Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1875-03-30
JUDGE EMIONs ON THE ENFORCE
ETENF ACT


MENT ACT.
In the Louisville Commercial of Sun
day we find the following reference to
the decision delivered by Judge EN-
mons holding the Gibson county pris-
oners for trial by the Federal Court,
and explaining the part taken therein
by Judge Ballard:
When Judge Ballard held the court
in Memphis last December ne sustained
demurrers to indictments founded on
the sixth section Of the act OF Congress
of May 81, 1870, which, II various
courts, charged parties with cOnspiring
together for the purpose Of depriving
certain colored citizens Of their lives.
He held that the crime of murder,
whether committed by one person or
two or more persons, and all other like
offenses, are not within the jurisdiction
Of the courts Of the United States. He
/ did not decide that the act Of Congress
is unconstitutional, but simply that the
statute could not be held to apply to
the offenses charged.
mons has Overruled the demurrer Is
not founded on the above statute, but
on the second section of the act of
April 20, 1871, which, among other
things, makes it a crime against the
United States for two or more persons
to conspire together for the porpOse Of
preventing or hindering the constituted
authorities of any State from giving or
securing to all persons within such
State the equal protection Of the laws.
| This portion of the statute both Judge
Emmons and Judge Ballard hold to be
constitutional, and, therefore, that the
Indictment founded upon it is good.
The fourteenth amendment to the
Constitution Of the United States,
among other things, provides that no
State shall make or enforce any law
abridging the privileges and immunities
of any citizens Of the United States,
OF deny to any pei son within its juris-
dictiOn the equal protection of the laws.
The Judges hold that what is meant by
"the State" as those words are here
used, is the authorities of the State
the organs through which the State
acts-and therefore that all conspira-
cies to prevent those authorities or or
gans from giving equal protection to
all persons, may be made offenses
against the United States, and are IN
fact embraced by the act last before
mentioned
It may be further stated that the de-
murrers to that indictment were argued
before Judge Ballard when he was in
Memphis, and 1t is in this way that be
has participated IN this last decision.
We do not know when the trial Of the
prisoners will take place, but they viii
be tried under this Indictment.
1t would appear from the above that
the constitutionality of the Enforce
ment act is based exclusively upon the
Fourteenth Amendment. The decision
reached, that individuals can be pun
ished directly by the United States
under that amendment, is in fiat con-
tradiction with the words Of Judge
Emmons in his charge to the Federal
jury on the subject Of Civil Rights.
We reproduce lis exact words as re-
ported by the Memphis appeal, Of
March %, and which fully accord with
the telegraphic synopsis:
1t viii simplify the subject before
considering the Fourteenth Amend
ment to say that the clauses forbid
ding Estates to deprive any person of
life, liberty or property, without due
process of law, or denying to any per-
son the equal protection Of the law, ,"
have no application to this subject,
civil rights. They are intended sole
ly TO prevent the arbitrary transfer Of
property from citizen to citizen with
out legal adjudication Of process, and
prevent the establishment of tribunals
for one class Of persons varying from
those which determine the rights of
al. These iHhibitiOns, too. beyond al
controversy, are aimed at the action Of
the State only, aad hare no reference to
iHdiUiduals
The case Of the Gibson county pris-
oners involves no arbitrary transfer
Of property" nor, so far as the State is
concerned, any establishment Of tri-
bunals varying from.those which de-
termine the right of all It is not the
State, but the United States, which is,
in this case, amenable to the latter
charge. But the italics above cover
the entire case. If, as Judge Emmons
holds, the inhibitions Of the Fourteenth
Amendment ''have no reference to in
diuduals, " how can individuals be pun.
ished under that amendment or any
law that depends on 1t for constitution
ality?