Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

/. ■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