The Gillespie Case. 
99 
On the 31st of October, 1865, Ezekiel Gillespie, a Milwau¬ 
keean of mixed African blood, and a resident of the Seventh 
Ward, requested the board of registry of that ward, then in 
session, to register his name as an elector, which the board 
refused to do, on the ground that he was a person of color, and 
not entitled to vote. On the following election day Mr. Gillespie 
offered his vote, accompanied by an affidavit giving the reasons 
why his name did not appear on the registry list of voters, and 
also accompanied by the affidavits of two householders of the 
Seventh Ward to the effect that they knew him to be a resident 
of that ward. The inspectors of election for the ward, Henry 
L. Palmer, William H. Williams and Andrew H. McCormick, 
refused to accept his ballot, whereupon Mr. Gillespie brought 
suit against the board of inspectors in the Circuit Court for Mil¬ 
waukee county. Byron Paine appeared as counsel for Mr. Gil¬ 
lespie, and D. G. Hooker for the board of inspectors. The de¬ 
fendants demurred to the complaint, setting up the claim that 
it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. 
By stipulation, notice of trial was waived, and the case was put 
on the calendar and submitted without argument, judgment 
being rendered pro forma sustaining the demurrer. The object 
of this was to bring the matter without delay before the state 
Supreme Court, to which Mr. Gillespie’s attorney at once took 
an appeal. The justices of the Supreme Court at that time 
were three in number. Luther S. Dixon was chief justice, and 
Jason Downer and Orsamus Cole were his associates. The main 
opinion in this case, overruling the order of the Circuit Court, 
was written by Justice Downer. With reference to the meaning 
of the phrase, “Approved by a majority of all the votes cast at 
such election, ” he said: 
“Three different constructions of this clause were suggested 
on the argument: 1st. That it required that the extension of 
suffrage should be approved by a majority of all the votes, on 
all subjects and for all officers , cast at such election. 2d. That 
it should be approved by a majority of all the voters voting at 
such election. 3d. That it should be approved by a majority of 
all the votes on that subject cast at such election. ... If 
the first construction, requiring a majority of all the votes on 
