Abbeville press. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1860-1869, 1866-04-13

o'S So'o' VI ''So3 tbau 70 PIescTiUeo iOT tue
punishment OF white persons, shall be
deemed guilty Of misdemeanor, and, on
conviction, shall be punished by fine no,
exceeding one thousand dollars, or implis-
onment mol exceeding one year, or both
in the discretion Of the court" This sec.
tion seems to be designed to apply to some
existing or future law of State or Terri
tory which may conflict with the provisions
of the bill now under consideration. II
provides for counleracting such forbidden
legislation, by imposing fine and imprison.
ment upon tho legislators who may pass
such conflicting laws, or upon the officers
or agents who shall put, or attempt to put
them into execution. 1t means an official
offence, not a common crime committed
against law upon the person or property
OF the black race. Such an act may de-
prive the black man of his property, but
not Of the right to hold property. 1t tmeans
a deprivation of the right itself, either by
the State judiciary or the State Legislature
1t is, therefore, assumed that under this sec
ton members Of State Legislatures who
should vote for laws conflicting with the
provisions of the bill; that judges of the
State courts who should render judgments
in antagouisn with its terms; and that
marshas and sheriffs who should, as minis.
terlal officers, 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 10 6ue and Imprisonment for the
performance of the duties which such State
laws might impose.
The legislation thus proposed invades
the judicial power Of the State. 1t says
to every State court or Judge, if you de-
eide that this act is unconstitutional; If
you refuse, under the prohibition of a State
law, to allow negro to testify; if you
hold that over such a subject-matter the
State law is paramount, aud "under color"
of State law refuse the exercise of the
right to the negro, your error Of judgment
however conscientious, shall subject you
to fine and imprisonment. I do not ap-
prehend that the conflicting legislation
which the bill seems to contemplate ia so
likely to occur as to render it necessary at
this time 10 adopt measure of such doubt
full constitutionaIity.
In the next place, this provision of the
bill seems to be unnecessary, as adequate
judicial remedies could be adopted to se-
cure the desired end, without invading the
immunities of legislators, always important
to be preserved IN the interest of public
liberty, without assaiing the independence
of the judiciary always essential to the
p' eservation Of individual rights, and with.
out impairing the efficiency Of ministerial
officers; always necessary for the main,e.
nance Of public peace and order. The
remedy proposed by this section seems to
be, in this respect, not only anomalous but
unconstitutional for the Constitution gua-
rantees nothing with certainty, if 1t does
not insure to the several States the right
of making and executing laws in regard to
all matters arising within their jurisdiction,
subject only to the restriction that in cases
OF conflict with the Constitution and Con.
stitutional laws of the United States. the
latter should be held 10 be the supreme
law of the land.
The third section gives the district courts
OF the United States exclusive "cognizance
Of all crimes and eferces committed against
the provisions Of this act" and CONCURRENT
Jurisdiction with the circuit courts of the
United States Of all civil and criminal ca.
ses affecting persons who are denied or
cannot enforce, in. the courts or judicial
tribunals of the State or locality, where
they may be, any Of the rights secarad, to
them by the ffst seotion.' The construo,
ton which I have given the second sectian
is strengthened by this third section, forit
makes clear what kind Of denial or depri.
va.ion fsthe rigbtss secuted by the first
lection was in contemplation. Il is de-
NAL; deprivation Of such rights yin the
courts or Judicial tribunals of the. State"
/, II stands, therefore, clear ofsdoabt that
the ofence'and the penalties provided ID
The second section are intended for the,
State judge who, in the clear exercise Of
distinctions IS Q judge, not acting minis
terialIy; but iudicially, sshall decide con-
trary to this Federalslaw mother words,
when 5stafejad dge, acting upon . question,
involving q Conflict between a,state law.
and . Fsdefal: :iaiR, and accord;nR,