Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1874-10-25

LOUISVILLE, October % Some days
since the grand jury OF the United States dis
trlct court Tor Kentucky presented 20 Judge
Ballard q request for further charges upon
several qutsuohs felatihk 70 tIeL uuiy
These questions and copy Of Judge Billiards.
answer have only been given 10 the newspa-
pers tonight Ibis further charge Is OF gem
eral interest, in view OF the Importance given
90 his first charge, made several weeks ago
The questions are as follows; The attorney
for the United States having called our aiten-
slon 10 an act oi congress approved A9y 81,
1870, entitled "An act % enforce the right OF
citizens OF the United states % Yoje in The
several States OF this Union, and for other
purposes" end also to an act Of congress sp
proved February zS, lS7l, entitled "An act 70
amend an act approved May 81, ls70, entitled
IS above" we desire a further charge on the
following question:, to-wit:
First--Ls IL an oifense against the United
states Of America for any per'On within a
stale, by means o. threat or threats deprtV-
ing a person OF employment or occupation
or ejecrng such person from rented house
lands OF other property, or b. bfibes to pre-
vent, hinder, control or lntimidafe any person
from exercising the right Of suffrage, II such
person be peIson 70 whom the right OF sur
| frage Is secured by the fifteenth amel dmenl
/ 10 the constitution OF the United Sta esq
SecOnd-Is it an Offense against said United
States for two or more persO1s 70 cOuspire to
gether to deprive any citizen Of the right q
vote on account OF his races
Thirti-Is It an oftense against said Y nited
States for two or more persons 20 cOnspire 10
gether to prevent, hinder, control or lntimt
date any person from exercising, or in exer
cisfng, right Of suffrage on account Of hi,
Fourth-Is il an ofTenss against said United
States for any person TO assau any person
because be has exercised the right 10 vote, p.O
vided violence was on account Of race
FIfth-Is It an Odense against said United
States for two o. more persons TO consptre to.
gether u prevent any citizen Of toe United
States fIon engaging in the occupation OF
busi oess of free man, or IN exercising the
rights Of a free man.
Sixth-is il an Offense OF which this court
has jurisdiction fOr any person or persons, OF
any combi nation Of persOas, by force, bribery
threats or intimidation, 10 hinder, delay, pre-
vent or obstruct any person, on account Of his
race or color, from voting al any eleciioH by
the peopl- in this State, such person being
otherwise qualified, under the law, to vote.
As 10 the second, third, fourth, and sixth
questions, Judge Ballard answers in general
Gfiirmatlveiy. He gives the same answer 70
the fifth. but di scusses its bear ugs and cOnstl'
tutional laws, giVIng il at length. his entire
charge occupies thee columns Of fne type,
ana his ansWt TO the fifth question is elabOr-
ate,which, after referring to the congressional
enactments on the subject, concludes as fol-
81 am inclined to think that when a STATE,
in It's laws or in its Judicial tribunals, cenies
10 some persons within its jurisdiction pro-
lection which It accOrds 70 others, congress
may, under the express powers cOnferre
upon it 10 enforce all the provisions of the
fourteenth article OF the Constitution, pass
laws investing the courts Of the United states
with authority TO give to all Of its inhabitants
equal projection; that is, to afford those in
habitantS 70 which tue state gives the least
protection the same protection it gives to
those whom 1t protects most; but when
neither State laws nor State courts make any
di-tinctiOn in the protection which they give
the Inhabitants of a state when the state
laws and the state courts give the same pro-
lection TO all, there is no ground for con-
greSsiOnRl legislation. There is in such cases
no denial by the state Of equal prOtect ion,
and therefore no ground, either IN the clause
of the fourteenth amendment which we have
been considering, or in any other clause Of the
constitution, ON which TO base legislation
looking to equal protection: or, 1 should
rather say, there is IN such cases no authority
in the courts OF the United states 70 assume
any Jurisdiction under the laws passed or
which might be passed, 10 meet the cOutin-
geuey CT a state denying 20 any persons
within is Jurisdiction the equal protection OF
its laws"
AIIer answering the questions, Judge Bal
lard adds further observations IN the same
direction, in :he course OF which he says:
This court has no jurisdiction, ana cOngres,
has not attempted 10 confer on il the juri--
dictiOu 20 punish ordinary crimes, such as
murder, arson, assault and batteries, whether
committed against black or white persons,
when they are induced by the usual motives,
such as hatred, evil passions and revenge,
which ordinarily provoke crime. lt has
Jurisdiction Of such 0ffeEses only when COM
mitted in places slbj ject 10 the exclusive Juris-
oiction OF the United States, or when com
mitted for the motive OF depriving some per-
sou, on account of his race or color, Of his
right to vote, as l have before pointed OUT.
it Is i'm possible 10 MAINTAIN mat a COG>p piracy
OF two or more persons 10 injure, beat, wound
or ull a white or a black man, or tnat the
actual beating, injuring wouudiug or killing
of a white OF black man by any person CT
any number OF persons whe' her in disguise
or openly on the public highways or ON
private premises, is denial by the state to
soch white or black msn OF the equal
protection OF its laws, and therefore tt
IS impossible 10 maintain that such crimes
are offenses against the United states within
the meaning of the act OF congress passed
April 20, lS7l, TO enforce the provisions OF the
fourteenth amendment of the constitution"
In concluding be deplOres the kukluN out
RACES which have occurred in kentucky, and
says that "in view Of thee occurrences l
have been inclined % cOnstrue the amend
meBts Of the constitution OF the United
states and laws passed TO enforce them most
literally, but I caunot derive from these
amendments or these laws a jurisdiction
which they plainly do not confer, i cannot
allow my sym patnies TO control my Judgment
or my conscience" Judge Ballard adds
q" The opinions announced in my former
charge, and those now announced, have not
been hastily formed. They have been arrived
at after the fullest argument aud In open
court, and after the most careful conSidera-
tiOns."