New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-04-05
WASHINGTON.
THE FORCE BILL.


GREAT INTEREST FELT IN THE GRANT PARISH CASE
VIEWS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS wYIIAMs-rHE
RIGHTS OF THE CoLoRED MEN UNDER THE con-
sTIrUuoNAL AMENDMENTS DEPENDENT on
VERDICT FOR THE CONFERENCE.-THE DECISION
NOT EXPECTED TO DE GIVEN SOON.
lsr TELEGRAPH TO TIE TRbuHEl
WASHINGTON, April 4.-The great import
ance OF tho Cruikshank enforcement case recently
argued before the United States Supreme Court forms
the most conspicuous feature of conversation In pot
zeal circles here There TO he good deal Of doubt
to what the Court will decide. and whether decision
will be made OF the present term Of the Court which
expires the 81 OF May. It Is understood that the
Court at its consultation yesterday did not refer TO inc
at all and ae chances 10 DO that decision
will DO reached until next Winter. The case is not re-
garded that will require the Court to make full
construction and decision the enforcement law but
may conclude to take up the whole question In all It's
bearings and decide it finally. II, however. only the
technical points Involved considered decision may
DO made at toe present term.
Attorney General Williams, in speaking Of the case,
says he regards the important ever before
the Supreme Court excepting, perhaps the Dred Scott
He refers TO the fact that tho Government relies
particularly upon the count in the charg'
ing conspiracy the part OF nnetyeght persons. at
the head OF whom appears the name Of Wm l. Crmk'
shank for the purpose Of destroying the right OF Mel
son Tyndall in exercising the prerogativo OF every
American citizen, to voice in electng the trainers OF
the laws under which he must abide through casting his
ballot This conspiracy formed in Grant Parish. as
charger IN tho Indictment and was attempted
TO bo carried out aud applied to Tyndan. The
Attorney General, 10 this brief review OF tho case,
which shows its origin dwells with great significance
then upon the fact that the right OF suffrage was denied
tis particular 10 his mind there arc questions
paramount 10 this. The eonstitutionalty Of the En-
forcemen act the definition the rights Of the coored
man under the civil Rights bill aud the power OF the
Government to nac pain and prescribe punishment In
cndeavors 20 enforce constitutional amendment or
law OF the Congress OF the United States. vital
questions TO the future OF the cOOred race, and
matter which exercises the minds OF great por-
ton OF the American people to-day. judge williams
Gays that freedom is tho inalenabe right OF the cOiored
aud LAID down In the Thirteenth Amendment Ilat
article abolished slavery ana proclaimed freedom 10
proscf1ea race by iFeeto tue A.totneS oehe ,h
idea that it means freedom in the true5t ana broad
or that word - freedom TO exercise
the right OF suffrage in the OF tue men, ana freedom
both In the enjoyment OF those privileges Whcl
every American citizen IS entitled to- Before the Thir
teentb, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments were
adopted, aud while the colOred in slavery, he
Was denied the right of holding property in his own
name aud there VAS no provision in law for govern
mental protection. judge Williams therefore asserts
Chat le adoption OF these very amendments clearly, 10
his mind, removes these restrictions and eudows tho
cOlOr6d with freedom and protection In his rights
under tic laws by the constant Wacnfulness OF the
GoyeIumsnt-the same protection which II affords the
white race; aud furthermore he declares nun cnu.en
the right OF sufrag, and that the Government shGu
take possible step 10 remove all obstacles which
stand IA nis path hindegance to the exercise OF these
nights.
the date upon which the Court expects 10 render u
decision 10 taIs ctsc bnt thinks it hardly possible In
view OF importance attached to tho Judgment Of the
Court this great subject, that its opinion VIII Do rem
dcred this terlL, nor uGtll some time EeXt Winter