Weekly Trinity journal., 1871-01-21
SHERIFF JAcKsON's CASE.


The decision of the .. S. Circuit Court upon
the demurrer to the indictment interposed by
Of the 14th as follows
The case of John Jackson, Sheriff and er o6fcio
Tax Collector of Trinity County, with which
our readers are already familiar, came up yes
terday in the United States Circuit Court
Judges LoreHzo Sawyer and Ogden Hoffman
were on the Bench. 1t will be remembered that
jackson, eT o6ici0 Tax Collector OF Trinity
County, collected 81 from Chinaman, An Ko0,
as Foreign Miners License Tax, acting under
/ certain State Laws. For this he was indicted
! by the United States Grand Jury. He was sub
srquenrly arrested by United States Deputy Mar
sha, Is }. AckermaD, and on the 23d Of Decem-
Der gave security before United States Commits
soner q Berne for his appearance on The trial
Of bis case, and was released from custody
The indictment and arrest Of Jackson were
looked upon as movements of the utmost i'm
portauce-as involving the principle Of State
Rlgbts-and n demurrer 10 the Indictment was
filed. Both demurrer and indictment have al
ready appeared in the ALTA. week ago yes
terday an argument on the demurrer took place
by Attorney General Jo Hamilton, J. d. Ham
hetou and George Gordon for the defence and
United States District Attorney Latimer and W.
II. l.. Barnes for the United States The Court
took The matter under advisement aud yester-
day, Judge Hoffman, of the United States Dis
trct Court, rendered the decision which was
verbal, and substantially as follows
DECISION.
The questions raised by the demurrer are two :;
First, aS to the suihciency Of the indictment and
second as to the constitutionaliIy of the Act of
Congress under which it is based.
The Indictment ayers, in substance, that one
All 400 was deprived Of right secured TO him
by the Sixteenth Section of an Act of Congress
OF 1870 in this, that there was eXacted from him
four dollars by tue defendant, who was then and
there duly elected Collector o! Taxes ia Trim
ity county, under color Of certain law of the
State Of ltornia, which the indictment partic-
ularly sets forth
The indictment contains no averment that Alb
koo was "A foreign miner, and within the provis-
ions of the State law If this averinent be un-
necessary, no proof of that fact need be given on
the trial, and the Act of Congress would then
be held to apply to case OF illegal ext0rtion by
a Tax Collector from any person, though such
eXtctlon might be wholly Unauthorized by the
law under which the officer pretended to act
We are satisfied that it WIS not the design of
Congress To prevent or to punish such abuses of
authority by Sale Offices. The object of the
Act was, not to prevent Illegal exictions. but to
forbid the eXaction Of State Laws which, by the
Act itself, are made void The District Attor-
~
of showing that the tax was levied by the officer
under the authority Of State law; for he AYERS
him to have been duly elected Tax Collector
Nor does he contend if any other person not IA
tax collector, had levied similar contribution
from CT inaman, that the offence would come
within the provisions of the Act Of Congress
1t wonld seem, necessarily, to follow, that the
person from wh0m The tah i0aS etacied must have
been person from whom, under the provisions
Of the State law, the officer was authorized to
exact it. The statute requires that party
shall be subjected to II deprivation of right Sc
cured by the statute under color of some law
statute order custom; but if this exaction,
although made by Tda CoHector, has been lev
led upon a person not within the provisions OF
the State law, the eXaction cannot be said to
have been made ''Hader coior Of iaV ~ any more
than similar exaction from Chinese miner,
made by person wholly unau,norized and un-
der the pretencc of being Il Tax Collector
Again; The constltuionaliN If the section
Of the Act Of Congress in question must be sus-
tined, If at all, under the second clause Of the
Fourteenth Amendment, which provides that all
persops snal be secured to the equal protection
OF the laws for the first clause relates exclu-
sively to the privileges aud immnnites Of cit-
zens of the Unted States. If, therefore. the
person on whom this tax was levied was not a
foreign miner and not subject to the tax, by the
term of the State law, he has the same remedy
for the illegal extortion would be possessed
by any citizen. Ne has, therefore, equally with
any other citizen, the protection of the law 1t
IS only when, being foreign miner, a tax is
levied upon him ms SUCH which tax white cti-
zens are not subjected to, that he could be said
to be deprived OF the equal protection of the
law.
We are, therefore, of opinion that the indict-
meni should contain an averment that he was IA
foreign miner, with such other averments rs are
ffts lrtt, l..
the State law, and subject him to its provisions.
The demurrer, on this point, is sustained.
coNsTIruToNALITY OF THE ACT or CONGRESS-
On the second point it is also contended the
Sixteenth and Seventeenth Sections of the Act
of 1870 are unconstitutional, aud ia excess of
the powers conferred upon Congress by the
Fourteenth Amendment
The duty Of declaring an Act of Congress void
for uncOnstitationaty, is one of the most drli-
cate and responsible which the Courts are
called upon 10 discharge. 1t is only in the
clearest cases, aud in those admitting of no
other decision, the Supreme Court of the United
States has declared laws of Congress to be un-
constitutional. Il is said by Mr. Justice Swayne
in "a recent case that only three instances of The
kind occurred since the organization of the Gov
ernment In some of tIle States the subordinate
Courts decline to pass npon the c0nsttutionality
OF State laws under State Constitutions, but re
nit the question to the highest judicial tribu-
nal for its determination.
We see no reason why the same rule should
not be observed by the subordinate tribunals of
the United States Courts
1t is further to be considered that the law in
question was passed almost Immediately after
the adoption of the amendment, and, in the sup
posed exercise of the powers conferred by it, by
"A Congress, to a very large exteat, composed of
the men who had framed the amendment sub
milted il to the States and urged its adoption
A law passed by them, in pursuance of the
power conferred 10y the amendment may, there
fore, be regarded as legislative construction
cotemporaneous legislative interpretations have
been always considered TO afford much light rs
to The intention of the fathers in framing the