New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1868-03-31
OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE UNITED STATES
AMUsEMENTs rms EVENING.
An Important Question before the Lou-
Aslana Supreme COURT = Argument OF
Colonel Field. ..


An Important Question Before the Lou-
IsIana Supreme Court : Argument of
Colonel Field.
Many very important questions growing
out of the Reconstruction Acts Of Congress
are daily being adjudicated in both the
State and Federal Courts, on points which
have arisen under these acts, and the con-
structiOn ofethem, in the administration of
Justice, by District Commanders.
The Supreme Court of this State yester-
day entertained an appeal, from ruling Of
the First District Court in the case Of " The
State Us. Morgan and Wilson," indicted
| therein by the Grand Jury for the crime of
murder. On the trial Of the cause counsel
for defendants moved to quash the indict-
ment on the ground that part Of the jury
returning the bill was disqualified to act
as jurors under the terms of the Reeonstruc-
ton Act having failed to register as eiti-
zens under the order of General Sheridan
issued in August last, or whose names were
subsequently stricken from off the registry
roll. -.al
1t will also be remembered in this con-
nectioD that Hancock, under an order
dated December 9th, 1867, revoked this
clause in the order of Sheridan. These
men, Morgan and Wilson, were tried and
convicted. On the question as to the
quashing of the Indictment the motion was
refused by the Judge, whereon bill of ex-
ceptions was taken, coming up for hearing
yesterday involving the rights of col
cred registered citizens as Jurors, and also
the point that none but men coming under
the law requiring registration as a condi-
ton precedent for citizenship were entitled
to act as such.
The case was conducted on behalf of the
defendants by Colonel A. p. Field, and fol-
the State by the Attorney General. The
defendants counsel, in an elaborate argu.
ment insisted for his clients that no decree
Of court or a commander of a Military
District, could restrict, modify, or contr o.
any of the sections of the reconstruction
act. That while commanders in the exer-
else of the power cOnfided to them may
remove officers, revoke laws, establish trib-
unals, they could not by their act destroy
or in the slightest degree interfere
with one provision of the law fixing the
status of the people of these states, ant
that General Hancock in the revocation of
the order of Sheridan did so interfere
which even the President as commander-in
1uAof VI buO al Whc pOWNIlGco W Nv
that by these acts a large class uf the col
ored population were made citizens and
voters, and that all their rights, political
and civil, were guaranteed them; that 81
also is the right to hold office and property
to vote, and be fully protected in their per
sons to the full extent secured to others
that these newly enfranehised citizens in tn,
exercise of the powers confided to them do
hold office, and with honor, and own prop
erty also, and when these men call upoI
the courts of the country for protection o
their persons or property, they should not b
excluded from the jury summoned to adju
dictate their claims. w .s
d The laws Of England and this countr
t confer upon all men charged wit
n crime the right not only of trial by jury
=. but by jury Of their peers.
He argued that the civil rights bill, i
its first section, and the third section of th
Reconstruction act, decided who were t
be elassed as citizens in the rebel states
that the proposition is undeniable that theT
is no government in Louisiana except tina
provided for by these acts; and that the
have full power and paramount control j
D the states in which they have been promul
r gated. .di seqa1 -lI
:. The great Importance of the questio
can scarcely be estimated. 1t is of more in
2 portance thanany other prerngative whie
IL they possess by virtue Of any act ye
d passed The nreindiea entertained tssasiasSd ! I;
b. very many, and in this and otht
communities, wherein they have heretofol
occupied menial position renders it abst
lutely essential to the enjoyment Of lif
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, tbs
they must be permitted to enjoy the righ
!, of citizenship, among which the chiefel
'' is the right to sit as jurors the vi,
lation of which must be declared Illegal
'e The counsel was unable to col
1a clude his argument for want of time.
was an argument exhaustive in the dept
Of research and skill evinced by him, an
was listened to by large assemblage
- the legal profession, drawn thither by u
g importance Of the question at issue.
= MEETING OF THE DEMOCRACY o