Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1875-06-11
THE CIVIL RICHT.S BILL.

In the United States District Court at Winona,
Minnesota, on the Sth inst, Judge Nelson read a
written opinion very pointedly sustaining the con-
stitutionall,y of the Supplementary Civil Rights
bill passed by the last Congress.
As Judge Nelson has been lifelong democrat,
his emphatic opinion produces no little astonish-
ment among politicians as well a. lawyers. The
opinion was given in response to a request made
by the Grand jury, before whom case was
brought by the District Attorney under the Civil
Rights bill. After reciiing the provisions Of the
last three amendments TO the Constitution, and al
luding to the celebrated SlaughteI-house decision
of the Supreme Court of the United States, Judge
Nelson says:
81 call your attention to this case for the reason
that several distinguished Federal district judges
in instructing grand luries upon the presentation
of similar question, have considered that the in
depreciation by the United States Supreme Court
Of this first section of the fourteenth amendment
Is a Judgment against the constitutonality of the
law under consideration, and have therefore given
a negative reply to the question propounded. With
great respect for the opinions of these judges |
cannot assent to their conclusions, and while |
have sympathy with this kind of Congress
onal legislation, and believe that the State gov
ernment should punish all wrong or outrage of this
char acter committed with in its limits, still |
think when race, color, nativity, religious or
political belief furnishes the only reason for the
commission Of such wrong outrage a proper
occasion arises for the exercise of the power of
Congress under this amendment. The objection
urged against such law is that it seeks to pun
| ish in the Federal Courts n violation of GER
| tain privileges which pertain TO State citizenship.
| Ii is not doubted that the punishment of ordin-
airy otfenscs against persons of any race belongs
| to State governments. They were created for the
purpose of protecting life, liberty and the pursuit
of individual happiness, and should lcgislate for
this object Yet as the fourteenth amendment
creates citizenship and guarantees equality Of all
citizens before the law, think Congress can pro-
vide for the punishment of individuals who dc.
priye apy person of the enjoyment of the rights OF
citizenship and legal equality solely on account OF
race or color. These rights and privileges are de-
rived from the Federal Government and are I'M
der its protection. 1t will be conceded think
that state legislation making II an oilense to re-
| fuse the enjoyment of hotel accommodations tC
white persons and permitting the exclusion of all
| other persons would be repugnant to the amend
ment. If so, cannot Congress nterpose until some
unfiie ndly and discriminating State law is passed
Must it confne its action to correcting obnoxious
| legislation and not restrain individuals 7
In the case OF McCulloch VS. The state of Mary
land a Wheaton, PIP. 400-437 the construction OF
| the grant of legislative power under the Constitu
ton as II stood before the recent amendments wa,
fully discussed, and it was decided that within the
grant OF power TO Congress for purposes flegisa-
lion 1t may select any proper means Of checting