Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1866-04-06

the lights secured to them by the first sec
ton" The construction which have giver
to the second section is strengthened by this
third section, for it makes clear what kind O.
denial or deprivation Of the rights secured by
the first section was in contemplation. 1t il
denial or deprivation of such rights Sin the
Courts or judicial tribunals of the State
It stands, therefore, clear of doubt that the
offence and the penalties provided in the Sec
ond section are intended for the State Judge
who in the clear exercise of his functions as
a Judge, not acting ministerially but judi
cially, shall decide contrary to this Federal
law. In other words, when State Judge,
acting upon question involving a conflict
between State law and Federal law, and
bound, according to his own judgment and
responsibility, to give an impartial decision
between the two, comes to the conclusion
that the State law is valid and the Federal
law is 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 judi
cial decision, and converts the State Judge
into mere ministerial officer, bound to de-
eide 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 exclusive cognizance of the Fed
eral tribunals It follows that if, in any
State which denies to colored person any
one Of all those rights, that person should
commit crime against the laws of the State,
murder, arson, rape, or any other crime, all
protection and punishment through the laws
of the State, are taken away, and he can only
be tried and punished in the Federal courts
How is the criminal to be tried? If the Of
fence is provided for and punished by Fed
eral law, that law, and not the State law, is
to govern.
It is only when the offence does not hap
pen to be within the purview Of Federal law
that the Federal courts are to try and pun
ish him under any other law. Then resort
is to be had to ''the common law as modi-
fed and changed by State legislation, $50
far as the same is not inconsistent with the
Constitution and laws of the United States. y
So that over this vast domain Of criminal ju-
risprudence provided by each State for the
protection of its own citizens, and for the
punishment of all persons who violate its
criminal laws, Federal, wherever it can be
made to apply, displaces State law.
what source Congress derives the power to
transfer to Federal tribunals certain classes
of cases embraced in this section The Con-
stitution expressly declares that the judicial
power of the United States shall extend to
all cases in law and equity arising under this
Constitution, the laws of the United States,
and treaties made, or which shall be made,
under their authority, in all cases affecting
ambassadors, other public ministers and con-
suls to all cases of admiralty and maritime
Jurisdiction to controversies to which the
United States shall be party; to controver-
sizes between two Or more States, between a
State and citizens of another State, between
citizens of different States, between citizens
of the same State claiming land grants of
different States, and between 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 "a, 1889, establishing the
judicial courts of the United States, in con-
ferring upon the Federal Courts jurisdiction
over cases originating in State tribunals, is
careful to confne them to the classes emu
merated in the above recited clause of the
Constitution. This section of the bill I'M
dou5tedly comprehends cases and author Ives
the exercise of powers that are not, by the
Constitution, within the jurisdiction Of the
Courts Of the United States. To transfer
them to these Courts would be an exercise
of authority well calculated to excite distrust
and alarm on the part of all the States for
the bill applies alike to all of them-as well
to those that have as to those that have not
been 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 en-
force, by appropriate legislation, the article
declaring that ''neither slavery nor involun-
tary servltude, except as punishment 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 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 it
likely there will be any attempt to revive it,
by the people or the States. If, however,
any such attempt shall be made, it will then
become the duty of the General Government
to exercise any and ali incidental powers nee
essary and proper to maintain inviolate this
great constitutional law of freedom.
The fourth section Of the bill provides that
officers and agents of the Freedmen's Bureau
shall be empowered to make arrests, and also
that other officers may be specially commits
stoned for that purposed by the President OF
the United States It also authorizes Cir
cult Courts of the United States and the Su-