People v. Dean

Decision Date11 July 1866
Citation14 Mich. 406
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
PartiesThe People v. William Dean

Heard May 1, 1866 [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material]

Error to Wayne circuit.

Indictment for illegal voting. The facts are stated in the opinion.

New trial granted.

A. Williams, attorney-general, for the people:

1. Under the head of analogy we submit:

a. That section 4351, Comp. L., prescribes that the names to be placed upon the list of persons to serve as grand and petit jurors, shall be those "having the qualifications of electors."In making these lists, the practice throughout the state has ever been to exclude therefrom all persons known to possess any negro or African blood in their veins.

b. That sec. 1, art. 17, of our state constitution provides that "the militia shall be composed of all able-bodied white male citizens, between the ages of eighteen and forty-five years," etc. See also Sec. 641, Comp. L., and act No 16, laws of 1862, of this state, which provide for organizing the military force of the state, and making liable to enrollment only "white male citizens or inhabitants." In executing these statutory and constitutional provisions, persons known to be at all affected by possessing negro or African blood, have never been enrolled as a part of the military force of the state; and,

c. That sec. 629, Comp. L., in relation to taking the census of the state, provides, among other things, for the enumeration of "the number of colored persons." In taking the census we submit that in pursuance of the above mentioned clause, persons having even one-sixteenth part of negro or African blood in their veins, have always been enumerated as "colored persons," and not as white.

2. As it regards custom, we submit:

a. That persons belonging to the white race have not intermarried with those known to have any negro or African blood in their veins. At least this has been the rule, and one admitting only of rare exceptions; for such marriages have ever been denominated "amalgamation," and considered disgraceful.

b. That persons known to have more or less negro or African blood in their veins, have uniformly been excluded from ordinary social and familiar intercourse with white persons; the former everywhere, in this country, constituting a class by themselves for all such purposes; and,

c. That the prejudice which has existed in the minds of the white people of this state towards our colored population, has not been confined to the negro, mulatto, quadroon and mustee, but it has extended to all known to have any African blood in their veins. Hence, our legislation, wherever it has been prejudicial, on account of color, was so framed as to almost always bring within its purview all such persons. And the same is more or less true of the ruling class throughout the United States.

3. And now turning to authority, it would seem that the court did not err in the construction of the above mentioned provisions of the constitution, embraced in his charge; for,

a. From the time of the organization of our state government to the present moment, the clause "white male citizen" has never been understood as embracing any persons having any known negro or African blood in their veins; and from the time of the adoption of the revised constitution of 1850, to this day, the words "civilized inhabitant of Indian descent" have not been treated as including all, or any individuals commonly denominated "colored persons." On the contrary, the received construction has been that quadroons, mustees, etc., were neither "white male citizens" nor "civilized inhabitants of Indian descent," within the spirit and meaning of these constitutional provisions; and, therefore, they have not been regarded as electors and entitled to vote, they never having attended our elections claiming that high prerogative.

b. The fact that quadroons, mustees, etc., have not been held to be electors, by the great body of the people of Michigan, is further evidenced by the consideration (now a noticeable feature of our history as a state) that we have never elected them to office, however well qualified therefor more or less of them may have been; for if they were electors, they would have been eligible, and we might have elected them to office; otherwise not: Comp. L., §§ 594-5; State Constitution, § 5, Art. 4, and Sec. 2, Art. 5.

c. In the debates of the convention of 1850, the words "white" and "colored" were invariably used by the honorable members of that body, in contradistinction to each other; the former, in its use, having reference to the pure European race, distinguished from the Asiatic, Malay, American and African races, "by a natural complexion of white, mingled with red," and the latter to all who had more or less African or negro blood in their veins; being in fact the same description or class of persons then held in slavery in the southern states. So, too, did the people use and understand these words "white" and "colored," at the time they considered and adopted this revised constitution; and so, also, have they understood and administered them ever since, for "the whites of America are descended from emigrants of the several nations of Europe, and resemble, in appearance, those from which they are descended:" Woodb. & Will. Geog. (Ed. 1833), 165-9; Conven. Deb. of Mich., 1850, pp. 279, 289, 482, 507, 757, 764, 914.

We submit, too, that the construction of these clauses of the constitution, embraced in said charge, is the only and first one that would suggest itself to the mind of any person acquainted with the institutions of our country, the races of men living within its limits, and the prejudices and purposes of the European race living in the United States towards the negro or colored race, from the time they first became "property" on the soil of this country, even to the present hour.

In the following cases, 2 Doug. Mich., 411; 5 Mich. 520, it will be observed that the words "white" and "colored," when used either by counsel or court, had reference, in each instance, to the same kind or description of persons as when used in the debates of said constitutional convention of 1850, and as the people of this state have ever employed them.

The following authorities, we think, will be found to the same effect as the two last above cited: 2 Kent's Com., 254, 258, note b; 14 Ohio 199; 3 Rich. R., 136; 4 Gratt. 541; 9 Ired. 384; 18 Ala. 276; 2 Carter (Ind.), 332; 14 Geo. 185; 20 Id. 480; 5 Florida 261; 5 Jones (N. C.,) 11; 37 Miss. 209.

4. We submit, then, that, disposing of the question under consideration, either by analogy, custom or authority, or by all these lights--by the legislation of our state; by the social and familiar customs of the white and colored races; by the prejudices and purposes of "the whites,"resulting in various public policies; by the practical exposition thus far given to our constitution and laws, and by the first meaning that fastened in the mind when we read this part of the fundamental law of the state--we can come to no conclusion that will command the judgment, but that the said convention of 1850, and the people who adopted the revised constitution proposed by them, intended that all "colored persons," including those like this plaintiff in error, should be excluded from all participation in our elections. With the justice and wisdom of such exclusion we have nothing to do; but simply to ascertain and give force and effect to the intention of these constitutional provisions.

Knight & Jennison, Larned & Hebden, and H. M. Cheever, for defendant:

1. The qualifications of electors in this state are defined by the constitution. So far as may be applicable to this case the language is, "every white male citizen," and "every civilized male inhabitant of Indian descent, a native of the United States, and not a member of any tribe:" Art. vii, § 1.

We insist that defendant was a "white male citizen" within the meaning of the constitution. This is the only question in the case, as all the requests to charge are based upon the assumption that he possessed all the other requisite qualifications of an elector.

a. The word white, applied to persons, means one of the Caucasian race, without any African blood, or, at most, with not one-quarter part African blood: Bouv. Inst., p. 70; 3 Dana 382.

b. Mulatto means muled, or a mixed breed, from the Latin mulus; French, mulatre, born from different-colored people. The offspring of a negro by a white, or a white by a negro: Brand's Ency. of Science, Lit. and Art; 18 Ala. 276; 1 Bail. (S. C.), 273; 1 Id. 275; 7 Mass. 88.

We submit that the word "white" is used in our state constitution with reference to race, and not color. It doubtless excludes Indians, as well as Africans, and hence a specific clause was deemed necessary to give suffrage to the former. This clause includes equally Indians of the full blood and half blood: 9 Mich. 435.

It is, in either case, a question of race, and not mere color. There is no neutral ground; each person belongs to one or the other, and not to neither race.

Where the two races are equal before the law, the line of division must be in the middle; and if the white blood preponderates, the person is of the white race; if the black exceeds the white, he is of the black race.

This seems to have been the construction given to a similar constitutional provision in Ohio. The constitution of 1842 in that state gave the elective franchise to "free white citizens." Parker Jeffries, the child of a white man and a half-breed Indian woman, offered his vote, and on its being rejected, sued the trustees of election. The court held he was a lawful voter, and say: "This matter is...

To continue reading

Request your trial
22 cases
  • By Lo Oil Co. v. Department of Treasury, No. 251200
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan (US)
    • May 10, 2005
    ...effect to the language in the Constitution as the `popular mind' would have understood it at the time it was adopted." Id.; People v. Dean, 14 Mich. 406, 417 (1866). "A collateral rule `is that to clarify meaning, the circumstances surrounding the adoption of a constitutional provision and ......
  • Lockwood v. Nims
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Michigan
    • October 22, 1959
    ...necessary; for otherwise they would be defrauded of the right to frame their own government according to their own will.' People v. Dean, 14 Mich. 406, 417. Mr. Justice Cooley (quoted in May v. Topping, 65 W.Va. 656; 64 S.E. 848, 'A Constitution is made for the people and by the people. The......
  • United States v. Zepeda
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • July 7, 2015
    ...as a non-colored person with one-fourth Indian blood). And the same blood quantum tests determined who could vote. See People v. Dean, 14 Mich. 406, 413–15, 425 (1866) (construing state law giving only “white male citizens” the right to vote as excluding persons of African descent unless th......
  • Buback v. Romney
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Michigan
    • March 4, 1968
    ...necessary; for otherwise they would be defrauded of the right to frame their own government according to their own will.' (People v. Dean, 14 Mich. 406, 417, 418.) Mr. Justice Cooley (quoted in May v. Topping, 65 W.Va. 656, 660, 64 S.E. 'A Constitution is made for the people and by the peop......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT