Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1874-10-30
THE ENFORCEMENT ACTS.
Federal UsurPatiOn I'm Gibson County
Attorney General Williams Over
hauled by a Leading Northern Jour-
nal.

Federal UsurPaticn I'm Gibson County
Attorney General williams Over
hauled by a Leading Northern Jour-
nal.
New York Herald, Oct q.
The lettaS of Attorney General Williams
To the Governor Of Tennessee, commune
eating the refusal Of the President TO allow
certain prisoners to be tried in the State
courts for an Ofense which was a crime
against the State, presents singular con-
fiict between National and State authority.
The prisoners are, or are assumed to be,
the parties who took certain colOTed men
from the jail ia Gibson county, and
lynched them by hanging them. In other
words, if guilty, these men commit
ted the crime of murder, not in any
place within the exclusive jurisdiction of
the United States, but on the soil andwith-
in the jurisdiction of the State. They are
to be indicse ed aud tried in Federal court,
under and by virtue of the acts of Congress
| known as the Enforcement acts so called
because they purpOrt and undertake to ell
force the fifteenth amendment of the Fed
eral Constitution. If thai amendment, at
the time Of its adoption, had been generally
understood tOiauthOrize legislation by which
| the ordinary crime of murder, wheh COM
United upon a negro, could be tried in the
| Federal courts TO the exclusion of the State
courts, probably it would not, certainly il
should not, have been adopted.
The life of a negro is, and ought 10 be,
as sacred in the eye of the law and of rea-
son, as the life of white man; but TO as
sumo that the murderer Of negro caanos
be, and is not likely to be, properly tried
and punished in the 5 etc courts, and must
be tried and punished in a Federal court, is
to make the life Of negro more sacred
than the life of any white man. But there
are two very grave questions involved in
this matter. One is, whether the Enforce
ment acts have made the crime Of murder
of either a black or a white man, when net
committed within the exclusive jurisdiction
Of the United States, triable in a Federal
court. The other is, whether the fifteenth
amendment authorizes such legislation.
The fifteenth amendment is that which |
prohibits the States from denying or
abridsing the right of suffrage on account
Of color, race or previous condition of seryi- |
tude, and gives power to enforce the pro- |
hibitiOn by appropriate legislation" Aay |
90, 1870, Congress passed law to enforce |
this provision. 1t enacted certain punish |
ments of individuals who may have hinder /
ed or DISTRACTED other individuals in the \
the constitutional power conferred by the |
amendment authorized any legislation but |
such as would counteract and nulify the |
laws Of any State that might deny or
abridge the right Of suffrage on account of |
color, race, etc, is certainly question.
But, passing this question by, we call the /
attention Of our readers 10 what this en- /
fOrcement act undertook to DO. Its flfJh /
section punished by fine and imprisonment 4
any person who should iutimidate or al
tempt 10 infimidate any other person /
having the right to vote from exercising |
that right by bribery or threats. The sixth /
section punished with heavier fine and i'm
priSOnmeut, and also with disiTanchiSe-
ment, any two or more persons who should /
cOnspire, or go III disguise upon the high
way, to injuTe, Cypress, threaten or intimi-
date anV citizen with intent 10 prevent or
hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of
any right or privilege granted or secured to
him by the constitution or laws of
the United States or because Of his having
exercised the same. The Offenses created
by this section were made felOnieS. The
seventh section then made the following
provision: That if in the act of violating
any provision III either of the two preced'
ing sections any other felony, crime or
misdemeanOr shall be committed, tire Of
fender, on conviction Of violation Of said
sections, shall be punished for the same
with such punishments as are attached to
the said felOnieS, crimes and miSdemean-
Ors by the laws of the State in which the
Ofiense may be committed The eighth
section gives jurisdiction to the District
Courts Of the United States over all Of
fenses committed against the act.
/
of the seventh section would seem to be
that if, in committing either of the ofienses
created and punished by the fifth aud sixth
sections, murder, tOr example, is also COM
mitted. the Federal Court may increase the
punishment of the OtienSeS com mitted
against The fifth and sixth sections by ad-
ministering the punishment attached to
murder by the laws of the State. IL the
Attorney General suuposeS that the seventh
and eighth sections give jurisdiction TO the
district courts TO entertain and try an in
dictment for murder simply, and he propO-
ses so to indict and try these prisoners, he
POUNDS the jurisdiction upon a law that
hardly seems capable of such a cOnstruc-
ton. lie informs the Governor of Tennes-
see that "nO reasonable doubts can exist as TO
the jurisdiction Of the courts of the United |
States upon the facts as stated by the Dis
trict Attorney" But he does not explain,
nor has he informed the public in relation
to the extraordinary powers that he is now
exercising in the South generally, how the !
courts of the United States get jurisdiction
10 try and punish the crime of murder as
an oliense against the United States. As l
an incident or aggTagatiOn of some other |
offense committed against the United /
States, we can understand how a court Of /
the United States may be authorized to
punish for that other Ofiense by adding the /
punishment which the State law inflictS 1
upon murder. But we are not aware of |
any law that makes the Substantive OiienSe 4
Of murder indictable and triable in Fed /
eral court when not committed within the /
exclusive jurisdiction of the United States. /
There can be no doubt about the gen.
eral principle of which the Attorney Cen /
eTal reminds the Governor, that when, upon
the same state of facts, an ofiense has been
committed both against the United States
and State, the United States is not bound
to foreSO the vindicatiou of its own laws
and hand the prisoner over to the State.
But whether this principle is applicable to
the case OF these Tennessee prisoners de-
ponds upon what the ofienSe is for /
which the Attorney General proposes to
indiCt them in a Federal court. If he /
holds them for Indictment and trial for a
murder he will, We fear, find very little /
law for the jurisdiction of the Federal |
court to the exclusion of the State court. /
If he holds them for Indictment and trial /
for the oiIense of obstrUcting an exercise of |
the right of suffrage, in the commission of |
which oflcnse a murder was also commit 1
ted, the propriety of refusing to surrender |
them to the Governor of the State for trial |
for the gravest of all Oifenses, which can |
only be tried as a substantive offense in a |
State court, is at least very questionable.
I I h.