New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-04-03
HASHINGTON.
TIE ENFORCEMENT ACT.

ARGUMENT on ITS CoNsTITUUoNALITY IN THE ST.
PREME CoURT--CAsEs IN WHICH 1T WOULD AND
IN WHICH 1T WOULD NOT APPLY.
WASHINGTON, April 2.-During the argu-
ment yesterday before the Supreme Court IN the
Grant Parish case, involving the constitutonaty Of
Enforcement act, Attorney General Williams con-
tended that by the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amend
and the Civil Rights bill the people Of the United
States intended the colored under the
protection Of the General Government the right TO
mako contracts to sue TO hold property, and the va
GUS other rights OF citizenship On the other side, 1t
was commended that the Fourteenth Amendment was
nothing more than empty formula, aud amounts to
nothing but empty and vain words Even before the
adoption of the late amendments Congress had the
power to protect the right to vote for Presidential
electors.
Mr.. Justice Bradley ssid-Suppose Congress should
enact law making il felony steal the property Of
another Congress has the undoubted right TO punish
the stealing Of the property OF the Government or OF
property the service Of the Government but beyond
that the law would be unconstitutional. Now when a
law so framed that part CONSTITUTIONAL and the
other unconstitutional and the two are 80 blended as
to be impossible you hold one part const
tutona and the other part UNCONSTITUTIONAL
The Attorney General replied that the law could be
enforced as 10 those oenses which 1t admitted
within the legitimate power OF Congress TO provide for
AS to power assumed in the Enforcement act to pro-
sonal elections the very existence OF the Government
depends on these elections. II Congress has no power
10 protect voters then the White League OF LOus
ana minority Of the people, can stand around the polls
and prevent the majority from voting. The flfteeGtn
Amendment confers upon tie c0Ored people the right
10 vote and Congress has toe power to enforce
thai guarantee 1t is of no value whatever. 49,
Mr. Justics Clifford said that in his State hane) the
colored man always had the right TO vote be would
ask the Attorney General whether II two indictments
found Of conspiracy one to prevent coloreu man
and the other a white from voting. would the
Circuit Courts Of the United States have jurisdiction Oh
both casesi =. .
The Attorney General disclamed asserting that
negroes have greater rights than whites out these
alne pdments took the negroes from a condition OF
slavery guaranteed them equal rights VIII the Whlte
man. and undertook protect them against all dlscri
nations An indictments for deprving white man OF
the right vote at Congressional election could be
insist that il could maintained n the deprivation Of
the right 20 vote was at State election.
Mr. Justice strong asked II a conspiracy was formed
70 prevent from voting because ne was tue son OF
an Irishmsn would the u :. Circuit Court nave urs-
dictop OF thatf II would certainly DO race discrmi-
The General said he had doubt that Con
eress had the power provide for such case but ne
did not eay that IL would come under tins act.
Mr. Justice StrongSnppose the State OF South Caro-
lima where the majority OF the people are cOored'
should change it's Constitution and say that no whe
man should VOTE would remedy against that lie III the
u. g. COurtsf -. 49,. j..
The Attorney General said he had no dOubt that It
would His idea the main OF these amendments was
that any every right guaranteed by them may DC
protec ted in the Courts OF the United States.