Raftsman's journal. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1854-1948, 1866-04-18

:
to the deprivation of any right, secur-
ed or protected by this act, or to different pun
ishment, pains or pen alties, on account oil sucn
person having at any time been held IN condi
ton of slavery or involuntary servitude, except
rs punishment for crime whereof the party
shall have been duly convicted, or by reason OF
his color race, than is prescribed for the pun
ishment of white persons shall be deemed guilty
of a misdemeanor; and on conviction, shall be
punished by fine, not exceeding one thousand
dollars or imprisonme ent not exceeding one year.
or both, in the discr elton of the court.
Now, can human ingenuity point out wherein
that section discriminates in favor of colored
persons 1t says that no person shall subject
colored person to different punishment than
that inflicted white person, for the same Of
fense. Does that discriminate in his favor! Why,
sir, the very object of the section is to prevent
discrimination. The effect of it is to prevent 1t,
as we'll rs its object; and language, 1t does seem
to me, could not moro plainly express that effect
It may be said that it is for the benefit of the
black man, because he is in some instances dis
criminated against by State laws; but that is the
case with all remedial statutes. They are for the
relief of persons who need relief, not for the re-
lief of those who have right already; AID
whe those needing relief obtain it, they stand
upon the precise footing of those who do not need
it There are, however, other and serious objec-
tions made to this section 1t is said that it pun
ished, by fine and imprisonment. Legislators who
pass such conflicting laws. Let us see if that is
the language, is the proper construction of the
provisions will read again the first line. 1t de-
clares that any person who, under color of any
law sh all subject cause to be subjected any in
habitant of any State or Territory to the depri-
walton of any right secured protected, &c.
Now, sir, who il to be punished! T! Is the law to
be punished Are the men who make the law
to be punished! Not at all. If any person un-
der color of any law shall subject person, &c,
he is to be punished. Who? Why, the person
who. under color of law, commits the offense, not
the men who make the law. ''If any person,
der color of any law, statute. ordinance, reguls-
tiOn custom u RZ In n tIoS of the
South custom prevails by which different pun
ishment is inflicted upon the blacks from that
which is meted out to the whites for the same Of
fense. This section proposes to punish the com
munity, or to punish the person who, under color
of such custom, commits the offense. tits mop-
strous perversion of the meaning of the section
to give 1t any other construction. But it is said
that, under this provision. judges of the court
may be punished, and ministerial officers may be
punished. who are engaged in the execution of
any such statute as this, and this is made an OBJ
lection to the law. Well sir, I admit that the
ministerial officer and the Judge if he acts vi
ciously and corruptly in the execution of lille
gal law, may be and ought to be punished. But
If he acted innocently the judge would not be
punished What, sir, is crime? Why, it is @
violation of some public law, to constitute which
there must be an act, and a vicious will in doing
the act or, according to the definition in some of
the law books to constitute a crime, there must
be violation of public law coupled with
intent, or withcrim inal neglect. There mu 81 be
order to commit crime; and the judge, who for
the purpose of having this question decided in
the Federal Courts, should give a decision that
would allow the case TO be brought up, who acted
innocently and not viciously, oppressively,
would never be convicted before any court in
Christen iom. But, sir, if he acted viciously and
opPressiveiy, repeat he ought to be punished;
and it is no novel provision TO put into a statute
book. Why, sir, very soon after the organization
of this Government, in the first year of its exist
enee as long ago as 1876, the Congress of the Uni
ted States provided for Furnishing men who,under
color of State laws, violated the laws of the Uni
ted States. will read from the 26th section of
an act passed in 1890. "In case any person or
persons hall sue for prosecute any such writ
or process, such person or persons, and all attor
neys and solicitors prosecuting in such case, and
all officers executing any such writ process, and
being convicted thereof, shall be deemed viola
tors of the laws of nations and disturbers of the
public repose, and shall be imprisoned not ex-
ceeding three years fined 81 900, at the discre-
tion of the court"
Mr.. TrImbull after discussing the OBJ ectiops of
the President to the second section, reviewed
other portions of the Veto Message. In proof
that conflicting legislation existed, and that an
ger was TO be apprehended, from conflicting leg
islatien not yet affected, Mr.. TrumbuIl cited the
ofcial returns of military officers connected with
the Freedman's Bureau, of State laws recently
enacted in prohibition of the right of the negro
to lease or own land, and other rights secured to
them in this bill. He also referred to the militia
~ orders sanctioned by the President, showing
>no Soho tuiHS dmOuS tueIu, tuOSe OF 0eOelaB
Sickles at Charleston, cautioning the law making
authorities against discriminating against any
class OF the population, declaring that all laws
should expressly secure, in all respects, equal JUS
tlce TO freedmen as to all other people. His or
der of March 4th declared the exclusive jursdic-
tlon in all cases affecting freedmen, of the Supe-
rior and Circuit Provost Courts
Hecontinued in illustration of the frequent ex-
ercise OF these powers under the discretion of the
President, and assumed a radical change in the
Presidents opinions and action upon this subject
de also discussed the specific powers of the Pres
ident, claiming that the war power rested in Con-
gress. He next proceeded to examine the objec-
tlon of the President to the third section of the
bill. lying against the extent Of jurisdiction to
Federal courts granted in cases arising under this
act He claimed that the President had made a
strained construction of it, in assuming that all
cases arising under Its provisions ust necessarily
be excluded from The State Courts but if it did
sustain such construction, and it was found to be
the only safeguard for the rights of the freed
men, he would freely say that their liberty should
be maintained at all hazards, and he would fur
ther say that if it was found essentially necessary
for their rejection, ne would put in the hands of
the colorsd m en- the ballot, and the bayonet too
90 TAR as he was concerned in connection with the
faith of the nation, pledged to protect those who
had fought to sustain the unity of the nation, he
would never cease in his efforts to make that
pledge good. To the objection made to the num-
Der of officials and agents required by the bill,
ne replied that it all copied from the statute
nown as the Fugitive Slave law, machinery in
Itself always held to be constitutional and prop
er, and now used in the interest of freedom as IL
originally was in the interest of Slavery AS our
soldiers employed the weapons received from
Ihe rebels In putting down the Rebellion, SO the
weapons of the law were sanctifed in uses of
freedom Other objections to the seventh and
eighth sections he showed to be taken verbally
rom former laws against which no objections had
been made. That with reference to the employ
nent of the army and navy in enforcing its ex-
'cution, ho explained, was taken from . law en-
'cted in Van Buren's Administration in 1888.
In conclusion, Mr. Trumbull said Mr..
resident, | have now gone through this
Ieto Message replying with what potence
could command to its various objections
o the bill Would that could stop here,
hat there was no occasion to go further; but