New-York tribune., 1874-12-07
TILE ENFORCEMENT ACTS.

The disagreement of the Circuit Court at
Richmond in the Petersburg election case re.
moves TO the Supreme Court of the Onited
States question substantially the same as
that involved in the Grant Parish indictment
already before the same tribunal Without at
tcmpting full exposition of the points IN
controversy. we may define the gist OF the
DISPUTE to be whether Congress, in the en-
forcement Of the recent amendments 10
the Constitution, is authorized 10 frame
o system of municipal law to protect the
freedmen in the exercise OF the suffrage,
and to punish individuals for infringe
ments of their rights. The Fifteenth
Amendment declares that "the right of cltI-
"zens of the United States to vote shall not
abe denied or abridged by the United states,
" or by any State, on account OF race coior'
cor previous condition of servitude." Ii Is
restriction upon State legislation. But the
Enforcement Acts go much further. They
declare who may vote; they impose penalties
not only upon State officers but upon private
persOns for Obstructing the exercise Oh the
suffrage; they assume the right OF Congress
70 define and punish ordinary crimes OF
violence against the colOred people; they
even make it a penal Offense to prevent
"any citizenn (whether belonging to thc
race which the amendments were intended TO
protect or not) "from voting at any election.
Judge Bradley, in the Louisiana case, declared
that in these particulars. or at least In some
of them. the Acts were plainly uncOnstitu-
tional. ."There can be no constitutional leSis-
"lation of Congress-" said he, for directly
"enforcine the privileges and immunities or
tofol htrn n o.
"ceedings in the courts OF the Unlted otaIeS,
"wbere the only constitutional guaranty Oh
"such privileges and immunlties is that no
estate shall pass any law to abridse them,
"and where the State has passed no
claws adverse to them, but on the con-
"trary has passed laws to sustain
"and enforce them" In the Petersburg case
Judge Hughes arrived at an opinion against
the constitutionaity of parts of the Enforce
ment Acts by a different process of reasoning
from Judge Bradley, and declared THAT any
claw Of Congress is unconstitutional whlcn
"makes the preventing OF voter from vot-
cling in a State election penal on any other
account than of 'race, color, or previous
&" condition of servitude.'"
1t is a matter for cOngratulatiOn that the
important question raised in these two cases
is now in the way of final settlement We
shall not attempt to anticipate the judgment
of the Court but whatever that may be, 1t Is
plain that the tendencies of Federal leglsla-
ton since the war have been in Il dangerous di-
rection, and tha5 it is high time for the Supreme
Court to mark the line which Congress may
not rightly pass. The national law-givers at
Washington have arrogated to themselves an
authority over State concerns, elections, the
preservation of the peace, which they would
not have dreamed of asserting fifteen years
ago: and the mischief which they have done
by rash laws has been aggravated by
the extraordinary and forced interpreta-
ton put upon these loose statutes by
President Grants Attorney General. If
the laws themselves are questionable. the
manner of their execution has been nothing
less than scandalous. We may now hope that
our highest judicial tribunal will remove the
uncertainty which has surrounded this im-
portant subject, and, if it finds no usurpatiOns
to check, it will at least define the limits OF the
Federal authority, so that we may accOmmO-
date ourselves as well as We can to the new
principles of American government upon
which these statutes are based.