Tri-weekly phoenix. [volume] ([Columbia, S.C.]) 1865-1875, 1871-12-09

Of tbs United States. This, as We nayaI
shown, Is notao. The right OF citizen
to vote depends upon the law of the
State in which he resides, and is not
granted to him by the Constitution OF
the United States, nor is spth right
guaranteed to him by that Instrument.
All that it gu .rantees is. that he shall
not be deprived OF the suffrage by rea.
sqp OF bis race, color, or previous oondi-
The third count is repetition of the
second, with clause setting out charge
Of burglary. Copcerniug the courts in :.
r!sdiction over snch charge. the court is
divided in opinion. and will. therefore,
make no comments on it Of this time.
lie fourth count is obnoxious to the
4 objection tliat neither the citizenship of
Rainey, nor the fact Of his qualification
to vote, ID set out.
/ Ihe fifth count repeats the charge
| tained IA the fourth, with tho addi.
tionfl clnpse 9ontaihedin the third count.
md the court r6fratns from noticing it.
ior t|te' REASONS given as to the third
| ThHiIsbt$tH count is intended to charge
c5hsPffacy to ioppress Raipey for
havlng, prior, to 1st February, 1871, ex-
Htsstsed q. ste tho right OF suffrage. and would
l a.
tichlarity of the prior count. which
charges q conspiracy to oppress to pre-.
yeut tile fhtpfe exercise of the right. II
does not, however, contain any ailees-
ton Of the fact OF qualification, nor tha,
the party was entitled to vote in York
County or anywhere else, or that he ever
exercised his right to vote.
The seventh count is repetition of
the sixth, with the Charge Of burglary
added, as in the third count.
The eighth count alleges a conspiracy
to prevent aud hinder Kainey from the
exercise of u right secured to him by the
Consultation Of the United States, which
il defined to be the right to be secure in
bis person and papers against unreasou-
able search.
The article iu the Constitution of the
United States, to enforce which this
count Is supposed to be drawn, has long
been decided to be mere restriction
upon the United States itself. The
right to be secure in ones house is not q
right derived from the Constitution, but
it existed long before tho adoption Of
the Constitution at common law, and
cannot be said tn come within the mean
ing OF the words Of the Act-"right.
privilege or Immunity granted or secured
by the Constitution Of tho United
States
The niutl count is entirely too indef-
mite. and the defendants could not pussi
oily know from its language with what
offence they were charged; aud the same
objection liz valid as tn the tenth count.
The eleventh and last count Of the in.
dictment charges O conspiracy 70 iniure
Rainey. becans., he had previously voted
for 81 member of Congress. We have no
doubt of the. r Of Congress to inter
fere in the prol,ct:on OF voters at Fede.
rat elections, aud that that power existed
before the adoption Of either Of the re-
cent amendments It is a power neces
sary to the existence of Congress, and
this count seems to set forth the charge
With sufficient perspicuity. aud is not
liable to the objections urged against it.
Ihe motion to quash is over ruled, 10
to the first and eleventh counts OF the
indictment, aud sustained as to the
others, excepting such as the court is
divided respecting.
Mr.. Stanberry submitted u certificate
OF the division of the court. on the
points named in tho decision, aud re.
questcd the signature of the conrt, in
order that 1t might be sent up ut once to
the Supreme Court Mr.. Corbin ob,
iected, and stated that the GOVERNMENT
would enter nole proSeque as to the
counts upon the validity of which the
court was divided
After considerable discussion, it was
agreed that similar certificate of divi.i
sion should be sent up in case to be-
called tomorrow, and to proceed at;once
to the trial OF the case in hand.
Nlr. Corbin stated, that as the defence,
expressed their intention to sever in /
their challenges Of the jurors, he would
sever lii the trial, and ~o1ld tirst tr,
Sherod Childers. The prisoner was ar
rnIgned, ind plead not guilty. The!
clerk then proceeded to empannel tho
jury The name first called was Andrew
N. Curtis, colored. to whom the prisoner
objected
Mr.. Corbin denied tho right OF peremp.
tory challenge to pNties III the United
States Court charged with ohoncea less
than capital felony. citing as authorities
the clse of the United States rs. John
-, I'd RiacEfnrd, 40; United States
Us Reid. 18th Howard, aG5; United
States rs. Shepherd, Abbott's Reports,
I lst vol. page 435. The defence replied
that all the decisions referred to were
made prior to the Act of Congress OF
1865. where it Is enacted that in all cases
of fGlonios less than capital and misde. ,
neanors, v'hero tho right to emptory /
cliallenge now EXISTS" the accused
shall be entitled to ten peremptory chal
lenges, and the Government to two: and /
! citing rs authority 4th Wharton, section
2,95S. The point of difference was the |
Interpretation to be placed upon the
/ words OF the Act Of 1865, "where the
right to pcremptory challenge now ex.
lists. The counsel for the government
maintained that as the current OF all the