusively scious show that acceptable response request an interpret discriminatory acts were not isolated the Louisiana Article 3§ peculiar or accidental or registrar to the individual Constitution. part pervasive but pattern hand, practice record shows other disfranchisement On application discriminatory forms interpreta- whose use high- are and answers indicate test. by literacy ly qualified standards deny The State does not that unlimited high degree intelligence have have registrars by discretion is vested in the although they had down turned been argues Louisiana, the laws of but given interpretation of a reasonable reasonably officials must act and that fairly constitu- technical clauses subject decisions their to review example Louisiana Con- For tion. Louisiana, however, pro- district courts. provides: stitution, X, Article § whereby vides effective method arbi- State, “Rolling operated in this stock trary by registrars capricious action no domicile of which have the owners therein, prevented voters be redressed. Lou- shall be assessed discretion was Unreviewable built into Commission, shall tax- Tax isiana the test. only, purposes not at rate ed for State forty assess- mills on the dollar to exceed Registration Board of re- rejected interpretation ed value.” The recognized cently arbitrary nature understanding “My means is that it was: and, as indicated earlier in this resi- of which does not have the owner if general opinion, abandoned its use after rolling State, his stock dence within However, institution of this suit. forty exceed mills not to be taxed shall the Constitution statutes of Loui- dollar.” require use siana still of the under- registrar standing instance the re- another test. And registrars following interpretation entirely jected abandoned provision it, despite the institution of the and Seizure new test. Search *30 “[Njobody example, April can For as late as Amendment: 1963 the Fourth registrar using person’s go just and take Webster into a house the inter- because, belongings pretation explained, test warrant from without a she their books”; specify law, still on it had to in this “it’s sometimes she gave citizenship to search and test and what warrant sometimes rejected interpretation interpretation register- test. Another Voters seize.” ing challenged by Negro ap- purged now could be same Amendment you taking “To would was: search plicant the inter- in the future for get authority to an authorized repeat pretation history it- test—should The Louisiana Consti- a warrant.” exactly happened read This is what self. I, provides: Article 5 § tution nineteen-fifties. middle late F. demonstrate strik- The statistics VI. ingly of resurrection of the the effect We have considered reason the true interpretation report test. A of the Lou- how the in fact used to test was Sovereignty Committee, isiana Decem- accomplish purpose, its and its neces- 14, 1960, ber boasts: sary Now, apply effect. the law. we your “We would like to call attention scope No doubts broad that, during to the fact this four power reasonable, fix State’s year period time, from 1956 until nondiseriminatory qualifications for vot 1960, 81,214 people colored became ing consistent Constitution. with the voting age, registration when the Thus, literacy a reasonable test bears figures people actually colored de- governmental and, objective relation to a 2,377. Going clined during further perpetuate past if it discrimina does not year “ period, four 114,- we had tion, permissible requirement. [I]n people 529 white who became of * * * vot- might society con our a State ing age and, during year this four who literate clude that those period time, registra- the white Lassiter should exercise franchise.” 96,620.” tion increased Elections, County Northampton Bd. of State accomplished Louisiana 45, 52, 79 S.Ct. 360 U.S. purpose parishes has the where L.Ed.2d Since nation, highest illiteracy test rate in the used.81 In twenty-one those parishes, than most reason has more even persons spur literacy between states to use 1956 and December But improve electorate. increased level of the 161,069 from 162,427; registration clause, is an in understanding constitutions, decreased 25,361 10,256. terpretation test of
81. DISCRIMINATORY THE EFFECT OF INTERPRETATION TEST *31 S86 literacy test it As is and as with a it administered must not be confused designed administered, peers. Loui was to be
or the
treated
Under
two
understanding
interpreta
qualification is
law, any literacy
Louisiana
and
siana
applicant
reasonable
tion test
requirement
bears no relation
met
that the
registrar
voting
registrar
requirements.
If a
read
the Preamble
fact,
interpret
require
applicant
should
an
United States Constitution.
X
applicant
Article
Louisiana Constitution
an
only
need
the Preamble
write
through
dealing
between
tongue,
with the distribution
in his mother
parish
severance
and
ad
interpreter
State
valorem
dictation of an
speak, read,
if
cannot
he
oil
English.
sulphur
hand and
taxes
on the
on
La.Const.
or write
gas
hand,
find
good measure,
would
VIII,
1(c).
and
we
Art.
the other
For
§
interpreta
impossible
ability
it
hold
an
application
fill
is
out
form
an
Moreover,
provision
rational
literacy.
a
an
served
additional test of
withholding
governmental
provision
under
interest
another
statute
suffrage
unqualified voters. Short
Constitution,
all
until 1960
government
philosopher-kings,—
interpretation
of a
time
had an
Louisiana
test
and no one
government
ever described
has
allowed
vote?82
illiterates
just
(LSA-R.S. 18:36).
is
in such terms—there
In November
ability to in
no correlation between an
terpret
37,365
the State carried
registration
on the
illiterates
section of the Louisiana Con
rolls.
registrar may
an
a
thrust at
stitution
having
us a
We do not have before
legiti
applicant
gov-
proper
rational relation with
informed
mate State interest
elec
giving
objective of
the vote
ernmental
only
torate.
persons.
qualified
Despite assur-
ugly
is,
intractable truth
the nex-
meetings
ances
at
state officials
us is with unlawful discrimination. The
registrars
this test measures
vitiating any relation to
ineradicable vice
“only
intelligence",
native
the truth
legitimate governmental objective is
nothing
na-
the matter
that there is
registrar.
power
raw
vested in the
intelligence
tive
that will enable those
power
The unrestricted
which makes
give
untutored
constitutional law to
registrars’
arbitrary
discriminatory and
highly
reasonable
possible
conduct
comes from the words
containing
legal
technical document
such
“interpretation."
“understand”
concepts as,
example, venue,
pro-
due
“interpretation" are
“Understand” and
cess,
requisites
of a criminal indict-
meaning in the
without definite
words
ment, appellate
jurisdiction,
ju-
court
ambiguity
purposive
Their
law.
key
risdictional amount. Whatever name the
for the test:
to the true reason
give
State elects to
it is
intelligence
‘read’,
citizenship
‘speak’
a test of
when
“The
‘write’,
terms
registrar
eight
it enables a
to flunk
Ne-
the words ‘under-
unlike
gro
eight
passing
‘explain’
school
while
have consider-
teachers
stand’
persons.83
objective
quan-
content,
illiterate white
able
literacy
registered
revealing.
among
distribution
voters
83. This bizarre result
reached in
Feliciana.
East
*32
unthinking,
discrimination
even for
decision
and
turn of administrative
purposeless
frame-
employed
discrimination.
within the
could be
terminology would
such
work of
Schnell, S.D.Ala.1949,
In Davis v.
contrast,
negligible.
seem to be
* * *
F.Supp. 872,
aff’d memo.
U.S.
Mis-
and
both
S.Ct.
L.Ed.
three-
sissippi
is re-
voter
would-be]
[a
judge
Judge
(Circuit
court
and
McCord
give
quired
inter-
‘reasonable
McDuffie)
Judges
District
Mullins and
pretation’
of the Constitution
had before it
the Boswell Amendment
language em-
United States.
the Alabama
Court
Constitution. The
ployed
is similar
tests
these
(as
us)
held
we
do in the case before
literacy amend-
that of the Alabama
the test
in-
was invalid on its
and
face
vagueness,
and,
of its
ment
because
valid as administered.
appear equally censurable.”
would
Note,
amendment, adopted
The Boswell
49 Col.L.Rev.
1946, permitted registration only
per-
of
explain”
sons who could
“understand
understanding
any
of
article
the Federal Constitution.
subjective
anything
intimately
length
an
The Court dealt
with the mean-
at
process.
ing
under-
A
of that
communication
of the word “understand”:
subject
standing
under-
is itself
pointed out,
may
“As
‘understand’
standing
interpretation of the listener
or
interpret.
mean to
uses
[Louisiana
atmosphere
or reader. Even in
meaning requires
both
This
words.]
good will,
cooperation
mutual
exceedingly high,
impossi-
an
ble,
if not
very
person
often
to know
difficultfor one
distinguished
standard.
actually understands what
that the other
Supreme
Justices of the
Court of the
being
appears
As
from
said or done.
frequently
United States have
dis-
registra-
however, many
evidence,
agreed
interpretations
in their
relation be-
tion officesin Louisiana the
various articles
Constitution.
Registrar
appli-
tween
history
many
learn from
We
mutually
hardly
cants can
described
be
the makers of the Constitution did
cooperative.
Rainach and
As Senator
many
provisions;
not understand its
Shaw,
Mr.
siana, candidly
officers of
Loui-
of them
understood
believed that
registra-
it,
described
provisions gave
Supreme
the.
is “the
line
tion office Louisiana
front
power
declare
Court
an act of
segregated
of the battle” to retain a
Congress unconstitutional. An un-
society.
derstanding
explanation given by
or
help
Supreme
years ago
Without
Senator Rainach or
few
meaning
generations,
Mr.
Shaw—the customs
the commerce
today. Among
community,
exposure
apply
the mores of the
clause does not
segregation
judges
of the individual to
our most
from the
learned
there are
difficult,
impossible,
cradle make it
if not
at least four different understand-
registrar
ings
explanations
objectively
for
to evaluate
of the Four-
necessarily subjective
what is
teenth Amendment to the
Constitu-
test. We
registrar’s
tion as to whether it
are sensible
made the first
difficulties
eight
applicable
his
Amendments
—he must live with
friends —but we
to state
rigorous
recognize
predilections
that his
action. Such a
* *
must
weight
standard
*
against Negroes
completeness
illustrates the
the scales
any
interpre-
group
of an
individual
hinder fair administration
citizenship
electors,
prospective
or a
tation test
test. When
whether
Negro,
deprived
nor
neither
Constitution
statutes
prescribe
of franchise
standards
the
registrars
admin-
boards
apply
net
inclined
result is
istration
calculated,
meanings
purposeful
innumerable
full
latitude
of such
*33
”
* * *
because it
phrase.
violates the
an indefinite
Fifteenth
While it is true that
F.Supp.
Amendment.
at 877-878.
there is mention
race or color
of
shortly aft-
heard
was
Davis v. Schnell
Amendment,
in the Boswell
this does
The
adoption
amendment.
er
the
the
of
(Emphasis supplied.)
not save it.”
concerned therefore
Court was
arbitrary
and
examples
action
Referring
Schnell,
of
few
to Davis v.
Las-
inher-
on the
Northampton
concentrated its discussion
siter v.
Election Board the
discriminatory
ar-
potential
and
Supreme
ent
for
has
Court
said:
held
bitrary
The
* * *
Court
administration.
“In Davis v. Schnell
the
understanding clause violated
that
the
ability
test was
to ‘un-
the citizen’s
Amendment:
the Fourteenth
explain’
derstand and
an article of
plainly,
legis-
more
the board
“To state it
the
The
Federal Constitution.
applicant
reject one
setting
has
provision
the
lative
of
another, depending
accept
great
sole-
the
discretion it vested
the
ly upon
registrar
or
literacy
likes
dislikes
whether it
made clear that
explanation
understanding
merely
requirement
the
a device to
plain-
easy.”
more
To state
even
offered.
make racial discrimination
ly,
board, by
of
the use
the words
the
recently applied
The Fifth
has
Circuit
given
explain,’ is
the
‘understand and
Davis
the
v.
rationale in
ac-
Schnell
an
arbitrary
accept
reject
power to
tion
the
under 42
United
U.S.
States
may ap-
prospective elector that
against
Reg-
1971(c)
C.A.
of
the Board
§
language
ply, or,
use
of Yick
County,
istrars of Dallas
Alabama. Unit-
Hopkins,
Wo
118 U.S.
v.
Atkins, 1963, Cir.,
ed
States
v.
1064, 1069,
S.Ct.
30 L.Ed.
these
F.2d 733.
that case the district
court
‘actually
confer,
do
not a dis-
words
prior
held that
Board had discrimi-
upon
cretion to
exercised
a con-
against Negroes,
nated
current Board
sideration of the circumstances
had not.
Section
Alabama
arbitrary
case,
each
but a naked
provides
Constitution
that the
boards
power
give or withhold
consent
determining
registrars,
qualifica-
***_»*#*
arbitrary
Such
applicants,
questionnaire
tions of
use
so
power amounts to a denial
give
worded
answers would
in-
equal protection
the law within
necessary
proper
formation
to enable
meaning
the Fourteenth
pass upon
qualifications
boards to
Amendment
Constitution
applicants.
predecessor
The
sec-
”
* * *
F.Supp. at
tion to Section 181 was “the understand
legis-
explain”
down in Davis
The
also held that both
clause struck
Court
purpose
“no set standard
and the
v. Schnell. There was
lative
administration
‘grading’
questionnaires.”
test violated
Fifteenth Amend-
Appeals
pre-
held that “this is
ment:
cisely
practice
condemned
sort
clearly appears
thus,
“It,
that [the
injunc-
granted
Davis
Schnell”
Amendment
intended
Boswell]
against
rejecting
Board
the current
being
pur-
be,
used for
and is
applicants for
or omissions in the
errors
discriminating against ap-
pose of
they presented
questionnaire
until
plicants
the franchise on the
of standards” which
court
“definite set
Therefore,
of race or color.
basis
approval
court.
would meet the
necessarily brought
we
through
itself,
Louisiana
the Amendment
conclusion
legal advisory agency,
Alabama,
its authorized
both
the Constitution
Institute,84
questioned
object
has
its
Louisiana Law
manner
constitutionality
unconstitutional,
administration,
teachers,
neys
Institute, composed
chartered
and law
Law
advisory
legislature
distinguished
“an official
most
attor-
of the State’s
*34
legislature
Act
test.
52
the
because it
test
no
or
L.ouisiana
face
furnished
of 1946 directed the Louisiana Law In-
standard
to control administrative
dis-
“projet
prepare
stitute to
a draft or
cretion”.
The Institute
summarized its
position
for the
of Louisiana”.
Constitution
State
as follows:
completed and
work
cir-
1954 the
In
“1. The
deleting
Institute
in
these
thorough
culated
the State.85 After
qualifications
was influenced
the
study
law,
conclud-
the Institute
following considerations:
provisions
Louisi-
if
ed that
establishing
an under-
ana Constitution
a.
constitutionality
The doubtful
standing
at-
interpretation
were
present
provisions;
“Certainly
court,
the same
in
if
tacked
give
arbitrary
they
b.
power
The
charges
successfully
con-
made
be
could
registrars
to
voters,
since no
cerning
provisions
[as
Louisiana
objective
provided;
criteria
they
Schnelt],
would be
in Davis v.
made
86
Reporter com-
unconstitutional.”
“although
given
discrimination
authority
legis-
mented that
c. The
found
Davis v.
administration was
jet
[in
lature under
require
the Pro
* *
*
de-
Schnell],
court
lower
qualifica-
additional
educational
provision unconstitutional
clared the
tions.”
commission,
pose
reform
law
provision,
law revision
of a constitutional
would
agency
legal
agency
contrary
research
seem
be
to the Fifteenth
24:201
LSA-R.S.
of Louisiana”.
State
Amendment.
“ n Whether constitutional
Smith,
(1950).
Louisiana
Role of
provisions
See
(1956);
Institute,
stand,
La.L.Rev. 691
16
Law
Tucker,
this character
could now
even
Institute,
though
showing
Law
1
Louisiana
no
of malicious
(1938).
purpose
adoption
La.L.Rev. 139
discrimination
administration,
subject
question.
In
rejected a constitu-
In
voters
1956 the
previous
involving
two
cases
‘un
such
convention.
tional
derstanding’ clauses,
concerning
one
Mississippi
provision
on Davis v.
comments
The Institute’s
[Wil
Mississippi,
213,
are:
Sclmell
liams v.
170 U.S.
18 S.
constitutionality
(1898)
that
“It
is clear
L.Ed.
[42
Ct. 583
1012]
] and the
provisions
involving
above is now
listed
other
the Louisiana constitu
impossible
predict
questionable.
provision
Barnes,
It is
[Trudeau
tional
v.
[5
may
supreme
exactly
court
re-
F.(2d)
what the
(1933)],
Cir.] 65
563
the court
quire
strike down the
provisions
future to
held
the constitutional
‘understanding’
standing
proof
and similar clauses.
alone without
of discrim
(1)
was shown
Schnell case it
ination in administration were not un
adopting
purpose m
the amendment
equal
constitutional as
violative
(2)
protection
was to
clause of
the Fourteenth
disfranchise
fact,
that,
the amendment was ad-
However,
Amendment.
in the Schnell
way
case,
although
in such a
ministered
disfran-
discrimination in adminis
Negroes.
[Emphasis
found,
added.]
chise
tration was
the lower court did not
charges
Certainly
could
upon this;
if the same
rather,
base its conclusion
it
concerning
successfully
provision
made
the Lou-
declared the
unconstitutional
provisions,
would be uncon-
isiana
on its
because it
no test
face
furnished
stitutional.
or standard
to control administrative
likely
Thus,
“It also seems
the court
discretion.
be that now
equal pro
provisions
violation
would find
such
will be held unconstitu
Amend
regardless
clause
the Fourteenth
tection
tional in themselves
of wheth
only discriminatory
discriminatory
if
ment
administra
er
administration
proved.
Hopkins,
Projet
Wo
[Yick
tion were
v.
is found.”
of a Constitution
395
ing
proceedings in the District
perma-
making
further
"a
objected to
The Court
Court,
in civil
defendant
held the
County”
prac-
in Dallas
fixture
nent
contempt.
orders
two
Here,
The Court’s
as
law.
of state
tices violative
July 15, 1963,
the defendant
restrained
opinion,
developed
in the
later
will be
language as
precisely
same
an effect
such
relief does not have
¿
Moreover,
quoted above.
application.
in its
restricted
case
practice”
“pattern and
a
Atkins was
Again,
Penton,
v.
United States
district
which
1971 in
under Section
M.D.Ala.1962,
F.Supp.
193
dis-
Reg-
Board
current
held
court
prior
trict court
Feb-
found
while
against Ne-
had not discriminated
istrars
ruary
Registrars
1961, the
Board of
Court
finding
groes,
undisturbed
a
Montgomery
Alabama,
County,
had
ques-
Atkins, the
Finally, in
Appeals.
required
ap-
perfection
completing
Registrars
Board
a
whether
tion was
plication form,
“the Board
as of that date
state
valid
a
required
violate
should be
perfect
require
raised the standard to
predecessor
because
future
in the
law
application.”
F.Supp.
Dur-
at 197.
county
violated
had
of that
boards
ing
period
the earlier
Board had used
as
here,
issue
past;
same law
application
tricky
form “as a
exam-
state
whether
citizenship
Negroes only,
ination
test”
or
for
registration
standards
raise the
Negro applicant
failed meet the
“[i]f
in-
has
enacting
law
newa
him,
required
standard
he was denied
freezing discrimination
effect
evitable
registration
regardless of whether
A
law.
prior
an unconstitutional
under
formal,
error or omission
the form was
squarely covers
fortiori,
v. Wilson
Lane
technical,
inconsequential.”
White
Court.
the case before
applicants,
Negroes, had
as-
unlike
been
1962,
Lynd,
ways.
respect
5 Cir.
manifold
v.
sisted in
With
States
In United
den’d, 1963,
Negro
past
applicants,
818,
cert.
U.S.
and future
301 F.2d
Judge
applied
L.Ed.2d
con-
S.Ct.
Johnson
“standards
injunction,
temporary
past practices.”
entered
sistent with
Id. at
Registrar
restraining
enjoined
F.Supp.
pending appeal,
of 212
He
the defend-
**
*
using
ants
“from
different
“
stringent
* *
require-
*
qualification
more
refusing
give
failing
**
*
than
ments
*
priv-
Negro
applicants
same
*
* *
*
used
the Board
[those}
reviewing
applica-
ileges
their
as to
January 1, 1956.”
since at least
United
they
filled
are
forms at the time
Penton,
1962),
(M.D.Ala.,
States
advising
applicants
out
F.Supp. 193.
appear on their
such omissions
Dyer,
now or
Ross v.
forms
Cir.
heretofore
312 F.2d
given
applicants
analogous
presented
to white
un-
situation. The
**
*.”
circumstances
similar
Court had before it
der
the brother-and-sis-
*40
added.)
(Emphasis
public
rule of
sys-
ter
the Houston
school
tem,
long-standing
a
requiring
rule
a
appeal
injunction pending
was
After
child to attend the school which his older
Legislature
Mississippi
issued,
siblings attended. The rule was one “of
Mississippi
of
Section
amended
long standing applied to white and Ne-
mandatory
requirement
make
Code
groes alike”. This Court observed:
application
applicants fill out their
that
“On the basis
The amend-
of
assistance.
without
evidence
form
requirement
ap-
long
showed it to be
a rule
no
of
adds
ment
standing applied
approved
applicant
can be
white and
plication
Ne-
Judge
groes alike, the District
registered unless
the blanks on the
all
his
responsively”
opinion
“properly
memorandum
reasoned
are
form
plaintiffs
July 15,1963,
applicant.
‘the colored
not
do
seek
out
filled
injunction, pend-
same treatment as is afforded white
extended
entitled;
they
students,
voting registration
to which
are
crimination in
is not
fact,
different,
simply
process
applying
met
seek a
a
new
higher
treatment,
superior,
appli-
reason
standards to all future
grant
their
not
cants.
The
race. The law does
new tests
discriminate
logic
against Negroes
voting age by
them this.’
we think that
But
sub-
jecting
alone is
to overcome
them to standards to which the
insufficient
registered
practical
applicants (most
effect of this rule which
are
whom
Negro
white)
perpetuates
subjected.
prom-
to some
families
were not
The
segregated system despite
justice
ise
of evenhanded
in the future
stair-step plan
plain purpose
undoing past
does
not bind
our hands in
applies
injustices.
to ameliorate it. That
equally
over-
to white
group,
as to
VIII.
looks the fact that
compulsory
certain
at
attendance
brings
question
This
us to
fash-
uncon-
schools has been
result
ioning
necessary remedy.
pur-
The
stitutional discrimination.
power Congress
adopt
The
pose
eradi-
is
the court decree
Rights
protection
Civil
measures for
depriva-
cate that unconstitutional
process against
the electoral
debasement
equal protection,
matter
no
tion of
granted
expressly
discrimination
(Emphasis
how
felt manifested.”
the Fifteenth and Fourteenth Amend
added.)
ments.
housekeeping power.
It
insisting
registrars
apply
sweep
legisla
“appropriate
of the
was
difficult test which
now to
tion”
sweep
clause is no
than
less
registrants,
applied
never
to white
“necessary
proper”
clause.
compulsion
is no more
of state officials protection
vote,
without
than there
to violate
law here
state
regard
race,
important
in
citizen-
in Yick Wo. Enforcement
dividual,
para
but the Nation has the
just
point
ship
test at this
would be
integrity
mount
interest
against Negroes
discriminatory
as en-
process.
electoral
These considerations
licensing
forcement of the San Francisco
argue against
grudging,
narrow rem
against
laun-
Chinese
ordinance directed
edy.
Congress
So that
will
will
drymen
in Yick Wo.
would have been
courts,
be clear to the
1971(e) ex
Section
validity
requiring
of the ordinance
pressly states:
laundry operated in a
license for
way
“This subsection shall in' no
building could be asserted
wooden
upon
be construed as a limitation
relicensing
all
laundries on a
after a
existing powers of the court.”
Allowing
nondiscriminatory basis.
Thus,
specific remedy
in addition to the
laundrymen
had been favored
who
Rights
provided in
Act,
the Civil
courts
per-
past
licensed would have
to remain
authority
grant
retain an undiminished
Thus,
petuated
al-
the discrimination.
equitable
suitable
relief that will both
though
application of
ordinance
rectify past inequities now, without de
enjoined,
the ordinance itself was
lay,
prevent
and will
inequities.
future
in the sense that its en-
unconstitutional
States,
See State Alabama v. United
necessary
had the
effect of vio-
forcement
Cir.
F.2d
aff’d
lating
constitution until
U.S.
83 S.Ct.
399 qualifications. opin- the course of In the constitutional That however, ion, by it said: not, Louisiana is used quite clear “per invalid” becomes se right “The to vote intended to be holdings light prior of when viewed right protected refers to the vote It Supreme Court. United States the laws established and con- whether difficult to decide is sometimes stitution of the State.” Supreme rely Court on as the the law long jurispru- In a line of unbroken ago, years toor interpreted it a few beginning 1874, dence the United week, toor rely interpreted last it as on Supreme consistently has States Court might interpret speculate how on recognized voting privilege that the instance, However, in this it tomorrow. upon States, is citizens the conferred suffrage, right of to a citizen’s relative and that the United Constitution States inter- to be as prefer law the I believe upon anyone privilege does not confer the Supreme preted United States the suffrage. Williams, Pope v. past. many in the occasions Court 632, 573, 621, 575, U.S. S.Ct. L.Ed. proposition the rejecting that the 817, the Court said: right added the Amendment Fourteenth privilege “The to vote State privileges and immunities the to vote to given by is not the Federal Constitu- citizenship, Supreme Court, in the tion, by any 177, 162, of its amendments. Happersett, 21 Wall. Minor v. privilege springing It not 627, is 177, from 162, said: 22 L.Ed. 88 U.S. citizenship of the United States. can con- if Courts “Certainly, * * * may not It be refused on settled, any question this one sider race, previous account of color years people nearly For is. servitude, condition of but it does upon idea that the acted citizenship not follow mere Constitution, conferred citi- it when States.” United necessarily zenship, confer not did suffrage. right If uniform majority Therefore, insofar as the long continued, practice, settle can somehow, opinion seems indicate that important so construction guaranteed right is vote as the Constitution instrument Constitution, respectful- I United States confessedly is, States United suggest majority ly that is in error. certainly has here. it been done most privilege In view of fact that province what the decide Our voting entirely emanates from the is, what it should not to declare law States, not from the Federal Govern- be.” ment, and in view the fact that properly judicial function exercised Reese, 92 Then, States v. in United indicating only by whether or 564, 563, disposing L.Ed. U.S. provisions has transcended State right argument that vote Constitution, just it follows, Federal by the Fifteenth Amend- was conferred night day, follows the the role Constitution, States the United ment Court is not of the Federal to direct the Supreme said: Court procedures to used Amendment does Fifteenth Supreme registering voters. The suffrage right upon confer not anyone.” the “conditions has held under suffrage may be exer- lies with the States. cised” Lassiter v. Blacker, then, in McPherson And Northampton Elections, Board of 1, 39, 13 36 L.Ed. S.Ct. U.S. 45, 50, 79 S.Ct. U.S. L.Ed.2d Supreme Court once more States United recognized the fact was within majority opinion lengthy, province State, so and not the many extra-judicial Government, involves so dis- to determine voter Federal *44 terpretation courses, per se”, difficult to that it rather de- test is was “invalid they only so, then, holds the State need termine whether it that said application provision the State constitutional thereof becomes com- pletely establishing the constitutional irrelevant Statute because as heretofore pointed interpretation way unconstitutional out, test are there that an is merely themselves, may it holds unconstitutional whether statute be constitu- tionally applied. uncon- hand, laws have been that these State On the other if stitutionally must con- per constitutional, I statute administered. itself is se however, majority agree clude, intend- then I that the cannot that the “vices can- they the close injunction enjoining near not be hold, ed to as stated cured opinion, its application”. constitutional unfair of their that I believe that a “per interpretation invalid un- Court test is se should be most reluctant to declare Amendment, is and it the Fifteenth unconstitutional der statutes con- per provisions under the Fourteenth stitutional State, se invalid also of a only Con- of the United States should do Amendment” so when the statute being case, prior This provision stitution. the constitutional in- and/or voting history requirements clearly in Lou- volved is in contravention of the great length isiana, at United discussed States Constitution. In Cum- mings majority opinion, completely im- Bank, is Merchants National per invalid If these laws are U.S. material. L.Ed. the United States they Supreme se, not then it matters how Court held that a law is not to of administra- be held merely No method administered. unconstitutional because is invalid a law which tion could validate unfaithful administration. It held majority per If, however, a statute, intend- that facts, se. valid toas set contrary may specific to their be hold, is, ed to invalid as to another. That invalidity per se, concerning application may appli- statement its be valid or its unconstitutional because n cation may notwithstanding the test is invalid, that be then, application, improper constitutionality in view the of the statute itself. City in connection Ry. their ultimate order Kansas Southern Co. v. Anderson, of the new citizen- use with the State’s 233 U.S. 34 S.Ct. ship test, Supreme is to understand L.Ed. it difficult Court considered merely enjoin they strongly rejected why the im- did not the contention that application proper of the constitutional to hold that statute has been uncon- twenty-one stitutionally applied test specific under one they it had that set where found of facts is holding Parishes tantamount applied. improperly will later that the As statute been itself invalid. hesitancy they noted, in di- had no be I respectfully disagree must therefore viding and hold- into sections the State findings with both the and the conclu- may citizenship ing that new majority sions insofar as the applied in Parishes of the State some validity of interpreta- the constitutional may applied in other not be while tion test used in the State of Louisi- reasoning, line with Parishes. ana is concerned. While it well be interpretation test if the many have been instances of only improper because bad improper applications of never- improper use, should have then the use theless, improper applications such do only twenty-one enjoined in the been not, my opinion, render the laws improper- it had been where Parishes If, themselves unconstitutional. as I remaining applied, ly Parishes case, believe be the the constitutional should not in- have been the State interpretation test unconstitution- in their use of test. per terfered se, improper then applica- al majority, they If, as stated ac- test should have been en- tually joined. prefer found that the constitutional I in- to believe that
4y'j[ strenuously disagree, which I Supreme United States with then Court of suppose, token, which I the same I could cases meant what it said many citizenship many, *45 cited, other have that test is found the have and in the improper might to the unconstitutional cited because cases that have been right However, effect, the re- use. does not find namely, same the Court that citizenship to decide and that test has been im- mains with the States regis- properly they fact, requirements used, voter in have not declare the prefer it I that found way be unconstitutional in to to believe tration.. function merely decide, spite Nevertheless, in to the Court is whatsoever. majority fact, posi- specific case, takes the in not the this each whether prohibitions tion that twenty-one in State the use of this new test has transcended where in States Constitu- Parishes consid- contained tion, the United case, interpretation and if to be the ered the constitutional such is found necessary, order, by improperly applied, injunction, to to test have been if discriminatory prac- termination would result in continued discrimination of such proper purged I do it is a unless all from the tices. not believe that voters were re-registration complete establish de- rolls and new function of the Court to a requirements using qualification voters, citizenship all of of new cree the That, accomplished. majority voters in the of Louisiana. State my opinion, precisely citizenship ma- in jority what the decrees that is the new test discriminatory case not be used the Court in this does. “until effect the test to the been vitiated has concluding the constitution- After that satisfaction of court”. In other interpretation per al is “invalid test words, it seem that to would order majority a se”, proceed to con- then comply order, with this the new citizen- validity the new sideration of the ship test, though even constitutional in citizenship test, despite fact that every respect, may be not used until the allegations, were no nor could there every single case of voter the rolls citizenship be, that test was either tweny-one has Parishes been submitted improperly applied. unconstitutional Indeed, to the Court for a determination of majority specifically states whether or not individual each voter has upon that stitutionality it does not the con- “touch registered properly vote, to been without citizenship test as a simply agree discrimination. I cannot qualification voting”, state but then properly this is a function within proceeds prohibit twenty- to use in authority the ambit of Anyone Court. this one Parishes in the of Louisiana. State right claim has to discrimina- elementary require too It is citation tion, and when discrimination has been authority properly that a statute right day claimed, he has his Legislature passed pre- a State But court. until such a case or contro- sumed be constitutional until such versy presented, has been the Court sim- as it is found to time be unconstitutional. ply has no to intervene. The ma- citizenship This Court has not found the opinion jority states: “The ordered unconstitutional, test must, be and thus, it society our Constitution establishes does course, presumed be con- permit one man to have uncontrolled is, fact, If stitutional. the test con- power over his fellow citizens. When the stitutional, as it must be considered to be registrar omnipo- clothes a State light failure Court’s to find it deciding qualifications tence unconstitutional, complete then, it law, has enacted ‘not voters, it but an mystery to me where the Court finds its attempt to make the arbiter in such authority enjoin If its use. the ma- ” in himself.’ the law case ma- jority has found that the constitutional merely opinion jority would refuse to is unconstitutional registrar improper use, “a of its to be law in a conclusion allow him- because ,402 Barnes, stead, case of Trudeau F.2d substitute, this self”, his 1933). (C.A.5 All action no other opinion can Court. This pursuant taking law Court Louisiana taken than over effect n ofthe functions of the State decision, was, filing prior of this when
n comesto pursuant taken determining qualifications to a statute which major- Circuit, specifi- Court, Federal cally had Fifth required privileges. The for voter held to ity be constitutional. opinion further states: “[T]his n adheresto the the Trudeau case Court said: principle that fo read courts (cid:127)this (cid:127)case and local tempts a State the rolls This from the Atkins fails capable ‘They ana Atkins United predecessor that case under n quirements without that if the a new law which n opinion says, holds lated the requirements, until pretation test extent tion, a valid State Registrars ers in the State. issue down. law go complete on to standards for Fifth statement, establishing question (1963). The specifically wishes to alter completely proposition has been here is this fail to State clearly interfere with established on the States an effect same law under say and the procedures.” throughout not majority means what re-registration present Circuit distinguish should be unconstitutional own board very may law that the recognize whether used was whether an “unconstitutional grounds necessary it must may opinion. The case, instances of discrimina- Atkins, to do so. rejects effect, has the freezing discrimination same law present They try to in the future because not alter its Court majority decision was re-registering all vot- do the State required difference but improve its surely that in that that whenever past. so State I necessary, ines- et case is that county had vio- should majority now had can entire State. fact that present case al., everyone rejected The Atkins opinion at- my Appeals proposition distinguish prior have voting may raise They of Louisi- Board been it only majority if it enacting between opinion federal handed says in violate voting failed inter- *46 state F.2d law” then case law. spe- has say re- by a to be The effect of ty-one use guish Consequently, case, plies uniformly and without discrimi- clause can Amendment. the Fourteenth or the Fifteenth test, It is difficult to conceive how this right of citizens of the United States “It which stitution nation to voters of voters the color. trarily cant a not desires to istrar of voters clause and without plaintiff to any not his [*] if and to say had the ministrative the new him, he that the vote previous [*] an equal protection undertake to the Atkins qualifications say, trial drawn that the defendant as relief to Parishes that of [*] appellate plaintiff is under attack alike, * right denied that at once »> on and refuse to protects every court arbitrary * register citizenship would State the State them account of the distinction condition of servitude. denies to none intelligence, remedy * which he was entitled. expense involved, It said to case had majority order in by apply court. The Louisiana Con- deny apparent lays finally passed upon to vote to a not have to vote. We from right majority giving relief, is pursued power every simply or down without violate to himself to applies assume, Constitution It is race, color, citizen who abridge being by which laws, to submit race and registrar received of them but attempted to distin- the ad- order the the twen- not idle either appli- to all delay arbi- jury, that, deny open does reg- can- the ap- valid. this existing, law un- cifically violate valid held to be constitutional in the State til dicial this tells them that need determination of cases and contro- longer citizenship obviously versies contemplated by violate it. jurisdictional now, grant been as of and has not limited valid contained in including by any court, held invalid United States Constitution Therefore, now to one. for this Court I can do no more than to concur with using order the to refrain from State Judge Bell’s dissent in Davis v. Board of that test is to order to violate them School County, Commissioners of Mobile existing valid law of the Louisi- (C.A.5 322 F.2d 1963), when he my opinion judgment, ana. * * “Therefore, said: I must dissent majority just another in this case with the admonition that more constitu- decreeing” example “personal so rights tional gained will be lost than bitterly by Judge criticized Hutcheson long by departure run proce- dissenting opinion his United Lee v. dures which time, have stood the test of Cir., America, (1963), States part and which process are a of due completely F.2d concur 770. I law as we have it,” heretofore known Judge remarks of Hutcheson contained *47 Judge to concur with Cameron’s dissent therein. Sharp Lucky, 252 F.2d brief, cannot the take I sanction (C.A.5 1958), wherein he said: “This by this of the functions of the over Court epoch history [post sad in our Civil War] whereby attempts to es- State part, fomented in no small well-in- administer, tablish, and as well as to ad- hurry.” tentioned men too much of a judicate the laws to voter relative registration. must, reasons, this Court I respectfully I believe these ju- should confine its activities to the dissent.