New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-09-24
COURT RECORD.
SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER %, 1876.

United states Courts.
Before United States Commissioner
SonthwCrth:
United States va. P. Creagh ct Are
fnsing to register naturalized citizens. This
case was determined, in q lengthy opinion,
with numerous citations after argument. by
the commissioner on Friday, September Is,
but was reopened by leave of the court and
consent of the counsel. 1t was again pre-
eented to day by Hon. w. A Dooley for the
com plainants. and Hon j. w. Gurley for
the United States. The commist Toner ad-
hered to his former opinion, and in sub
stance held as follows:
The record of citizenship imports verify
end can not be questioned; but when the
holder of certificate of citizenship presents
himself tor registration, the State super
visor is not only authorized but compelled
to be satisfied as to "when and where he
obtained the certificate" "When and where
he was was borp," etc and unless his 6n-
swers to euch questions are consistent with
the allegations contained in such certificate
be must be refused on the question of
identity. The State supervisor Is bound to
comply with section twenty of the regis
tration act on the subject Of foreign born
citizens presenting themselves for regis
tration. For instance, john Brown applies
to be registered and presents q certificate
of citizenship recitiDg that he was born
in Germany; that he came to the United
States in 1852; that at the time he was
under eighteen years Of age; but, under
oath before the supervisor, he states he
was born in England that he came to this
country ia 1869; that he was twenty Eve
years old when he landed. The State SUI
pervisoT on the simple question of identity,
"a bound to infer that he is not the John
Brown named in the record, for ''out of
their own mouth will judge ye," is and al
ways has been cure guide to the truth.
Hence, on the sole question OF identity he
should be rejected.
This section is not in cor fct with tie
fourteenth amendment to the constitution of
the United States. That amendment only
declares who are citiz ms, but does not I'M
dertake to cay what privileges such citizens
shall exercise in the several States, and it
is clear that the question as to who shall
vote belongs to the States so they do not
deny the privilege TO any one on account OF
race, color or previous condition of seryi-
tude. Nor can it be said that section twenty
Of act No. 1885, approved July "a, 1874 is in
conflict with the State constitution. That
declares who shall be- voters, and this law
only fixes the mode and manner the priv
lege shall be enjoyed.
second District Court.
SUGGESTIONS of Jacob Weber and William
Tenbrink opened.
Valentine Delille prays to be emGnci-
pated.
Third District Court.
State ex rel. Theodore Jacques vs.. keeper
Of the Parish Prison.-Petitioner alleges
that be has been held for fifteen hours at
the Parish Prison on q commitment from
the first Justice of the peace on the allega-
ton that he was about to permanently
leave the State without satisfying the
claim of Mrs. Louise Masters, and that it
commands him to bs kept till he satisfies
the claim or gives security. The commit
ment being irregular, the writ was main
tanned and the prisoner discharged.