Shepherdstown register. [volume] (Shepherdstown, Va. [W. Va.]) 1849-1955, 1874-01-10
CIVIL RIGHTS BILL IN CONGRESS-.

that the constitution of the United
States gave to the federal government
limited powers and reserved Others to
the States, and that it was unconstltu-
tional to pass the pending bill. 10
show its wnconstitutionslity ne referred
to the decision Of the Supreme Court OF
the United States in the slaughter house
cases in New Orleans. He believed
that all in the South, black and white,
fully enjoyed their civil rights; but this
bill attempted to force social right
There was not white man on the floor
oh the other side of the House who
could look him, QIarris) in the face and
say that the colored man was created by
God to be the equal of the white man.
Mr., Ransler, colored member from
South Carolina, said he could do so.
Mr.. Harris.-I am speaking to the
white men on that side of the South,
and not to you. Laughter
Mr.. Harris in continuation quoted
from the speeches of Mr. Lincoln in his
campaign with Douglas in Illinois to
show that Mr. l.. never considered The
negro the equal of the white man. On
the contrary, Mr.. lincoln held the white
race to be greatly superior to the blacks,
Mr.. Harris then referred to the school
system and the philanthropic institutions
of his State, and had letters read from
the superintendent of schools and the
superintendent of the lunatic asylums
and the institutions for the deaf and
dumb and blind, and all testifying that
the passage of the civil rights bill would
be detrimental to those institutions. He
insisted that the opposition to this bill
was well grounded because of the injury
it would DO the white race, and not be
cause the white people Of the South
had any prejudice to the colored race.
Mr.. Ransler, Of South Carolina.-I
deny that.
Mr.. Harris-Oh, sit down. l am
speaking to the white men on that side.
am speaking to the gentlemen there.
Mr. E. Il. Hoar, of Massachusetts,
called the gentleman to order, and made
the point that he must address the
whole house and not only portion of it.
Mr. Harris in continuation said there
was no such prejudice as was pretended
by gentlemen on the other side. The
preiudices against any social arrange
ments was implanted by God himself
Mr.. Stephens, of Georgia, was then
recognized, and said he could not say
what he had to say in twenty minutes,
and he would therefore ask for an hour.
Mr.. Z. II. Hoar objected, but finally
withdrew the objection when an under
standing was reached that Mr.. Elliot, OF
South Carolina, should also have one
hour.
Mr.. Stephens said so much was in
yolved in this bill that he had thought
it best to reduce hit speech to writing,
q thing that he was not often in the
habit OF doing. He was opposed to the
bill, and would argue the question neg
atiyelv and at1irmatively. lie did not
oppose it because he was opposed TO
doing exact Justice to every human be
inc in all our broad land, for he recoS
nized the duty of all governments to
protect all classes of its citizens, but
the solution of this problem, i'll his opln-
ion, lies in the administration OF justice.
He opposed the bill from no prejudice
in the slightest degree to any man, wo-
man OF child within the limits OF the
United States, and was not influenced
in his action by any motive OF that sort
He recognized TO its fullest extent the
Great truths that all men were created
equal, and had an equal right to the
eniovment of life, liberty, and happi-
ness All have an equal right to justice,
and to stand, as far rs government
powers are exercised, on perfect
EQUALITY before the law, and this Supplied
to all of whatever color This was the
broad Catholic doctrine, but it did not
meulcate fraternity in the social rela-
ton, but that all should act toward an
other as they would have others act TO.
ward them. -,
Dir. Stephens said he had always held
10 this doctrine, and he quoted from
speech which he had delivered before
Legislature of Georgia after the war, IN
which he had urged the acceptance OF
all the issues of the war. lie was IN
favor OF giving Ine coioicu P0oPi0
full measure of justice and the civil lib
erty that they could possibly and right
fully claim. He believed that under
our laws first-class ticket entitled the
holder to first-class seat and passage
in any public conveyance, but railroad
companies have also right to assign
passengers to such seats as they please,
provided the afforded them first-clasS
passage. and the ears are as comfortable
as they expected when they paid for the
seats.
He was opposed TO the bill because it
was a yIolation'of the constitution. The
mowers of Congress were specific and
limited. and he could nowhere find the
authority for the passage OF tins meas
ure. He denied that the fourteenth or
6f,eenth amendment conferred any such
power a:.;on, Mr
s had read the decision OF the Supreme
Court in the New Orleans slaughter
bouse cases. He contended that while
additional powers were conferred no
new powers were conferred. So long
as an incorruptible Judiciary shall inter
nTet the powers of the government
there was no danger of any citizen be-
ing deprived of his rights. lie also OPP
Gel tho hill because of its inexpedlen-