Right Of Suffrage

Gorden vs. Forrar, and others, ïhspec tors of ETectioTÜ, -c. - Jiy the Courl, Miles J. - Whether n person oflering to vote nt aneleclion, has the requisito qualfication as to color ordescent, the Constitution Art. 2 1 conferring the right to vote, upon ' white male citizens" only, must on challenge for the want of such quaüfication, be inquired into and delennined hy the Insjiectors of the Election. In determining ihis question, thé Inspectors oct . jiidiciaïly not ministerially ; and thereforo they are not Hable in ap action on the case for damages, for im- properly refusing a vote because the person oilbring it was partly of A frican descent. E. C. Walker, for PlaintilT. The preceding appears in te Detroit Adverliser as a report of a recent decisión of the Supreme Court of this State. We understand that Ilr. Oordon, who is but si'ghtly tinged wilh A frican blood, oflered to vote at the polls, but his vote was rejected by the lnspectors of electon on the ground that hc was not a " white male citizen. " Mr. Gordon broughtthis action against the Inspectors for refusing this vote, claiming thnt ho was " white " in the meaningand intcnt of the Constitution. This claim is supporter! by the decisions of the Supreme Court of O'iio, wiio have repeatedly held that all persons having more white than black blood can vote under the Constitulion of that State, which, like pur own, givcs the right of sufiVagc to "white male cilizens." It will be scen that the Court evaded this question eniirely, the decisión of which would have aiTected the righls nol only of persons partly of African descent, büt of several hundred mon in different! paris of the State, who are now disqualified by asliglu lingeof lndian bloed. - The Court would not decide whelher such such persons had or had not a right to vote under the Constitution. We have nol scen a full report of the decisión, bul we learn that the Couri held that as the only law defining the duties of Inspcclors, fActsof 1841, p. 185; said nolhinp at all about color, there must bcsomewliere an implied power for Inspectorsto decide that point, Ihough tlintlaw, as well ns Ihe present, says that " the vote of cvcry one who takes tlie oath shall bc received." The Court further held, asrcpulcdabove, bat ndeoiding whether a pcrson oficring to votG is white or not, the lnspectors act judicially, and their decisions can never be queslionod. Just cansider fbr a moment lbo result of this decisión. It inakes tho nction of the Inspeclors absolute, conclusivo, final, omnipotent, infallible, supreme ! Ilowever palpa bly wrong tlveir decisions may bc, there is neitlier nppeal or remedy ; and not oniy Mr. Gordon, but tho w.hole cummunity, are leftcntirely at their Hpercy. To taken practical case. When lus ïlonor Jurlgo Miles offers his valeat the polls, if challengcd for any cause except colar, the law prescribes nn oaih, which, when taken by liim, carnes in his vote at once. But if the vale of the Ju'lge be chnllenged on tho groundof col. or, he cannot svear it in, bccause the )aw does not prescribe any oath by which he can swear that hc is a 4' white " man. Conscque-ntïy, should the Inspectora decide that he was a not white eitizen, the judgo would at once be uttorlychfsed, and according to his own decisión, would be without nny possible remcdy fbr vindicating his right to voe ! - Tho same is trú under tiiis decisión, of every other voter in the Stato. In the old law books we havo read a legal ma.im that "whero there is u right, therc is a remedí ; " but in thiscase the whito man who is unjuslly disfrnnchised would have none whatevor. The true remedy is to strike out oí the Constituiion lliát harbarous, anti-rcpublican and foolish provisión by which the right of suilrage is made to depend on the color or descent of tho einzen. - We trust the cemmunity may becomc onliglüencd enough to do this not many years henee.