. The 14th Amendment, among other things, made the
colored people American citizens. It was, in effect, a recall of the
famous Dred Scott decision. The 15th Amendment gave the colored
American access to the ballot box, in every State in the Union. The
fundamental principles that were carried into effect through the
Reconstruction acts of Congress were embodied in these two amendments.
After the ratification of these measures, what had previously been
local to the South became national. No State north, south, east or
west can now legally and constitutionally make or enforce any law
making race or color the basis of discrimination in the exercise and
enjoyment of civil and public rights and privileges, nor can it make
race or color the basis of discrimination in prescribing the
qualification of electors. By the ratification of those amendments the
right of an American citizen to the exercise and enjoyment of civil
and political rights and the right to vote ceased to be local and
became national. But it is claimed by some that because the 15th
Amendment has been successfully evaded in certain States, it is, for
that reason, a failure. I will state here in passing, however, that
there has never been made nor can be made any law or constitution that
can not at certain times and in some places be successfully evaded.
But this does not necessarily prove that the law or constitution in
question was a mistake and should, for that reason, be repealed. To
this extent and for the reasons and purposes above stated, the wisdom
of the Reconstruction Acts of Congress has been more than vindicated.

The failure of the Reconstruction legislation was not due so much to
the change of sentiment in the North as to an unwise interpretation of
these laws. This started with two unfortunate decisions rendered by
the United States Supreme Court, the result of two unwise appointments
to seats on the bench made by President Grant. The Judges referred to
are Waite of Ohio, and Bradley of New Jersey. Both were supposed to be
Republicans and believed to be in accord with the other leaders and
constitutional lawyers in the Republican party in their construction
of the War Amendments to the Federal Constitution. But they proved to
be strong States' Rights men and, therefore, strict constructionists.
Those two, with the other States' Rights men already on the bench,
constituted a majority of that tribunal. The result was that the court
declared unconstit