Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1874-06-28
GRANT PARISH PRISONERS.
Judge Bradley Decides the Indictments
Fatally Defective and Releases
Prisoners on Bail.
A Righteous Judgment-The Supreme
Court to be Called Upon to De-
eide Between Judge Brad
ley and WOed.

NEW ORLEANS, June 27.-In tht
| United States circuit court of GRAM
parish, Judge Woods rendered decision
on the motion for a new trial, which
was considered. The extra PicdyliR,
| gives the following account of furthel
proceedings in the Grant parish case
"At twelve O'Clock Justice Bradley tOoB
his seat on the bench with Judge Woods
and announced that he had prepared 8
! decision upon the points raised by Mr.
Mari ON the arrest of judgment and
| testing the constitutionaIity of the ku.
klux act. Justice Bradley then read his
decision, a most lengthy, exhaustive
and intelligent one. Under the
indictment the prisoners were charged
with, first, conspiracy to take
away certain rights from citizens OF
African descent; second, the commits
sion of murder whilst engaged in this
conspiracy, and found guilty on sixteen
counts. That congress has the right to
pass laws to carry out the provisions oi
! the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth
amendments no one will deny. The
| question is how far this right extends.
| The thirteenth amendment declared
| that all persons in the United States
shall not be disqualified from voting on
account of race, color or previous con-
dition. The United States is not given
power to pass laws relative to the elec-
tions or voting, but simply to see
that States do not interfere
with these rights. The United States
has only power TO see these rights en-
forced. The moment State fails 10
comply with the duties enforced upon it
the United States may interfere, or con-
gress may incerfere, but when State is
ready to punish a violation of these
rights, it is unnecessary, iDJudicious and
illegal. To constitute an Offense of which
the United States has jurisdiction, it
must be shown that 9 conspiracy was
formed to take away certain rights from
q person on account of race color, or pre-
vious condition. The fifteenth amend
ment declares that the right of every
citizen of the United Statas to vote
shall not be denied by the
United States, or any State, on account
of race, color, or previous condition.
When a Stste refuses this right, con-
gress has power to pass laws to enforce
the amendment. Congress has also
power to secure these rights against in
dividuals; therefore / am unwilling to
affirm the unconstitutionality of this
act. But let us examine the counts of
this indictment. The first count charges
the prisoners with conspiringsto prevent
certain persons of African descent from
pesceably assembling. The consti-
tuition of the United States de-
elares congress shall not interfere
with the right Of a peaceable assem-
blage. Does this amount to affirmative,
the law giving the United States juris-
diction over all persons who shall inter-
fere with the rights of a peaceable as
semblage? Clearly not. The second
count is the same as the first. The third
count declares that a conspiracy was
formed to take the lives of certain clti-
izens Of African descent without due
process of lsw. All murderers do
this. Has the United States ju-
risdiction over all murderers? The
fourth count is too vague and general,
so are The fifth and eighth. Their
vagueness is such that they
can't stand. The siXthand seventh counts
charge prisoners with conspiring against
certain persons because they had voted,
or were going to vote. Not q word is
said that this was done because of race,
color, or PREVIOUS condition. This is
vitality necessary. Mere interference
with the right OF voting is no offense
under the Jurisdiction of the United
States. The following eight counts are
literal copies OF the first eight, and must
file with them. ] am accordingly of
opinion that the indictments are fatally
defective.
Judge Woods then in a few words an
nounced that he differed in opinion with
Justice Bradley, and taat they had re-
solved to certify to a difference Of opin-
ion, so that the supreme court Of the
United States could passupon RE ques-
tion, as however, the Superior ;uezge had
decided against the yalisiity Of the indiet-
ment, II could not stand Or the present,
and the prisoners were theeefore epfitsed
to bali ii tnsi sum OF i've th0zsand dol
iafsio each prisoner whifh was fufnish-
ID. and Hslsibot, Cruikshaqk and ffWiis
were set st liberty and ss,Ssounded and
congratulate BY their frief 81.
= |