Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1879-05-10
EROM THE PEOPLE.
Wanted a National Park.

and charm which water gives to landscape
aRa 1t oes eu Of m sssch S Sf Rssps ss
Is becoming more and more like large farm
studded with too many buildings, and it
closed on Sundays to carriages. Il VIII De !,
not taken In hand soon, for more deslraoie
and picturesque location than the region around
Rock creek can hardly be 1magln e + ru1n 1I,
anthropist who shall be instrumental In carry
Ing out this plan. Could not THE STAR lend Its
powerful aid to this undertaking? N95nins
ington for beauty and attractiveness as the
formation OF such park. CITIZEN.
P4fsce Court Arithmetic.
~ Editor Star:-1 have been so often puzzled al
the anomalies OF the sentences In the Police
Court, that i am constrained to call on Tbs
STAR for an explanation. For instance, In tbs
STAR find something like the following:
John JONES' Sc or days.
John Brown, $40 or 20 days.
John Smith, $40 or 80 days.
John Black, S. or 10 days.
Now, what puzzles me Is, on what basis these
different terms Of imprisonment are transmitted
into such different sums OF money? Here the
first Is at the rate Of Sc cents per day, second
80 cents, the third 80 cents, and the fourth 81
cents again. Please tell us how Is this matter
arranged. Does the court keep dice box and
throw for the amount, or how Is it done? l must
confess can't understand it. ENQUIRER.
Editor EUtning iStar:-Seeing a second refer
ence, in yuur issue Of the 25th ult., to the case
Of Edward Kenney and his wife, recently SEN
fenced to five years In the Virginia penitenttary
seen fH ~ sSe he;T sRins ~ Mnsa od haa
coupled with statement that MeSSrs. Reed &
Co, New York law firm, had written and
advised Kenney, as the law under which they
were convicted was clearly unconstitutional,
to carry the case to the U. S. Supreme Court,
venture to beg little space for a few remarks
on the same. And do this with less hesitation
because such legislation is not confined to the
states where slavery recently prevailed; but
am ashamed to say that the statute books of
some Of the New England states Qncluding my
own, Rhode Island. which proudly boasts Of
a io pe e &c cT on the pape ct re
by similar enactments. Originating in COM
btnation Of the same ideas OF government which
dictated tie sBlue Laws" and other sumptuary
colOrphObia which Is ever cOncOmitant of the
.barbarism of slavery" the retention of such
laws In this latter half Of the 10th century, and
in any portion Of this Gland of the Free" Is a
even cur legislators have paid to the relations
Of the state to the individual, and to the prin-
ciples which underlie free institutions, as de-
monstrated, with such unanswerable logic, by
John Stuart Mill, in his little treatise "On Lib
erty."
Consider, for moment, the case above re-
ferred to- woman OF Anglo-Saxon descent,
and senseless twaddle OF the male specimens of
her own race among whom her lot happens to
be cast, sees and adm1reS, like DeSdemOna, the
qualities OF heart and soul of one with skin
''not colored like her own" but who, it may be-
Is as noble as Othello, as intelligent and tai
ented as Douglass or LangstOn. Superior
to the prejudiceS OF caste which slavery has
eDgenders, she allows him to lead her to the
altar and throw around their love the sanction
OF holy matrimony. What follows? Not only
Is sne ostrac1sed by society, but they are both
condemned as criminals and cast into prison,
Now by what authority, human or divine, does
the state thus dare to outrage the rights OF the
1nd1V1dua9 Or what right has it to say whom
person shall or shall not marry, except, per-
haps, when, from consaDguinity or other cause,
there Is possibility that the offspring Of the
union may become burden upon the public?
Its assumption to do so Is simply an act Of
tyranny, and just so much worse than that of
an Individual despot that it Is pcrpetrated
under the forms Of law by commonwealth
per Iyrannis." With tust as much right or rea-
son might the state assume to dictate what
shall be the color OF the hair or eyes of per-
sons wife or husband.
But aside from their conflict with these Gle.
mentary principles. which 1t needs no argument
government which deserves the name of free or
democratic, there cannot be the least doubt
that such laws are, at least since the passage
OF the 18th amendment, directly In violation Of
our national Constitution. as asserted by
Messrs. Reed Co., and trust that they will,
as suggested by the attorney general Of Viz
GINA, take legal and proper steps" to have the
the case OF Mr.. and Mrs. Kenney carried up to
the Supreme Court, that our country may no
longer be d1sgraced before foreign nations, by
meIly was by the slavery which has given rise
to them. Should fund be requisite for this
purpose, ], for one, am willing to subscribe IS
toward 1t, or more, If necessary. II. II. 7.