The New Orleans Democrat. (New Orleans, La.) 1875-1876, 1876-04-01

protection Of the persons aud property
OF said white citizens" There r. no
allegation that this was done because Of
the race or colcr OF tho persons con
spired against. When stripped Of Its
vcfbiage. tho case Us presented amounts
to nothing more than that the defend
ants cohspired To prevent certain
citizens Of the United States. being
within the State of Louisiana. from
enjoying equal protection Of tho laws OF
the State and of the United States. Tho
fourteenth amendment prohibits u State
| from denying to any person within Its
jurisdiction the equal protection Of the
laws. but the provision does not. any
more than tho ono which precedes it.,
and which we have just considered. add
anything 10 the rights which ono citizen
has under tho Constitution against IN
other. The equality Of the rights III cit
izens Is u principle Of rcpublcanism.
Every republican government is in duty
bound To protect all It's citizens in the
enjoyment Of this principle If within It's
| power That duty WIS originally as
suincd by tho States. and II still remains
there. The only obligation resting upon
the United Sthtos is to SEQ hat the
States do not deny The right. This the
amendment guarantees. but no more.
The power Of The National Government
!
| guarantee. No question Arises under
the Civil Rights bill Of March o. 1sGG.
IA Stat, ~. which is intended for the
protection Of citizens Of the United
Stntos in tho enjoyment Of certain rights
without discriminating on account of
race, color 81 previous condition Of ser
vitude. because. rs has already been
stated. il Is nowhere alleged in these
counts that tho wrong contemplated
against the rights Of these citizens was
on account OF their race Or color. An
other objection Ia made 10 these counts
that they are too vague and uncertain
This will be considered hereafter in
connection with the SHINE objection to
other counts.
Tho sixth and fourteenth counts state
tho intent Of the defendants to have
been ito hinder aud prevent The citizens
named, being of African descent and
oolored. In tho free exercise and enjoy
ment Of their several and respective
rights to vote ut any election to he
thereafter by law had and held by the
people in and of the said State Of Louis.
lana. or by tho people If and in the
parish Of Grant aforesaid" In Minor
vs. Happersott. ~ Wall ia. we decided
that tho Constitution of tho United
States has not conferred the right Of
suffrage upon any one. aud that the
United States have no voters Of their
own creation in tho States. In the
United States vs. Reese, just decided.
We held that tho fifteenth amendment
had invested tho citizens Of the United
States with u new constitutional right.
which is exemption from discrimination
i'm the exercise Of the elective franchise
on account Of race. color or previous
conditions Of scrviIude. From this
IL appears that the right IT
suffrage is not ~ necessary nttri-
butte Of national citizenship. but
that exemption from discrimination in
the exercise of that right on account Of
raee. etc. is The right to vote in the
States comes from the States. but the
right Of exemption from the prohibited
discrimination comes from tho United
States. The first has not been granted
or secured by tho Constitution Of The
United States. but the last has. Inas-
much. therefore. as IL does not appear
I'm these counts that the intent Of the
defendants was to prcven. these parties
from exercising their right 10 vote on
account of their race. etc. IL does not
appear that II was their intent to inter
roro with any right granted or secured
by the Constitution OF laws Of the
United States We may suspect that
race was the causo of hostility. but il is
not so ayerred. This is material Ia n
description Of the substance Of tho
oiiense and cannot be supplied by
Implication. Everything essential must
be charged positively. or not In
ferontially. Tho defect here is not in
form, but in substance. The seventh
and fifteenth counts arc no better than
tho sixth and fourteenth. The intent
here charged is to put tho parties
named in great fcar of bodily harm. and
IN In, itIr nd
being and having beon in oil things
qualified. they had voted at nm election
before that time had and held accord
ing to law by tho people of the said
state Of Louisiana i'm said State. to wit.
on the fourth day Of November. A. -,
1879. and Mt divers other elections by the
people OF tho state. also before that
time had and held according to law
There Is nothing to show that the cleo.
tions voted ut were any other than State
elections. or that the conspiracy was
formed on account of the race Of the
parties against whom tho eouHpirators
were to act. The charge rs mado is
really OF nothing more than n con
spiracy to commit breach OF tho peace
within State. Certainly II will |
not be claimed that the United |
States have tho power or nre required to
do mere police duty in the States. If
state cannot protect Itself against do
nestle violence, the United States may.
upon the call Of the Executive when the
cannot be convened. lend
their assistance for that purpose. This
Is N guarantee Of tho Constitution
article 1. section ~. but 1t applies to no
case like this. We are. therefore. of
The opinion that the first, second, third.
fourth. sixth. seventh, ninth, tonth.
eleventh. twelfth, fourteenth and IF.
tcenth counts do not contain charges Of
! criminal nature made indictnble under
he laws Of the United States. and that
they are not good and suf-
lcient in law. They do not show that
{ was tho intent Of the defendants bv
heir conspiracy to hinder or prevent
he enjoyment OF any right granted or
occurred by the Constitution.
We como now to consider the fifth and
and the eighth and sixteenth
'ount, which may be brought together
or that purpose. The intent charged In
he fifth and thirteenth is "to hinder
md prevent tho parties in their respec-
i've and free exercise and enjoyment of
he rights, privileges, immunitics and
granted and secured to them
rs citizens Of the United
states, and rs citizens of the said State
# Louisiana, for the reason that they.
icing then aud there citizens Of said J
tate, OF tho United States, were persons