Mills v. Green

• Decision Date: 08 May 1895
• Citation: 67 F. 818
• Parties: MILLS v. GREEN.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit

67 F. 818

MILLS v. GREEN.

United States Circuit Court, D. South Carolina.

May 8, 1895

Obear &amp Douglass, for complainant.

Wm. A Barber, Atty. Gen., C. P. Townsend, Asst. Atty. Gen., George S. Mower, and Edward McCrady, for defendant.

GOFF Circuit Judge.

On the 20th day of April last, on consideration of the bill in this cause, I passed an order that the defendant, W. Briggs Green individually and as supervisor of registration for Richland county, in the state of South Carolina, be enjoined and restrained until the further order of this court from the commission of the acts complained of in complainant's bill, and I directed that said defendant show cause before me, if any he could, at Columbia, S.C., on Thursday, May 2d inst., why such order should not be continued, or some order of like purport and effect be then granted, enjoining and restraining him both individually and as such supervisor of registration from the commission of said acts, until the final hearing and determination of this cause.

The plaintiff, a citizen of the state of South Carolina and of the United States, brings this suit against W. Briggs Green a citizen of said state and of the United States. The plaintiff exhibits his bill in his own behalf and for all others, citizens of the county of Richland, in the state of South Carolina, circumstanced like him, who are too numerous to be named, and made parties hereto. It is set forth in the bill: That the plaintiff was 26 years of age on the 4th day of February, 1895. That he is a male citizen of the United States. That he has resided in the state of South Carolina for more than 1 year preceding the last general election in that state, and in the county of Richland for more than 60 days prior to said general election. That he is an elector of the state of South Carolina, possessing all of the qualifications of an elector of the most numerous branch of the state legislature, and is subject to none of the disqualifications set forth in the constitution of that state; and that he is, under the constitution and laws of the United States, duly qualified to vote at all federal and state elections held in said ward, county, and state. It is also set forth in the bill: That section 90 of the General Statutes of South Carolina of 1882 provides as follows:

'All electors of the state shall be registered as hereinafter provided; and no person shall be allowed to vote at any election hereafter to be held unless registered as hereinafter required.'

That by section 94 of said statutes it is provided:

'When the said registration (in certain books to be provided for and made in the manner provided for in section 93) shall have been completed, the books shall be closed, and not opened for registration, except for the purpose and as hereinafter mentioned, until after the next general election for state officers. After the said next general election the books shall be opened for registration of such persons as shall thereafter become entitled to register, on the first Monday in each month, to and until the first Monday in July, inclusive, preceding the following general election, upon which last named day the same shall be closed and not re-opened for registration until after the said general election, and that thereafter the said books shall be opened for the registration of such electors, on the days above mentioned, until for first day of July preceding a general election, when the same shall be closed as aforesaid until the said general election shall have taken place.'

That in section 137 of Revised Statutes it is provided:

'After every general election the registration books shall be opened for registration of such persons as shall thereafter become entitled to register, on the first Monday in each month until the first day of July preceding a general election when the same shall be closed until such election shall have taken place.'

That section 97, Gen. St., provides:

'Any person coming of age, and being qualified as an elector, may appear before the supervisor of registration, on any day on which the books are opened as aforesaid and take oath as to his age and qualifications as hereinbefore provided, and if the supervisor find him qualified he shall enter his name upon the registration book of the precinct wherein he resides.'

It is also alleged that said registration laws provide that the supervisors of registration in the several counties shall issue to the voter, when registered, a certificate of registration, and that said voter shall present the same at the polls to the managers of the election, and that no one shall be allowed to vote at any election to be held in said state unless his certificate of registration is exhibited when he offers to vote; and that it is required by said law that, in case a voter shall remove from one county to another in said state, or from one precinct to another in the same county, or from one residence to another in the same precinct, he shall obtain a transfer and a renewal certificate; and that, should a voter lose his certificate, he must obtain a renewal thereof, upon furnishing evidence satisfactory to the registrar of the county wherein he resides that his certificate has been mislaid or lost, and that the same has not been willfully or intentionally disposed of. The bill also alleges that by the provisions and requirements of said enactment the voter failing for any reason to comply with any of the provisions of the same is denied the right of suffrage both in federal and state elections. Complainant claims that the provisions of the said enactments fixing the time for registration and the closing of the books for that purpose on the 1st day of July preceding every election, and the many requirements and conditions set out in the various sections of said registration law, were intended, and that they in effect do, abridge, impede, and destroy the suffrage of the citizens, both of the state and of the United States. It is also averred that on the 24th day of December, 1894, an act was passed by the general assembly of South Carolina entitled 'An act to provide for calling a constitutional convention, to provide the number and qualifications of members of the convention, their compensation, etc., and to provide for the election of the same, and to define and prescribe the qualifications of the electors, and the manner of the election and of declaring the result'; that by section 4 of said act it is declared who shall be entitled to vote for delegates to said constitutional convention; and that, in addition to the qualifications prescribed for electors by the constitution of the state of South Carolina, is provided a further one, viz. 'that the elector be duly registered as now required by law, or who, having been entitled to register as a voter at the time of the general registration of electors in the state which took place in the year 1882, or at any time subsequent thereto, failed to register at such time, or who has become a citizen of this state, and who shall register as hereinafter provided in such cases.' Other provisions of the laws and of the constitution of the state of South Carolina are set forth, but I do not deem it necessary to now recite them. The bill charges that W. Briggs Green has been appointed to the office of supervisor of registration for Richland county, in pursuance of said registration laws; that he is now exercising the duties prescribed by the same, and that he intends to continue so to act, and that he intends to furnish to the several boards of managers for the precinct in which plaintiff resides, in said county, who hold the election of delegates to said constitutional convention, certain paper writings purporting to be registration books for use at such precinct.

The complainant says that he failed to register at the registration made after the general election of 1888, and during the 10 days in March, 1895, provided for in the act of 1894, because, although he made repeated and persistent efforts to become registered, he found himself unable to comply with the unreasonable, unnecessary, and burdensome rules, regulations, and restrictions prescribed by said unconstitutional registration laws as conditions precedent to his right to register, and that he has never been allowed to vote at any federal or state election of the state of South Carolina; that he is desirous of voting for delegates to the said constitutional convention, and that the paper writings purporting to be books of registration, now in the hands of the defendant, do not and will not contain his name as a registered voter for the reason before state; that he and others like circumstanced with him will not be permitted to vote at said special election by the managers thereof unless their names be found upon the books of registration, and they produce the registration certificate mentioned; and that, if the defendant be permitted to continue the aforesaid illegal, partial, and void registration, and be allowed to turn over to the managers of such election for the county of Richland the books of registration for said county, he, the plaintiff, will be deprived of his right to vote at said election, and grievous and irreparable wrong and damages will be done him, which can only be prevented by the interposition of this court by way of restraining the defendant from the performance of said before-mentioned acts.

The defendant, in his return to the rule to show cause, insists that, as supervisor of registration for Richland county, he is not answerable to the jurisdiction of this court, and that the matters, facts, and things alleged and complained of in the bill are matters relating to the political duties of his office; that this is in effect a suit...