Newspaper Page Text
/.
■MATES,
Subscription
, Year..«*•••
c Uontbs......
t Montbs.-
Adtxuci.
ADVERTISING RATES
rtCHl-WBEKLYMEVS.
THE
ALBANY NE
ws- :
BY CAEEYW. STYLES.
; *
Libertas ©t Natal© Solum.
85 Per Annum
VOL. 3.
ALBANY. GEORGIA. JUNE 25, 1869.
r
NO. 50\
State, nt any period of its history, any
deniaiin terms .of the right to voto or
hold oflicc, to colored persons as such.
By tlio old law, they were either slaves
or ireo persons ot color, and these
rights wore denied them by declaring,
that they were not and could not ho class, as citizens.
rights ns defined in the Code, by con
terriug ujion them the right ot citizen
ship. It tranaierred them from the
4th class ei natural porsous, under the
above classification, who were denied
citizenship by the code, to the 1st
~ 1' oW ds, of the usual modes!
i - i .(.netted at $15 por annum, or
dBMMons. U Announo i„g Candidates $5.
HjgJJSrliS M»rrl“8« NoUom, not to oi-
1 usd 1 *S°*[*’ ,(|Stt«a«nU must bo paid in
I YrsaiUnt aaternse « . .. *.
Legal advertisements will
- — 1-1 — them, to
IV *^1^1,1, per cent will be allowed
’KsiaVUshed merchants in
I fa* w MWa AAHt**- Savannah, will
^ ,».■ xtAOnr needs money,
ility will always
duo on proacn-
r to I
ho preliminary twad-
totroddeed in the formula of the
’ a, OB the negro eligibilty ques..
did present the naked opinions
rflhVtiiree Justices.
[Olf OF COURT AB RKNDBRED BY
jtisric* u’cay.
I agree that the Code of
be law of Georgia as sepe-
fee Constitution—does make
ilor eligiblo to otiico, my
at eligibility is giiarnn-
. Constitution of the State,
.once these propositions as
_itpfinflipies upon which my
The Constitution of Georgia
i as the Constitution of 1808 is
I sef Constitution, made by and form
'd fora people who at the time were,
" '■ “ '.s of the case, ami by the
Jnlted States, without any
overament; and as the
iJ without regard to
LinctloiiB, and will,-
to distinctions ol color,
«ted on equal terms in the
*tiou fer tile Convention, and in its
mpmitlon and deliimrationa, us well
in tlie'Snal ratifieation of tlio Con.
tutiou it framed—in the oonstruc-
a of that Constitution, and in the
lestigatiod ot what rights it guar-
,or denies, such distinctions are
i be ignored.
e rights of the peopled
, white and blaok, are not
I to them by the Constitution
, - The Object and effeot of that
lent ii not to givo, but to re-
s, deny, regulate and guarantee
.s; and ill persons recognized by
Conltitution aa citizens of the
i have equal legal and political
1, ercept aa otherwise expressly
dtled and uniform
f the word ‘‘citizen,” when us
nco to the citizens of the
oftbe.United States,
'its as such citizens,
i a person entitled to
I and political, enjoys
i.in that State, unless
press exception, made.
, covering the particu-
ilaasot persons, whose
ubstion. •
i used in a stature, or
»havo their ordinary sig-‘
' w ,ltoy be words ot.art,
e the sense placed upon
skilled in the art, or
; bo defined and
-in tybioh latter oaso the
, prevail.
48th and 1540th
i*a Revised Code, it
iccUrcd, that among the
in tho right to hold
»U citizens are entitled
■MSBl
alien of 1808 expressly
i the" la* of the
it Constitution uses
it uses it in the
y tho express defi-
— .t odopt?d.
ant and Motion, 8d of
. f eruonr born in the
»or naturalized therein,
Ws State, • are eitizens of
"" "ie cede adopted by
express terms du-
he rights of eiti.
• hold office, a coL
i the United States,
l State, Ja by that
“""Gsac
l tim repeal of those
I or their alter*.,
id person of the
flteed. 'Since it is'a
i it is not ia tha now*
mean
ales
r rights i
crlbea t
, legal i
Dg-of the
• guaraufeo waa
l to vote involves the
.for, unless other-
ovided, since it is
citizens of tlio State, and when Articlo
1st, Scctiou 2d oi tbo Constitution of
1808, reooguized them aa citizen*, the
right lo voto and hold oflice, except as
otherwise provided by tlio Coustitu.
lion, was “ex vi termini,” also guaran
teed to them.
lltli. Ineligibility to office invol
ves not only the denial to the pereou
claiming the place the right lo bo chos
en, hut, what ia of far greater marncut,
the right ot selecting power to choose;
and to make out a cusu of ineligibility
thcro must be sucli a state of affairs as
established not only the want ol pow
er to ho clioscu, blit a denial of power
in tlio selecting parly to choose.
12th. The people of n State, in their
collective capacity, have every right n
political society can have, except such
as they have conferred upon the Uni
ted States, or on somo department ol
the Slate Governmenl, or have express
ly denied to themselves liy the t'onsti.
lion; and as the right to select a pub-
lie officer is a political right, the peo
ple or that branch of the Government
clothed by the Constitution, with the
power to choose, may select whomso
ever it will, unless the right to choose
a particular person or class of persons
iB expressly taken away by the Consti
tution.
OPINION OP CHIEF .IL'STIPK IIBOWN.
Tile view which I take of tlio rights
of the parties litigant in this ease, un
der llie Code of Georgia, renders it
umieeessary forme to enter into an in*
vesligalion of the question ; whether
tlio Fourteenth Amendment ot the
Constitution of the United States, m
the second section of the first article ol
the Constitution of Georgia, which in
substance is identical with the Four
teenth Amendment, confers upon col
ored citizens tlio right to hold office,
II the respondent ill this case acquires
tlio right by grant found in Wilier of
the said Constitutions, or in tile Code
of this State, it is sufficient for all the
purposes of the ease at bar, and enti
tles him to a revisal ot the judgment
of the Court below which was adverse
to ids right.
The third paragraph oi tlio nth av-
tide of tile Constitution of the United
Slate and the laws and treaties made
in pursuance thereof; and in Bulmrdi,.
nation to tlio Baid Constitution of Ibis
Slate; the “body of law known ns tlio
Codo ol Georgia, and the acts amend
atory thereof, which said Code mid
acts are embodied in the printed book
known as Irwin’s Code, except so
much of the several statutes, Code and
laws as may bo inconsistent witli the
Supreme law herein recognized.
The Code, Bection 1540, classifies
natural persons in four classes: 1st,
citizens; 2d, residents; 3d, aliens,
4tli, persons of color.
Section 40 of tbo Code declares that,
All “white” persons born in this State
or in any other State of this Union,
who aro or may become residents ot
this State, with, the intention of re
maining herein;'all “white” persons
naturalilzcd under tlio laws ot the
United States, and who are, or inay
become, residents of this Stato with
tlio intention of remaining heroin ; all
persons who have obtained a right to
citizenship under the former laws, and
all children, wherever born, whoso
father was a citizen of this State at
tlio timo ot tlio birth of such children;
or in case of poBtliuinous children at
tlio timo ot his death, are held and
deemod citizens of this State.
By the Codo tlio distinction is
therefore clearly drawn between citi
zens who aro “white” persons and per
sons ol oolor.
In other words, none arc citizens
under the “printed book known as Ir
win’s Code" but white persons. Hav
ing specified the class of persons who
are citizens, the Coda proceeds, in
Section 1648, to dofloe somo of the
rights of citizens as follows:
“Among khe rights, ot citizens arc
the cqjoytuoiit ot personal security, of
personal liberty, private property and
tlio disposition tiiereof, the elective
franchise, “tlio right to hold office,” to
appeal to tha Courts, lo testify as a
witness, to perform any civil function,
and to keep’and bear arms.”
Section 1549 declares that, “Act
oitizens aro. entitled to - exercise all
their righ ts'as such unless especially
prohibited by law.”
Section 1660 prohibits females from
exercising the elective franchise, or
holding invil'office.
Section 1651 prohibits minors from
tbo exeroiao of civil functions, till they
are of legal age, „
Sections. 1852 and 1055 paohlbit
certain criminals, and persons “non
compos mentis,’’ from exsroismg cer
tain rights of oilitens.
Articles,chapter I, title 1, part 2,
of the Code defines the right* of the
4th olasa of natural persons, designs-
The 40th Section oi the Code limited
citizenship to white persons. The
Constitution struck out the word
white, uud mudo all porsous born or
naturalized in the United States, ami
resident in this State, citizens, without
regard to race or color. It so amend
ed Scctiou 40 of the Code, as greatly
Stttc shall make or cuforco any law
which shall abridge the privileges or
immunities of “citizens” of the United
States.”
Tho Constitution ol this State do-
claics that “All persons born or nat
uralized in tlio United States, and res
ident. in this State, arc hereby declared
“citizens” ot tins Htaie, and no laws
shall be made or enforced which shall
abridge tbo privileges or immunities
of “citizens” of the Uni
“of this State.”-.
to eulargo the class of citizous. But adoption aud ratification of the Con-
„ifo*
e *T>res»lon '
**clttaiou ol
***• »*»?.' ha* been in this
Ld MMWnr'of iicr, giving the
riizhi to make contracts, auo ana be
„
jKsytSS SSSW'fflSgfe'
it repealed no part ot section 1048,
which defines the l ights of citizens.
I did not undertake to define the
rights of a citizen. It left that to the
Legislature, subject to such guaran
tees ns are coma tied in the Constitu
tion itself*, which the Legislature can"
not take away. It declares expressly
that no law shall be made, or enforc
ed, which shall “abridge the privileges
or immunities of citizens of the Uni
ted States, or of this State.” It is not
necessary to the decision of tills enso
to inquire, what are the “privileges
and immu; ilies” of a citizen? tvineh
ore guaranteed by the 14tli amend'
ment to tim Constitution of the Uni
ted States, and by the Constitution ol
this State. Whatever they may be,
they aro projected ngnin. i sill abridg
ment by legislation. Ymms the lull
extent of the Constitution. All rights
of the citizen, not embraced within
these terms, if they do uot embrace
all, are subject to the control ot the
Legislature.
Whether the “privileges and immu*
nities” of the citizen embraces politi
cal rights, including the right to hold
oflice, 1 need not now inquire. 11
they do, that right is guaranteed
aliku by the Constitution of the Uni
ted Slates and the Constitution of
Georgia; and is beyond the control ol
the legislation. If not, that right, is
subject to the control of the legisla
ture as the popular voice may dictate;
and in that ease the legislature would
have power to grant or restrict it at
pleasure, in ease of white persons, as
well as of persons ol color. The Con
stitution oi Georgia has gone as far as
the fourteenth amendment lias gone,
hut no luiiher. An authoritative con
struction ol the four tech th amendment
by the Supreme Court of the United
States upon this point, would be
equally binding as a construction of
the Constitution of the State of Ueor:
gia, which is in the same words.
Georgia 1ms fully complied with
the terms dictated by Congress in the
formation ot her Constitution. Shu
ha-5 stopped nothin" short, and gone
nothing beyond. The highest judicial
tribunal ot the Union will no doubt
finally settle the tucauing of tbo tcim
‘privilege i aud 'immunities’ ol the cit
izen, which legislation cannot abridge;
and the people ot Georgia, as well as
those of all the other States, must con
form to, and in good fiuth abide by
aud carry out the decision. All the
rights of all the citizens, of every
State, which are included in the phrase
“privileges and immunities” are pro
tected against legislative adridgement
by the fundamental law of the Union.
Those not so embraced, unless inclu
ded within some other Constitutional
guaranty are subject to legislative ac
tiou. The samo rights whiontho four
teenth amendment to the Constitution
of the Uuited Slates confers upon, and
g uarantees to, a colored citizen of
nto, are conferred upon and guaran*
teed to every colored citizen of Geor
gia, by the same amendment, and by
the Constitution oi this State, made in
conformity to tbo reconstruction acts
of Congress.
Whatever may or may not bo the
“privileges and immunities” guaran
toed to the colored race by the Con
stitution of the United Slates, and of
this State, it cannot be questioned that
both Constitutions make them citizens
And I think it veiy clear, that the
Code of Georgia, upon which alone I
base this opinion, which is binding
upon all her nihaoitants while of force,-,
confers upon ‘all’ her citizens the
right to hold office, unless they are
prohibited by some provisions found
in the code itself I find no such pro
hibition in the code, affecting the
rights of this respondent. I am, there
fore of the opinion that the judgement
of the Court below is erroneous, and I
concur in the judgment oi reversal.
DISSENTING OPINION 0? JIJNQE HIRAM
WARNHg.
frotn hit.own Manuscript.
YVabnbu, J, Dissenting,
The defendant is a person of color,
having as the record state., one-eighth
of negro or Airican blood in Ilia veins,
—bo claims to be ‘is—fully’ entitled lo
hold and exercise the duties of the
Clerk of the Superior Coqrtiii Chat
ham County, aud ‘the’ question prusen
ted lor oar consideration and judge
ment ia, —bettor a person of color, of
the description mentioned in the re
cord,ia “legally” emitted to hold office
in this Suite, under'the Constitution
and latva thereof V
The Fourteenth ; Amendment to the
Constitution ol the United Stales, do.
eUres that *hitl peftont bom or nator*
alixed in tlio United States,-and sab-
jeot to the jurisdiction thereof, arc
Htitutlon of this Stulo ju 1808, tlio ilo
,1'ciiilqiu,became (notwithstanding ins
color aud African blood), a “citizen”
ol ll:o United States, mill of this State
and is entitled to have all the privi-
L’es or iii!!iimiit.icH ol a citizen,
lines the fact that the defendant
was made u “citizen” of the Slain with
all iho privileges or iniiniinities of a
“citizen lliercol,” confer upon him tim
“legal” right to hold office in this
Stato ns such citizen f When we
laKe into considers!inn the definition
and objoct ot creating “an office,”and
by what nulhorit
ratYsJ.tTonsd" t ^Talrs>dy»h»»R l *t -«»
so tar as tli
on the ft ‘
and no r
•kh^Tbu# UwrCode stood prior to oiliieiw ot the Uuited Staten am! tho
*... iU»-
Jnitefi Slates,
Fi op^ the time of the adoption of
the .Fourteenth Amendment, and tho
y it it* con fenc'd upon, b ......
citizen,” the distinction he ween’ been specified in a former
the privileges and immunities ot a (erring to articlo 40,
law of this State, on the 1st day of
Jauuary, 180.1. By tho 40th Section
thereof it is declared, “All “white”
portions horn in this State, or in any
other Stato of thin Union, who aro, or
may become residents of tldn State
with tho intention of remaining hero
in ; all “white” person naturalized un**
dor tho laws of tho United Staten, and
who aro or may become residents of
this State with tho intention of re
maining herein ; all persons who have
obtained a right to eitizenship under
“former laws,” and all children whore-
ever born, whose father waa a citizen
of this Stato at the time of tho birth
of such children, or in case of postku"
uious children at the timo of bin death,
aro held and deemed “citizens” ol this
State. Persons having one eighth or
moro of negro or African blood in
their veins aro not “white persons in
the moaning of this Code.” The
1040th Section declares that “Natur
al persons are distinguished according
to their rights and “status” into 1st
citizens; lid residents, not citizens ;
id aliens; 4tli “persons of color.”
^The persons lo whom belong the
rights of citizenship, and the mode ot
acquiring and losing tho samo, havo
articlo
“citizen,” us such, is oho tiling, and
that his legal right lo hold oflicc as
such citizen under “tho authority o1
the Slate,” is another ami quite a dib.
(event question. W hat is an office V—
“An office” says Bacon, “is a right to
exercise a public function, or employ
ment, and to take the fees and emolu
ments belonging to it. An officer is.
one who “is lawfully invested with an
office.” It. is said that the word “ofii-
iuin” principally implies a “duty,”
jnd in the next plaeo tho “charge ol
such duty ; and that it is a rule that
where one man hath to do with anoth
er’s affairs against his will and with
out his leave, that this is an office, ami
he who is injit is an officer. By t he an
cient common law, officers ought to
ho honest men, legal nnd sage, “ot qui
melius sciant ot possiut offiois illi iii«
teudere”; and this says my Lord Coke,
was tho policy of prudent antiquity,
that officers did oven give grace to tho
place, and not tho “place only to
grace tho officer*” 7th Bacons Ah.
270—title offices and officers. Black,
stone says tho King, ill England, is the
fountain of honor, and of “office” and
the reason given is that tho law sup
poses that no one can he so good a
judge of an officer's mMls ami ser
vices as tim King who employs him.
“From the same principle also
avisos the prerogative of creating and
disposing of offices ; for honors and
offices arc in tlmir uatuio convertible
and synonymous. All officers under
the Crown carry in tho eye of the law
‘in honor along with ilium ; because
they imply a superiority of narts, and
abilities, being supposed lo lie always
filled with those that aro most able to
execute thorn” 1st Bl. Coin. 271, 9 —
Ofllco* (says Blackstono) aro a right
to exorcise a public or privato employ
incut and to lake tlio fees nnd emolu
ments thereunto belonging, and aro
also incorporeal hereditaments. 2d
Bl Cora. 36.
All citizens of tlio State, whethor
white or colored, male or female, ini*'
nors or adults, idiots or lunatics, aro
entitled to all tho privileges nnd im
munities of “citizens,” but it does not
follow that all of theso <li lie rout Glass
es of citizens are entitled to hold “ot-
fioo” under the irablic authority of tho
State, because, tho privileges and .im
munities of “citizens” aro scoured to
thorn. Tho Stato, in this country, as
the Crown in England, is tlio “foun
tain” ol honor, and of '‘oflicc’” aud
she who desires to employ any class
of her citizens in her service, is tho
best judge of their fitness and qualifi
cations therefor, An officer of the
State, as wo havo shown, “hath to do
with another’s affairs against **hia will
aud without his leave, and such offi
cer must havo the “authority of the
State” to perform tlieso public duti.es
“against tfie will of the citizen and
without his leave.” This “authority”
must bo conferred upon the citizen by
somo ’’public law of tho State” from
that “class” of her citizens which, in
hor judgement will best promote tho
general welfare of tho State. The
right to have and enjoy the privileges
and immunities of a “citizen’.’ ot the
Slate does not confer upon him the
right 1 o servo the Stato in an “official”
capacity, until the right is expressly
ranted to him by law- Mr. Justice
Jurtis, in bis dissenting opinion in tho
case of Drod Scott vs Sanford, (10th
Howards Hep. 6. and 3) says: “So
in all the States, numerous persons,
though “oitizens,” cannot vote “or
cannot hold office,” either on account
oi their age or sex, or the want-of the
necessary legal qualifications.” Cor-
field vs Corvell, 4 Washington’s Cir-
oult Court Repotla S and >\ to the
same point.
The defendant, therefore, cannot “le
gally” claim m.y right to hold “office”
either'under tlio Utli amendment oi
tho Constitution of tbo. United States,
or the Constitution of this Stato,
whioh make liiqt a “cUi»eu” and guar
antee unto him the privileges or im
munities of a “citizen”* in the State,
without holding ujiy office, or oxer*
ling any public or official duty un
it* thp “authority of the St*iet”
Tbo privileges and immunities of o
citizen di tlie Htatedo not confer the
o (rc-
w , before cited.)—
Among the rights of “citizens” aro
tho enjoy incut oi personal security, of
personal liberty, privato pioporty and
tho disposition thereof, tho elective
franchise, tho right “to hold office,” to
appeal to tho courts, to testify ns a
witness, to perform any civil function,
aud to keep and War arms. All “cit-
/.otw” are entitled to exereiso all these
rights, as sueh, unless specially pro.
hunted by law.” Sections HM7, U148,
1040, lflfiO, KMl, 1652, 1051, of the
Code.
I( will tic miH-iubcrcU thivt nt ih» time ol
*bo adoption ol ilio Codo, iu the defen
dant wiin not a ci(i:m uj this State, and WHS
not recognized l»y Hie I’odo n« a citizen there-
of. lty Hie Hiliiili Section, Hio slatiiH of Hie
do fend ant in defined to l>® that of a person of
color, and not that of a citizen.
The revixed Uodo ado) led hy I lie CoiiHlilu*
lion of 1 HUM, inoludos Hie act of 18(51, which
declares Hint "All negroes, initial tors, niusii
im*s and their descendants,having one-eighth
of negro or African blood in their veins, shall
be known in (his Hale aa “persona or color, 1
and CHpeuially dclinen llieir legal rights, lull
"tho riglii to hold oillco” la not ouo of them,
llevised Uode—Beet Ion. pUll.
It ia iruo Hut tduco tho adoption of tho
Code the defendant has boon made a citizen,
hilt all iho “legal" rights conferred upon cit
izens by ihe Code wero conferred upon (hot
class «f persons “only," who are diolured
and recognized hy (he Codo as “citizen* of
the Male at (lie lime of iin adoption." When
•lie Cede declare* lhat it ahull bo lhe right of
a “citizen to bold oillco,*’ such rigid ia con
tlued to "that elans of peruon*" who are re
cognized aud declared therein to lie “citizens
oi the Slide,” aud not lo auy oilier elnaa of
poraona who might “thereafter" become chi-
Ml*. So where itio (.’ode declares (lint “All
“citizens” are entitled to exerclao all their
riglda as inch, unless prohibited by law," it
is applicable lo “llmtclu.Ha of poraoua only,"
who were declared to be oilizonu of the Bute
at “(bat time,” and hot (o auy oilier class of
persona who might “thereafter” bo made
citizens of the Btate. sticU ns Chineze, Afvi
Cana, or persons of coUr. Tlio truth ia llut
the public will of tho Btalo lias never been
exproMed by any legislative enact meat in
fnvor of the right of colored citizens to hold
otliae In this Btate “sloe© they became citi
zens thereof.”
Although theso aovcral clasHea of persons
might bo made ciiizuua of the Slain with the
privileges and immunities of citizous, still
they could not “legally” hold oflice under the
“Authority of the BtaU” until that right shall
bo conform! upon them by aomo “public law”
of the State, subsequent to the time at which
they became oitizeiia, so as to includo “them”
in its provisions. The publlo will or tho
8Ute, as to the “legal” right of that olasa of
her oilmens to hoUoflioe, has never, been “of-
flrmatively” expressed; but on the contrary,
wbon tho proposition was distinctly made in
the Convention which formed the present
Constitution, to confer the right upon colored
citizens to hold “oflice” in the fltute, It was
voted down by • large minority. (See Jour
nal of Convention, page 112.) Ho far ns
thcro has been any expression of Hie publio
Will of the State as to the “legal” right of
that oUhh or oitizens known as colored citi
zens, aud since llioy became such, to hold
oflice in thin Stale, it is “agaiust” that right
now claimed by the defendant
The Insurmountable obstacle in the way of
the defendant claiming % “legal” right lo
hold office in this State uuder the provisions
of tbe Code, is the fact that he was not a
citizen or tho Stale “at the lime of its adop
tion.”. The olaaa of persons lo which he be
longs were uot recognized by It aa “citizens,”
and therefore be is not included in any of iu
provisions wbioh confer the right to hold
olflce upon the olass ot ollisens “specified in
the Code. M .The Code makes no provision
whatever for “colored citizens” to hold office
in this Stale; all of ha provisions apply «*-
cluaively (q._“white” citizens and to “no oth
er class of citisens.”
The Convention wbioh framed the present
State Constitution and deolared persons of
color to be citizens, “could” have conferred
the right upon them to hold offioe, but de
clined to do so by n very deoided vote of that
body, and *ent before tho people claiming
its ratification upon the ground that colored
fltlUeni were “not entitled to hold
office" under it; and there ean be no doubt
that tbe people of the State voted for its rat
ification at the ballot bos with that “under
standing.”
But “now” it ia contended that tbe defen
dant, though a colored person, Is made a
eitizeo of tbe State and of tbo United fltatsi,
at»4 that no “enabling” act bas ever been
passed to. allow a naturalized citizen lo hold
Office in ibis Btate—when be possessed the
Othfr requisite qualifications prescribed by
law;" that ibe defendant having been made a
citizen of tbe State is enlUled lo hold offioe
hi the same manner as a naturalized citizen
idlili
"fall
a*» naturalized citizen
. _ JMmto IMw naturalised cit
izens war# “white'' persons, and aa such bad
a “common law right to hold office”—a right
founded upon Immemorial usage and rnisfom,
which has existed so long that *Hho memory
•f man vunucib hot to tbz contrary.” The
1644th Section of the Code simply affirms
the common law an to the right ot a “white”
ciifaen to held office in this Btate. No such
eommon law right, however, can he * etaJmed
citizen canrtut claim any Mich common law
right for the reason that ho has never exor
cized aud enjoyed it;ami Hmt romtitnlrs (hr
difference between Hie “legal” right «f u
naturalized “while" citizen to hold otiico in
this Htntf, nnd a person of color who has re
cently hern made a citizen “sineo Hio ndup
Hon of the Code, aud who is not embraced
within its provisions."
The one can claim Ids common law light
to hold oflice in the Slate, tlio other cannot;
nnd until (ho btnto shall dcMaro bysouio leg
islative enactment Hint it is her will nnd do
siro that her colored citizous shall hold «r-
fico “under her authority,” they cannot claim
the “legal" right to do so, for wo must not
forget that the Stale ia tho “fountain” mid
“parent” of office, nnd may confer or rcfuSl
to confer the right to "hold office” upon any
olass of her citizen* she may think proper and
expedient.
NVhen a "new class of person*'* are intro
duced into (he body politic of Hie Stale ami
made “oiiixena thereof," who “cannot claim
a common law right" to hold oflice therein, it
i* incumbent on them to show “affirmatively"
that such right ha* been conferred upon them
by some nubile law of the State "siuoo” they
were ma»lc citizens thereof, to entitle them
to have and enjoy such light. iu othoV
words, they must show “Hie public" law ol
the State enacted since they became citizens
thereof, which “confers the legal right claim
ed” before they can demand a judgment ol
the Court in favor of such legal light.
A male “while” citizen of HicHia'o, wheth
er native born or naturalised citizens, (hav-
tng the necessary legal qualifications,) have
a common law right, to hold office in this
Slate.- and in order to deprive them of that
common law right, a “prohibitory" snuuto is
necessary. A naturalized citizen hud n com
mon law rigid to hold the office or Urraldoni
of the United States; hence tho “prohibition'
in tho Constitution of the United Slates. Hut
ns colored citizens of the State, who have
recently been made such, camml claim n
common law right to hold office iu the Stale
as uo “prohibitory" statute i* necessary to
deprive them ora tight which (hey never had
under tho common or statute law ortho State.
“hen, therefore, it is said lIml colored citi-
zens have the right to hold office in the State
uulcNM “specially prohibited hy law." it musi
be shown affirmatively that they had "nre*
viously enjoyed that right. If they cannot
show their right In hold office in the Hlale,
I-Itlirr umli-r llm coinliiuii l„w, Hi. ('0111,1 tln
(lira orMklntea of lire S1.1I0, Hi,■Iml Hmi Kiev
aro m.l ".|,ucl„l|y ■.ratntijlc.C* from unrein.
I"* * rl R 1 ' 1 r— I.idi liny uover Im.l. Iiuumi.!«
nollii'iB mi fur .reeling .villi H,e
right to hold oflice 1* concerned.
“When” and “where," nnd hy what pub
lio law of the Stato was the legal light t
hold office therein conferred on the colored
citizens thereof? ifiliis question eaiiuot hi
answered in the nffirmaUvo, nml the “legu
authority” under which the “right is claimed
cannot be shown, then Hie argument that in
asmuch as there In no special prohibition in
tho law against tho right of colored citizens
to hold offioe. fall* to llm ground. If Hu
wire ire rxl'iiiiR “I,'Kill HkIii- In |,„1,1 „|| ic „
lie “prohibited,” the fact that there Is “
prohibition" doe* not “confer" such legal
f'ritl. There wa* no legal necessity to too
hibil Hint which did not ozi*l. * 1
It i* not the biiNines* or duly of court* to
“uiako" the laws, but simply t„ expound and
enforce “ezlsliiig laws” which have been
prescribed by llm supreme power oflhe .State
Alter llm nio.*l careful examination of Uib
question, I am clearly of the opinion Ihm
there is no existing law of this Hlale which
confers the right upon colored citizens there
of to hold oillco therein, ami consrutiently
that the dol'cmlaiil ha* no "legal light"
hold nml exercise the duties of the ofli,
which hiydalin* under "Imr authority,*’ nml
that tim judgment of the Hourt below, ovor
ruling the demurer, should hu affirmed.
THEPROBLEMSOtiKBI
Irrprisr. I he Meimsn and
Success the Result!
HESTER & GREENWOOD
Have demonstrated Dm wisdom of
W PRICES AND QUICK SALES.
nml arc determined to do business
on that line.
They now have iu Stofe, aud are constantly
receiving,
N|»orlal Kelefiioiu for fhia Mnrhct
Consisting of
Heavy Plantation Supplies
AND .
FAMILY ■GROCERIES
They
would especially call affention (o
their slock of
BACON!
eicr 81,lc«, Clmr Rllibcl Bid.., Should.-
nml Hams.
W la © ®
OP Al.t. (IHAIIKH.
CORN,
•mRaS visas, votatorb and rice
Mnolzoreli
Canned Moats and Fish.
SUGAKS, COFFEE, TEAS, SVJIFP.
SALT.
BOOTS AMD SHOES.
Omabnrgs.
Hvown & Htripod Goodn.
COTTON VAHN.
Chewing and Smoking Tabacro.
Ami a new supply of
(ivnuine Double Rectified
POPLAR LOG!
1 lie licet whisky on the continent!
CE/BLIT
will lie extended till uext fall to those desir
ing it, for
City A.ccoptanoe.
— " J
VZ^.. They respectfully solicit a eotiHuuaucc
••I Hm liberal puin.imgH heretofore bestowed,
iml pledge unreiniliing exertion* to give sat-
iHfitolion.
Albany, Ha., Marrh 21, I8(5l)—ly
CARRIAGES &
WAGONS & HARNESS
THE
aiiany mm,'
M. BA KlsTJiS
Proprietor.
Pino Street, Albany, Georgia.
(»)
Having cecerilly completed (hi* House, nnd
put it In oomlition for the nnoommodalion of
guests, tha Proprietor pledge* his earnest en
deavor* to give ratisfaction. His rooms arc
large and well ventilated ; his table shall be
constantly supplied with tho hext tho market
afford*, and bis servants shall always be
prompt, polite and attentive.
99* A Haok is always at tlio Depot on the
n-rtval of traius, to convey passenges to the
House, and every convenience and comfort
detlrable la guaranteed .
'•pMHItltlCinTXJlN RH,
Proprietor.
r. vr. iikwitt.
Jan 1—If a.<
HEWITTS’
GLOBE HOTEL,
AUGUSTA, GA.
FAKE AffO-OO PER DAY
Tub Bbst i* tiw City.
May 4—flm
BROWN’S HOTEL ’
Oppo«il<. Depot, IQnron.Cti.
* ». SHOWN ft SON, Proprietor.,
man wnu known house h.«
1 been refuted and repaired, and la now
on. at 1ft. NEATEST HOTELS In th. Slat.,
nnd lb. mail convenient In the .Hr, Tbe
iftWr^i* " ,pUrt NHbererjtblngtbe market.
Uhmi, top,.24 TMT
I am llm agent Tor the Tomlinson Pernor,
eat Company of New York, tho Woodruff
(fonoord, nndlho llrattlrhoru mauufhotoriea
in,I am receiving per steamer every week
Carriages,
Wagons,
and Harness?
From these aud other well known estab
bmcnlH, nnd can fill any order at short no
Hoc, when desired, at tnariufaoltiren 1 ptires
ivith freight added.
L. C. SUA"'
... Agtnt. 1
Albany, fla.,
\dverflsc0ieiits forwarded to »11 Newspapers,
*; «.», ,WH«k»r,> price,.
AH Ljodlng Newspapers kopton flic.
Information as (oCost of Advertising furnished
All orders receive eareftil attention,
inquiries by Mail answsred promptly.
Uomplote Printed List of Newspapers tor sale
dpecial Lislspropored for Cnstomere..
Advertisements Written end Notices e
Orders frotn liasinoss Men ospeolelly
If n FIRM OP.1
uilOi, Is this diy
sent. Thoso Imleb
oall el onoe end set!
to meet outs tend It
he found «l the oh
is‘authorized in i
satettass
.ansds
* i. the be ok s will
H. Gilbert