Gov. O’Ferrall and the Illiterate Voter

Ex-Governor Charles O’Ferrall indignantly cries out against implementing a “literacy test” for voters, thus denying the uneducated suffrage.

Ex-Governor Charles T. O’Ferrall in the issue of the Richmond, Va., Daily Times of April 2nd, 1901, discussed “Should the Ballot Be Taken Away From Those Who Cannot Read?” He said: “Sir,--It must be admitted that general intelligence at the ballot box is much to be desired; but the educated voter is certainly not always a worthy citizen, nor is the illiterate voter by any means always an unworthy citizen. We all know college graduated who are worthless and venal, vicious and dangerous, and we all know illiterate men who are thrifty, honorable, orderly, and law-abiding.” The above is laying down a strong premise and again: “Virginia contains within her borders thousands of men who cannot read, who are public spirited, leading upright lives, perform their duties, faithfully and dint of their hard commonsense, industry, and economy have raised themselves from the position of day-laborers to that of well-to-do free holders. We can recall a number of men without learning who have been successful contractors on railroads and other public works. During our war between the States In knew Confederate soldiers, some of them still living, who had to make cross-marks to their names and pay-rolls when they drew their service pittance, who were just as brave, just as true as nay of their educated comrades. I know men whose fathers dying on battlefields leaving helpless families were compelled to devote their young days and boyhood energies to the supports of mothers, brothers and sister with no opportunity to attend school, who are today in their illiteracy most respected citizens. Shall all these men be told by their native state that when ‘the people’ are assembling to’ execute a freeman’s will’ that the polling places shall be barred against them; that they shall have no more voice in the affairs of their government than dumb brutes; that only the educated shall say who shall be rulers and law-givers, what statutes shall be enacted and what taxes shall be levied?” He continued: “It has been argued that as Virginia for the past thirty years had fostered and maintained a public free-school system, voters not able to read have themselves to blame. This may be true to a limited extent; in the main it is not true. It is not true as to the adults in 1870, when the free-school system went into effect, for free schooling was not offered to them. Many a dissolute father has kept his children from school to support him in idleness. Should the sins of these fathers be visited upon these children? In other instances the services of the children in households were required to maintain impoverished families, depriving them of the advantages being offered. Should these unfortunates, who are now voters, be held responsible for their lack of learning? In some sparsely settled sections schools could not be maintained. Should men raised under such circumstances, to whom the State would offer no opportunity in their youth, be condemned for not acquiring something that was not within their reach? I am just as much opposed to an educational qualification as I am to a property qualification.” This is strong language. He clinched it however when he said: “As I have already intimated, Virginia did not, in 1861, define her call for defenders of her soil and honor to her educated sons and she would now, if she needed soldiers to stand between her and danger. Cruel and ungrateful indeed would it be for her to say one of her sons returning from some sanguinary plain with his badge of honor on his manly breast. ‘You responded loyally to my call; you did your duty well and bore yourself bravely; but as you cannot read I cannot trust you with a ballot; you must be content to let your educated brothers do the voting and run the government.’ What an outrage that would be upon common justice and right! I repeat, a State has the general constitutional power to restrict suffrage. She could have an aristocracy of aged and wise men, or a plutocrac of landlords and millionaires as her ruling power without violating the letters of the Constitution of the United States. I am not arguing against the naked right of a State to draw the line between the rich and the poor, the cultured and the illiterate at the ballot box; to enfranchise the one and disfranchise the other. It is not necessary to tell me this thing can be done with a brazen face and bold affront and keep within the organic law. I know it. I am arguing the injustice and wrong of a policy that would stamp inferiority upon a class whose minds may be untutored, but among whom are multitudes whose common sense is strong whose hearts are loyal to their country’s welfare and who are ever ready to bear their breasts in their country’s defense.” But why comment further? Ex-Gov. O’Ferrall has gone to the root of the matter. He is able. He is fearless. He is brave. God bless him. He considers Virginia’s interest paramount to that of any individual citizen. It is not his love for the Negro, but his devotion to great principles which has caused him to lead the way and demand a hearing in the forum of the commonwealth. The end is not yet.

“Gov. O’Ferrall and the Illiterate Voter,” Black Virginia: The Richmond Planet, 1894-1909, accessed January 20, 2026, https://blackvirginia.richmond.edu/items/show/796.