The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1879-10-30

4ne LtsyNtsf yesterday TOOK up the case
Of strauder for fresh discussion in connec.
ton with its announcement that It ID
now awaiting decision by the su.
preme Court of the United States. II
goes on 10 say that "the important cues.
tons 10 be determined is % 10 whether A
state has any individuality In the matter
Of legislation which Congress Is bound TO
respect; whether II shall have the right TO
the administration Of law, not in conflict
with the federal constitution, by such
methods and the use OF such machinery
as II may choose 10 devise; whether there
Ing 20 the citizen Of the state, as such,
which are not dependent upon citizenship
OF the United States, and which the state
may not control or abrdge at its pleasure;
whether, In fine, q citizen OF the state,
who has violated the law Of the state, and
has been tried by Q jury Of the state,
formed under the laws Of the state, and
found guilty, shall be allowed TO escape
the penalty which the state law indlcts,
by Rresort TO the United States Courts, not
by way OF appeal, but through q trial de
moro.
The State Of West Virginia has seen
proper 10 prescribe the material OF which
ilries In her courts shall BIO constituted.
That Is to say: "All white male citizens
who are twenty.one years OF age and not
over sixty, and who are citizens Of this
State, shall be liable to serve as Jurors"
with certain exceptions named In the
statute"
The plain way to state the case Of strau.
der, as 1t stands to-day in the Supreme
Court Of the United States, Is this. 1t is
not whether he had a fair trial or mott not
whether mixed jury, or one wholly
Colored, would have found differently, but
whether the law under which he was
tried, by which colored men were Oxclud.
ed from the jury, was in derOgation
Of any constitutional provision Of the
United States, or any law passed in pur-
suance thereof. II 1t was, then the law Is
Of course null and void, and the trial had
under it was not such a trial as he was en-
titled 10.
We need not explain that the Four
tenth Article OF the Constitution Of the
United States was manliestly intended To
equalize and protect fully and fairly all
the legal rights Of citizens Of the United
States, be they white or black. The
article was not adopted TO equaliEe and
better protect the rights Of white citizens,
but to prevent any State Of the Union
from drawing color or race line against
any citizen Of the United States whereby
his full and equal citizenship could be i'm
paired. Its language is as follows: IAN
persons born or naturalized in the United
States, and subject to the Jurisdiction
thereof, are citizens OF the United States
and Of the State wherein they reside. No
State shall make or enforce any law which
shall abridge the privileges or immunities
Of citizens of the United States, nor shall
any State deprive any person OF lie,
liberty or property, without due process
oflsw, nor deny to any person within liz
Jurisdiction the equal protection Of the
laws"
Inpumuance Of this Constitutional pro
vision Congress passed in March, 1855, the
Civil Rights bill, which in It's first section
provided in the plainest possible terms, sc
that no Bourbon OF the old pro-slavery
regime could possibly misunderstood what
was meant by the 14th article Of the Con
stitution, that "citizens Of every race and
color, without regard to any previous con
dition ofslavery or involuntary servitude,
except as punishment for crime whereof
the party shall have been duly convicted
shall have the same right in every State
and Territory in the United States tc
make and enforce contracts, to sue, be
parties and give evidence: 10 inherit, pur.
chase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real
and personal property; and to the full and
equal benefit Of all laws and proceedings
for the security OF person and property as
isenioyed by white citizens, and shall be
subject to likepunishment, pains and pen.
alies, and to none other, any Law, statute,
ordinance, regulation, or custom, to the
contrary Notwithstanding"
The Supreme Court Of Appeals of the
state Of West Virginia did not deny in
their decision. in the strauder case that
these provisions Of the Fourteenth Article
OF the Constitution Of the United States
and OF the Civil Rights Bill, were intend.
ed to give Colored citizens of the United
States every legal right. and every legal
protection possessed by any white citizen,
but they did deny the Constituionality Of
the Civil Rights Bill. Judge Green in
pronouncing the opinion Of the Court at.
tackled the law Of Congress, which he
recognized as initiating against the law OF
West Virginia, and pronounced 1t uncon.
shtutional. The Judge no doubt holds,
in the language OF the whole Democratic
party, as expressed in 1868. that not only
is the Civil Rights Bill unconstitutional,
but that all the Constitutional amend.
ments are unconstitutional, revolutionary
and void" His deliverance, therefore, in
the strauder case was to have been ex.
pected. He is a disciple Of fancy, who
held that a negro had no rights in partic.
ular that white men are bound to re.
speCt.