The Sun.
London, England, 1866-04-10 00:00:00

pass an ex post facto law ; and, as to money, that no State
shall make anything bat gold and silver a legal tender.
But where can we find a Federal prohibition against the
power of any State to discriminate, as do most of them,
between aliens and citizens, between artificial persons called
corporations and nationalised persons in the right to hold
real estate ? If it be granted that Congress can repeal all
State laws discriminating between whites and blacks in the
subjects covered by this bill, why, it may be asked, may
not Congress repeal in the same way all State laws discri-
minating between the two races on the subject of suffrage
and office ? If Congress can declare by law who shall hold
lands, who shall testify, who shall have capacity to make
a contract in a State, then Congress can also by law declare
who, without regard to race or colour, shall have the right
to sit as a juror or as a judge, to hold any office, and,
finally, to vote in every State and territory of the United
States.

As respects the territories, they come within the power
of Congress, for as to them the law-making power is the
Federal power ; but as to the States, no similar provision
exists vesting in Congress the power to make rules and
regulations for them.
The object of the second section of the bill is to afford
discriminating protection to coloured persons in the full
enjoyment. of all the rights secured to them by the preced-
ing section. It declares that any person who, under colour
of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, shall
subject, or cause to be subjected, any inhabitant of any
State or territo:y to the deprivation of any right secured or
protected by this act, or to different punishment, pr.ins or
penalties, on account of such persons having at any time
being held in a condition of slavery or involuntary servi-
tude, except as a punishment of crimes, whereof the party
shall have been duly convicted, or by reason of his colour
or race, than is prescribed for the punishment of white
persons, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and on
conviction shall be punished by fine not exceeding $l,OOO,
or imprisonment not exceeding one year, or both, in the
discretion of the Court.

This section seems to be designed to apply to some exist-
ing or future law of a State or territory, which may con-
flict
with the provisions of the bill now under consideration.
It provides for counteracting such forbidden legislation by
imposing fine and imprisonment upon the legislators who
may pass such conflicting laws, or upon the officers and
agents who shall put or attempt to put them into execution.
It means an official offence, not a common crime committed
against the law, upon the person or property of the black
race. Such an act may deprive the black man of his pro-
perty, but not of his right to hold property. It means a
deprivation of the right itself, either by the State Judi-
ciary or the State Legislature. It is therefore assumed that
under this section members of a State Legislature who
should vote for laws conflicting with the provisions of the
bill, that judges of the State Courts who should render
judgments in antagonism with its terms, and that marshals
and sheriffs who should execute processes sanctioned by
State laws and issued by State judges in execution of their
judgments, could be brought before other tribunals, and
there subjected to fine and imprisonment for the perform-
ance of the duties which such State laws might impose.
The legislation thus proposed invades the judicial power
of the State. It says to every State, court, or judge, if you
decide that this act is unconstitutional ; if you refuse under
the prohibition of a State law, to allow a negro to
testify; if you hold that over such a subject-matter the said
law is paramount; under colour of a State law refuse the
exercise of the right of the negro—your error of judgment,
however conscientious, shall subject you to fine and im-
prisonment.

1 do not apprehend that the conflicting legislation, which

the bill seems to contemplate, is so likely to occur as to
render it necessary at this time to adopt a measure of such
doubtful constitutionality. In the next place, this provi-
sion of the bill seems to be unnecessary, as adequate judi-
cial remedies could be adopted to obtain the desired end,
without invading the immunities of legislators—always
important to be preserved in the interests of public liberty;
without assailing the independence of the judiciary—
always essential to the preservation of the individual
rights; and without impairing the efficiency of officers
always necessary for the maintenance of the public peace
and order.

The remedy proposed by this section seems to be in this
respect not only anomalous, but unconstitutional; for the
Constitution guarantees nothing with certainty if it does
not insure to the several States the right of making index-
ruling laws in regard to all matters arising within their
jurisdiction, subject only to restriction in case of conflict
with the Constitution and constitutional laws of the United
States, the latter to be held as the supreme law of the land.
The third section gives the district courts of the United
States exclusive cognisance of all crimes and offences com-
mitted against the provisions of this Act, and concurrent
jurisdiction with the circuit courts of the United States of
all civil and criminal cases, affecting persons who are denied
or cannot enforce in the courts or judicial tribunals of
the State or locality where there may be any of the rights
secured to them by the first section.
T he construction which I have given to the second section
is strengthened by this third section, for it makes clear what
kind of denial or deprivation of rights secured by the first
section was in contemplation. It is a denial of deprivation
of sucri

It stands, therefore, clear of doubt that the offence and the
penalties provided by the second section, and intended for
the State judge, who, in the clear exercise of his functions
as a judge, not acting ministerially but judicially, shall de-
cide contrary to this Federal law. In other words, when a
State judge, acting upon a question involving a conflict
between a State law and a Federal law, and bound accord-
ing to his own judgment and responsibility to give an im-
portant decision between the two, comes to the conclusion
that the State law is valid and the Federal law invalid, he
must not follow the dictates of his own judgment, at the
peril of fine and imprisonment.
The Legislative Department of the Government of the
United States thus takes from the Judicial Department of
the States the sacred and exclusive duty of judicial deci-
sion, and converts the State judge into a mere ministerial
officer, bound to decide according to the will of Congress.
It is clear that in States which deny to persons whose
rights are secured by the first section of the bill any one of
those rights, all criminal and civil cases affecting them will,
by the provisions of the third section, come under the exe-
cutive cognisance of the Federal tribunals.
It follows that if any State which denies to a coloured
person any one of all these rights, that person should com-
mit a crime against the laws of a State—murder, arson,
rape, or any other crime—all protection and punishment
through the Courts of the State aro taken away, and he can
only be tried and punished in the Federal courts. How is
the criminal to be tried if the offence is provided for and
punished by Federal law? That law, and not the State
law, is to govern. It is only when the offence does not
happen to be within the purview of the Federal law that
the Federal courts are to try and punish him under any
other law. Then resort is to be had to the common law as
modifiedby the State Legislature so far as the same is not
inconsistent with the constitution and laws of the United
States. So that over the vast domain of criminal jurispru-
dencecitizens,p provided e d
forbtyh
the
each
punishment State f orotfhael protectionl persons
wohfo itsow
violaten
its criminal laws, Federal law, wherever it can be made to
apply, displaces State law.
The question naturally arises—From what source does
Congress derive the power to transfer to the Federal tribu-
nals certain classes of cases embraced in this section ? The
Constitution expressly declares that—" The judicial power
of the United States shall extend to all cases in law and
under this Constitution, the laws of the
UnqnniitetydaSrisitatng States, and treaties made, or which shall be made,
under their authority ; to all cases affecting ambassadors
and other public Ministers and consuls ; to all cases of Ad-
miralty and maritime jurisdiction ; to controversies to
which the United States shall be a party ; to controversies
between two or more States ; between a State and citizens
of another State ; between citizens of different States ; be-
tween citizens of the same State claiming land.under grants
of a different State, or the citizens thereof and foreign
States, citizens or subjects." Here the judicial power of
the United States is expressly set forth and defined, and the
Act of September 24, 1789, establishing the judicial courts
of the United States, in conferring upon the Federal courts
jurisdiction over cases originating in State tribunals, is
careful to confine them to the classes enumerated in the
above recited clause of the Constitution. The section of
the bill undoubtedly comprehends cases, and authorises
the exercise of powers that are not by the Constitution
within the jurisdiction of the Courts of the United States.
To transfer them to those courts would be an exercise of
authority well calculated to cause distrust and alarm on
the part of all the States, for the bill applies alike to all of
them, as well to those who have as to those who have not
baen engaged in rebellion.' It may be assumed that this
authority is incident to the power granted to Congress by
the Constitution, as recently amended, to enforce by ap-
propriate legislation the article declaringceptas
a that neither
slavery nor involuntary servitude, except
for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted,
shall exist within the United States, or any place subject
to their jurisdiction.
It cannot, however, be justly claimed that, with a view
to the enforcement of this article of the Constitution, there
is at present any necessity for the exercise of all the powers
which this bill confers. Slavery has been abolished, and
at present nowhere exists within the jurisdiction of the
United States, nor has there been, nor is there likely to be,
any attempt to revive it by the people of any State. If,
however, any such attempt should be made, it will then
become the duty of the General Government to exercise
any and all incidental powers necessary and proper to main-
tain inviolate this great law of freedom.
The fourth section of the bill provides that the officers
and agents of the Freedmen's Bureau shall be empowered
to make arrests, and also that other officers may be spe-
cially commissioned for that purpose by the President of
the United States. It also authorises Circuit Courts of
the United States and the Superior Courts of the territo-
ries to appoint, without limitation, commissioners, who are
to be charged with the performance of quasi-judicial duties.
The fifth section empowers the commissioners so to be
selected by the Court to appoint in writing one or more
suitable persons from time to time to execute warrants and
other processes desirable by the bill. These numerous offi-
cial agents are made to constitute a sort of police, in addi-
tion to the military, and are authorised to pummon a
.posse

comitatus, and oven to call to their aid such portion of the
land and naval forces of the United States, or of the militia,
as may be necessary to the performance of the duty with
which they are charged. This extraordinary power is to be
conferred upon agents irresponsible to the Government and
to the people, to whose number the discretion of the com-
missioner is the only limit, and in whose hands such autho-
rity might be made a terrible engine of wrong, oppression,
and fraud. The general statutes regulating the land and
naval forces of the United States, the militia, and the exe-
cution of the laws are believed to be adequate for any emer-
gency which can occur intime of peace. If it should prove
otherwise, Congress can at any time amend those laws in
such manner as, while subserving the public welfare, will
not jeopardise the rights, interests, and liberties of the
people.
The seventh section provides that a fee of $lO shall bo
paid to each commissioner in every case brought before
him, and a fee of $5 to his deputies for each person he or
they may arrest and take before any such commissioner,
with such other fees as may be deemed reasonable by such
commissioner in general for performing such other duties
as may be required in the premises. All these fees are to
be paid out of the Treasury of the United States, -whether
there is a conviction or not ; but in case of conviction they
are to be recoverable from the defendant. It seems to me

that under the influence of such temptations bad men
might convert any law, however beneficial, into an instru-
ment of persecution and fraud.
By the eighth section of the bill, United States Courts
which sit only in one place for white citizens must migrate
with the marshal and district attorney, and necessarily
with the clerk, although he is not mentioned, to any part of
the district upon the order of the President, and there hold
a Court for the purpose of the more speedy arrest and trial
of persons charged with a violation of this act, and there
the judge and officers of the Court must remain upon the
order of the President for the time therein designated.
The ninth section authorises the President, or such per-
son as he may empower for that purpose, to employ such
part of the land or naval forces of the United States, or of
the militia, as shall be necessary to prevent the violation
and enforce the due execution of this act. This language
seems to imply a permanent military force that is always
to be at hand, and whose only business is to be the en-
forcement of this measure over the vast region where it is
intended to operate.
I do not propose to consider the policy of this bill. To me

the details of the bill are fraught with evih The white race
and the black race of the South have hitherto lived together
under the relation of master and slave—capital owning
labour. Now that relation is changed, and, as to owner-
ship, capital and labour are divorced. They stand now each
master of itself. In this new relation, one being necessary
to the other, there will be a new adjustment, which both are
deeply interested in making harmonious. Each has equal
power in settling terms, and, if left to the laws that regulate
capital and labour, it is confidently believed that they will
satisfactorily work out the problem. Capital, it is true, has
more intelligence, but labour is never so ignorant as not to
understand its own interests, not to know its own value,
and not to see that capital must pay that value. This bill
frustrates the adjustment. It interferes between capital
and labour, and attempts to settle questions of political
economy through the agency of numerous officials whose

interest it will be to foment discord between the two races;

for as the breach widens their employment will continue,
and when it is closed their occupation will terminate. In
all our history, in all our experience, as a people living
under Federal and State laws, no such system as that con-
templated by the details of this bill has ever before been
proposed or adopted.
They establish for the security of the coloured race safe-
guards which go infinitely beyond any that the General Go-
vernment has ever provided for the white race. In fact the
distinction of race and colour is by the bill made to operate
in favour of the coloured and against the white race. They
interfere with the municipal regulations of the State, with
the relations existing exclusively between a State and its
citizens, or between the inhabitants of the same State ; an
absorption and assumption of power by the General Govern-
ment, which, if acquiesced in, must sap and destroy our
Federative system of limited powers, and break down the
barriers which preserve the rights of the States. It is an-
other step, or rather stride, towards centralisation and the
concentration of all legislative power in the National Go-
vernment. The tendency of the bill must be to re-
suscitate the spirit of rebellion, and to arrest the progress
of those influences which are closely drawing around the
States the bonds of union and peace.
My lamented predecessor, in his proclamation of the
Ist of January, 1863, ordered and declared that all persons
held as slaves within certain States and parts of States
therein designated were and thenceforward should be
free, and further that the Executive Government of the
United States, including the military and naval authorities
thereof, would recognise and maintain the freedom of such
persons. This guarantee has been rendered especially
obligatory and sacred by the amendment of the Constitu-
tion abolishing slavery throughout the United States. I,
therefore, fully recognise the obligation to protect and de-
fend that class of our people whenever and wherever it
shall become necessary, and to the fullest extent compatible
with the Constitution of the, United States.
awou ovutirn.olliS, it only remains for me to
say that I will cheerfully co-operate with Congress in any
measure that may be necessary for the preservation of the
civil rights of the freedmen as well as those of all other
classes of persons throughout the United States by judicial
process, under equal and impartial laws, or conformably
with the provisions of the Federal Constitution.
I now return the bill to the Senate, and regret that in
considering the bills and joint resolutions, 42 in number,
that have been thus far submitted for my approval, I am
compelled to withhold my assent from a second measure
that has received the sanction of both Houses of Congress
ANDREW JOHNSON.
Washington, D.C., March 27, 1866.

ELECTION COMMITTEE—This Day.

NOTTINGHAM.

The members of the committee re-assembled this morn-
ing shortly after 11 o'clock.
The Chairman said that he had received a letter from a
person complaining of having been exchided from the
committee-room by a policeman, and, in consequence, he
would state that the inquiry was a public one, and none
but unexamined witnesses should be excluded.
Mr. Rodwell, Q. 0., handed a letter which he had re-
ceived to the chairman, which he thought right to submit
to the perusal of the committee, but said that as far as he
was concerned he did not attach any importance to its
contents. The nature of the document did not transpire.
James Lyon, the first witness called, was examined by
Mr. Riodwell. He said he lived at Sheffield, and was a
musician. During the Nottingham election ho,was em-
ployed by Mr. Milner as a paid canvasser for Messrs.
Morley and Paget. Mr. Milner was secretaryof the Park
Ward committee-room in Rutland-street, Nottingham.
He was engaged canvassing for a fortnight before the elec-
tion, and ho was sometimes accompanied by Mr. Milner,
who paid him as well as the other canvassers. He saw
Mr. Heath at the Park-ward committee-rooms. He be-
lieved the money was brought to the committee-room by
Mr. Milner, who paid him on two occasions with some
other persons, but he did not know them. On the day of
the election, he went with Mr. Milner to the house of
man named Henry Murin, and they solicited him for his
vote for Messrs. Morley and Paget. Muria said he did
not know whether he should vote or not, but after
some conversation with Mr. Milner he said that
he and his father would sell their votes for .£4. Mr. Milner
not having the money with him offered to give him an
I 0 U for the amount, which he consented to take, on his
(witness) signing it. The next day ho was in company
with a person named Henry Walker, and he saw Murin,
who told him that he had been paid. Witness then asked
him to give him a stamped receipt, specifying for what
purpose the money was paid to witness, which ho did on
the I 0 U, writing at the top, "for two votes, F. and
H. Murin." (The paper produced with the IOU in ques-
tion.)

The witness was cross-examined by Mr. Mundell at
some length, in order to show that he had been tampered
with by Mr. Richard and Mr. Parsons, which, however,
he positively denied, and nothing material was elicited
calculated to affect his examination in chief.

Other witnesses were called to prove bribery on the
part of Messrs. Morley and Paget's agents.
The committee will reassemble to-morrow at the usual
hour.

MARKETS.—This Day.

HAY.

SMITHFIELD.—Meadow hay, £4 4s to £5 12s ; clover,
£s' 5s to £6 12s 6d ; and straw, £1 18s to £2 5s per load.
Trade heavy.
CUMBERLAND.—Meadow hay, £4 4s to £5 15s Od; clover,
£5 5s to £6 12s 6d ; and straw, £2 Os to £2 5s per load .
A moderate demand.

WHITECHAPEL.—Meadow hay, £4 4s to £5 12s; clover,
£5 56 to £6 15s Od; and straw, £1 188 to £2 5s per load.
Trade slow.

COLONIAL.

TEA.--The market has remained very quiet, the trade
having deferred their operations until the public sales,
which commence to-day.

&malt—Business has been inactive, and the few bargains
recorded have been at barely previous rates. In the refined
market there is little change to report.
COFFEE—There has been a fair inquiry for both Planta-
tion and native Ceylon, and late quotations are in most
instances fully supported.
RlCE—Only limited transactions have been entered into;
holders, however, still continue to demand full rates.
SALTPETRE—The operations have been of quite a retail
character, at about previous prices.
TALLOW.—Business.in the Tallow Market has been quiet,
and some forced sales have reduced the quotation from
6d. to ls. per cwt. The trade demand has also been
sluggish, and there is no improvement to report ; prices
are 475. 9d. to 48s. ; on the spot, 475. 6d. ; April to June,
48s. 3d. ; June, 495. is offered for October to December.
Town Tallow is in good supply, and 48s. is the net letter
price ;
Australian beef, 465. 6d. ; Odessa sheep, 475. 2d. to
48s. beef, 465. 641 5 South American, 50s. ; scare)).