Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1874-06-26
dNiluirlgtolr gournl,
WILMINGTON, N. G.
FRIDAY, JUNE 26, 1874.
- PANEL COME TO JUDGMENT
YEA, A DAM e III U ID & T.
RUSSELL AND CIVIL RIGHTS.

There is no question in which the
white people of this district feel an IN
crest, greater than that they feel IN the
question involving the relations be-
tween themselves and the negroes.
1t has become apparent to all men
that in the hotels, on the steamboats,,
on the cars, in the theatre and gen
orally in every public place the negro
socks to prove that he has the right to
90 wherever the white man goes.
How Judge Russell stands upon this
great question is matter OF vital I'M
,,ortance to us if he shall remain any
longer upon the bench, and fortunate
" we are not left to any conjecture or
mere surmise about his position. 1t is
trne that SO far as we know, Judge
Russell has given no intimation, either
public or private as to his approval OF
disapproval of the particular ClVn
RIGHTS Bill now pending before Cor
oress. but if his views upon the general
ouestion be correct, the negroes need
no Civil Rights Bill to give then all
they demand. Upon this point Judge
Russelrs opinion is matter OF pnplic
record in the Superior Court OF tins
county and can be seen, we presume,
by any who may desire to DO SO.
The case was substantially as 1ol-
lows. In October of last year, certain
negroes having determined to SIT with
the white people in the Opera House
in this city procured first class tickets
Inv some means and attempted to gam
admission by force. The negroes were
arrested and legal proceedings instl-
tinted against them by the Lessee OF
the Opera House. Judge Russell
heard the case and gave his opinion Ill
writing, rs he said, to prevent 1t from
being misunderstood or mlsrepre-
sented." In that opinion he declared
that the negroes had committed
breach of the peace, subverslve OF all
public order and safety, and that too,
even if they had undisputed right to
admission to that portion OF the Opera
House to which they attempted to go,
for the reason that no one Is allowed
to enforce mere civil right by q re
sort to violence. These negroes he
declared had resorted to violence and
therefore in every possible view CT the
case they were guilty of a violation
of the law.
And there, plain men will think the
case and the opinion ought to have end
ed. Thenegroes were guilty, no matter
what their civil rights were, and
Judge Russell SO declared. What ne
cessity then was there for Mr.. Russell
to undertake to ascertain and declare
from his place on the bench, what those
civil rights were-a question, too, that
ne could not decide without assuming
to be facts, what he SAID there was no
evidence before him to prove? There
was no such question and no such evil
dence before him, and he knew it, and
he said he knew it. Yet FOR all that,
he openly and defiantly went aside
from the path of judicial propriety TO
rive the sanction of his official posi-
ton to the opinion that negroes had
equally with white people the right to
enter all places of public resort for
"."ror, rricfvUy
giving public advertisement to the ne
groes that he was ready to sustain them
as Judge in their purpose to go to our
hotels and other public places, provi-
ded only, they used no force before they
went to law. And this public adver-
tisement he calls an "oGitcr dicten,a," a
dicttna of a 'Nisi Prius Court It was
we'll for the Judge to give the thing a
hard name, for it was hard thing for
the Judge to do.
Whatdid Judge Russell say? He said:
Enough appeared in the examine
ton of these cases to show that III
truth there was controversy between
these parties as to the right of the de-
PENDANTS, who are men of color, to ac-
commodations and privileges in this
theatre equal to those enjoyed by 9th
er persons. Assuming that the house
is place of entertainment for the
general public, that it is licensed by
the laws of the State, and that there is
nothing in its objects or character
which relieves it from those legal
rules which apply to the government
of allinstitutionsi in which the public has
aninterest, and which are establishedo or
permitted for the public'good-a to all
of which there was no evidence, and
hence express no Notwithstanding
that this is the fact, [ apprthend that
the right of these defendants to pre-
cisely the same accommodations and
the same treatment as other persons
will not be questioned. The pretcn-
sion that any person or class may be
prevented from resorting 80 a pub
lie place whose doors are open to all
but them, and denied to them only on
account of color or race. Will not be
tolerated by any court honestly and
sincerely DESTROYS of upEolding the
constitution and the laws according TO
their true intent and meaning 1t
may be that the manager of the theatre
has the right to separate differ ent
classes of persons whose close assOcia-
alon is not agreeable to each other-al-
ways remembering that he must not
discriminate against any-but that the
accommodations given, the com
fort, the style, convenience and all
other considerations for which the
parties pay their money shall be the
same rs to all, or so nearly so as to
furnish no substantial cause of COM
piaint by any. This opens a wide
held OF argument into which [ have
not time to enter"
After reading the above there can
be no pretence that we do injustice to
Judge Russell in saying that he made |
substantially a public proclamation
from the bench that negroes were en-
titled to precisely the same accom-
modations and the same treatment" as
whit; men at our hotels, and that
a"' regardless of the wishes of
the landlord. The Judge did, indeed,
throw out as tub to the white whale
the idea that there might be a
possibility that hotel and theatre
keepers "naay separate 6iffarap+ o1osso,