Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1879-10-23
STATE RIGHTS IN THE SUPREMH
COURT. e..

The supreme court of the United States
is now engaged in hearing number of cases
OF national interest. Nearly all of them IN
volve, in one phase or another, the doctrine
of State rights, which is admitted to be at
present the leading issue in our politics.
With the present composition of that tribu-
nal we can hardly expect an entirely non
PARTISAN decision, although some of the
judges may sink their partisanship beneath
their judicial positions. At any rate, the
decisions, whatever they may be, will be
final and of binding force until reversed.
One of the questions already argued was
taken from Virginia, and involves the right
of colored men to claim seats in the Jury
box. It will be remembered that the su-
preme court of Virginia decided that jury
service is not right, but duty which
should be required of only such
citizens as the court in which the cases we're
set for trial should regard as fully qualified,
and that the court had the right to exclude
from the panel any citizen or class of citi-
zens at its discretion. The cases at issue in
the appealed case were two negroes indicted
for murder. The counsel for the defense
demanded that the panel be made up of an
equal number Ct colored and white citizens.
The court, perceiving that such course
would defeat the ends of justice, denied the
request. The question is not whether COL
ored men shall be exclu He'd from jury duty
in all cases, but whether they have right
to demand a seat in the Jury box when the
interests of justice will be endangered by
their presence.
There are several cases that involve ques-
tons of jurisdiction between State and fed
eral courts. Some cases have been trans
ferred from State to federal courts that, III
the opinion of many good lawyers and ju-
rists, were not subject to federal jurisdic-
ton. Two of these have already been ar
gued, and several more are yet to be heard.
But the most important case of all to the
general public is one involving the consti-
tutionality of the supervisors and deputy
nlarshals election law. This case was certi-
fed from the district court of Cincinnati.
and will probably be argued before the close
of the present week. The question involved
is of the utmost mportance-whether the
State or the federal government shall assume
control of elections for President and mem
bers of Congress. It has been the custom
for more than century for the States to
regulate all elections of whatever nature. and
as this is not one of the powers delegated by
the States to the general government in the
organic law of the land, and has never since
been surrendered, it must of necessity still
reside in the States. The arguments pro
and con will be read with general
interest, and the decision looked for with
anxiety, for men of all parties regard the
law as it stands dangerous encroachment
in the direction of monarchism. It has been
defended by the representatives of the Re-
publican party because of the tremendous
power it gives to that party in the control
of elections-a power that has in the past
proved efficacious in defeating members of
Congress run by the Democracy. If the de-
cision is reached by judicial process we have
no doubt of the result. ..