The New Orleans bulletin. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1874-1876, 1874-05-21
CIVIL RIGHTS AND FOURTH DIS
TRIOT COURT.

Cases are brought under the Civil Righ' s
statutes, the damages being laid at $500
with the view Of cutting off the appeal to
the Supreme Court Of Louisiana.
So far, so well. But as consequence, the
matters involved being within the jurlsdic
ton Of the Federal judiciary, an appeal lies
directly from the judgment Of the State Dis
trict Court to the United States Supreme
Court, as the judgment is one OF last resort
This is not matter of mere Inference
The statutes are clear upon this subject; and
the adjudcated cases Of the Federal Supreme
Court positively hold the right Of appeal as
above indicated.
The appeal lies from the Judgment Of last
resort of any State court, not from the
/ Judgment of the State Supreme Court. St
| that, in the civil rights cases of the Fourth
| District Court, the demand being for less
than S500-below the State appellate jnris-
dction-the appeal lies from the District
Court to the Federal Supreme Court, under
/ the provisions of the XIV and XIV amend
ments to the United States Constitution, and
| the acts of Congress.
| These observations lead to the inquiry as
to the mode of defending these suits, 50 as
20 secure this right of appeal. A proper
foundation should be laid by bills of except
ions to erroneous rulings and charges of the
court, when such errors are committed.
At the very formation Of the jury the
1 nod
on their roir dire as to their scruples, prejn-
dices and bias against the Civil Rights
statutes, and their intention to enforce or
mot to enforce its provisions.
Such inquiry is highly improper; for it
takes for granted the very question at issue
"a question which the jury after trial is
called to pass upon, both as judges Of the
facts and of the law.
The first question is as to the proper in
depreciation of the Civil Rights statutes ;
the second, as to the constitutionality of the
State laws on this subject, with reference to
provisions Of both the State and United
States constitutions.
To require as qualification Of the juror
that he recognize the validity and constitu-
tionality of the very statute upon which the
suit is brought, and against the validity Of
which the defense protests, is to assume the
very point in controversy-to condemn the
defendant unheard, and by anticipation.
The case is virtually decided by the Judge
before the jury is empanneled; when such
test Of exclusion is applied to jurors. By
that means the whole case is reduced to
question of fact-whether the defendant has
refused to colored man, as alleged, the
claimed privilege Of entertainment in con-
fectionery, theatre, or other public place.
The question to be tested is not whether
such privilege is denied as fact; but
whether the denial Of it by the defendant
is matter of right; and, for that purpose,
holding that the civil right statute is no
law; but, on the contrary, is in violation Of
State and Federal constitutions.
This matter is suggested to the various
counsels defending such cases, where the
damages are laid at $500 or less, and the at
tention Of the judge presiding is also in
vited to these important considerations. 1t
is to be observed that SO far, counsel seem
to have failed to raise the objection. The
sooner this is considered, the better.