The New Orleans bulletin. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1874-1876, 1875-03-23
PRiCE-FIVE CENTS

You ask whether it is crime for which you
nave night to find an indictment, that a
negro has been denied full and equal enjoy
ment of accommodations, advantages, facili-
lies and privileges Of theaters and inns of
| the State.
oQch denial IS not an offence over which
congress eau give this court jurisdiction :
those are matters which the State Governments
alone control Parties, who think themselves
aSSSfieved, can bring their civil action in this
court at once; any decision we may then make
| can be received by the Supreme Court. He
then gives his reasons for entering into the
details OF the case, which are mainly the ex-
cited condition of classes whom the law WAC
intended to affect.
Until the taree recent amendments t, the
National Constitution which abolished slavery
ana attempted to protect the civil and po-
ilncai rights OF freedmen, all parties concur
RED that the Federal Government had no
power Whatever to restrain such an offence as
'hls. Inc punishment of murder, arson, as
sautts and batteries, trespasses frauds, in
lnfles to reputation of distractions, to right
OF attending churches, public schools, thea
'ers, and forcing the right of being accom-
modated III inns and ty common carriers
"ithih the STATE, We're matters not only not
granted to the general government, but in
|
to the States.
The vast mass of civil and political rights
inciuoed IN the compendious phrase, rignt to
me, loerty and the pursuit of happiness.
res'ed entlrely under State protection. To
iaiS lanlilar and unique stone trueism, there
was universal assent then and is LOW. The
only question presented for judicial determine
ton Is, have these amendme nts completely
feVolutionized the whole character of our
government, because it is entirely evident
that II Congress has the power of regulating
tne theaters and other places of amusement in
Memphis and other cities of the Union this
necessarily involves the power of protecting
the more sacred and important rights of the
colored citizen
lie then reviews the Thirteenth Amendment
ana declares 1T abolished slavery and did no
more. lie also reviews at great length the
Fourteenth Amendment aud saws the clauses
lofD'ddlng the States to deprive any person
OF lie, liberty Or property without due pro-
cess OF law, Or to deny to any person equal
protection OF the laws, have no application to
TINS SUBJECT. They intended solely to
prevent the arbitrary transfer of property
from citizen to citizen without legal adjutlica-
ton or process, sand to prevent the establi 81
ment OF tribunals for one class of persons
varying from those which determine the rights
of all.
these lnhibltions, too, beyond all contro-
Versy, are aimed ut the action of the State
ohly, and have no reference to individuals
lie cites decisions in Michigan and Onio in
support OF this and also the slauphter-house
cases OF the Supreme Court, 10Th Wallace.
and then deals at great length with outrages
against the colored race. He expires ,es his
sympathy with that large and respectable
class OF our fellow-citzens, including beyond
question, a majority Of the more conservative
Christian gentlemen of the South, who regret
mere exists nowhere, IN either government,
State or National, the power of Furnishing
those mean and cowardly murderers.
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.
WASHINGTON, March 22.-No. 2l5-Moran
ct al, vs.. Prather; error to the Circuit Court
for the District Louisiana. In this case the
defendant in error sold the plaintiff his in
terest in vessel for much less than its real
value, upon condition that he should be held
harmless as to all it's debts
The court held that evidence of tho sale of
The vessel at much less than its value was
properly admitted as tending to show the cir
;umstanees of the sale, and that evidence of
usage offered by the plaintiffs in error, to limit
he operation and scope of the guaranty, was
properly excluded The terms OF the contract
1elng PLAIN, 1t is said, usage cannot be per
nitted to materially Offset the construction tn
% given it.
United States VI. Home Insurance COMPANY:
md BIG, United States vs.. Southern Insur-
nee and Trust Company. Appeals from the
commissioner OF Claims. In these cases the
question was whether the insurance company,
having been chartered by the State of Georgia
when IN rebellion, have any legal existence
The Court held that as the Legislature
vas the law making power of State de facto,
Ill enactments not in actual hostility to the
Constitution and union of the States and not
prohibited must be held to have the force
generally accorded to the action of de flcto
public officers. Any other doctrine, it is said,
would work unnecessary hardship upon the
'eople of the States in rebellion, without cor
esponding benefit to the people of other
states and without any advantage to the
rational government.
The incorporating acts had no relation to
anything else than the domes ic concerns of
he State, and must be treated as valid In
aspect OF another point made in the case.
hat only persons who could have given aid
nd comfort to the rebellion can sue under
he Captured and Abandoned Property Act
nd that corporations could not have so
Ided the rebellion, it is held otherwise tha.
hey could, as corporations have 50 acted. and
hat they will be TIE ated as persons. Affirmed.
ir. Justice Strong deli7ered the opinion.
DECISION AFFIRMED.
Justice Clifford delivered the opinion. eli
Ray VS.. Bingham ct al. error to the Supreme
,ourt Of Louisiana. Ia this case it is held
hat where the assignee in bankruptcy sells
ncumbered property without order of court.
e sells subject to lawful membranes and
an convey no better title than the bankrupt
ould have done.
Such sales may be made without notice to
he secured creditor, but when it il intended
pass the nnincumbered the authority of
'enkrupt must be obtained and notice to
realtors. Decision affirmed Mr. Justice
'lifiord delivered the opinion.
TENNESSEE LEGISLATURE.