The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1879-03-24
!. !. g ,,,.,.a r,,res,s Trsur1,ation.

Judge Riyes's usurr'ation'
Though we place no confidence { In ". tue
"a re.,trs that two or more OF the justices OF
the Supreme Court OF The United states
have expressed an opinion In the case o. o.
The sta,ctof Virginia Us. Judge Rrvss. yes
we cannot say that we should be mtieh sur u,
nrised II that tribunal were to sustain hih
ID iis5usurpation. The action OF the ' Eiec'
,ora, Commission damaged THAI court s., IRE.
narsb,v in the public mind, and proved
too. clearly that Ii was a tribunal mace
I'm almost exclusively OF Republican par
,isai,s, III this last statement be the iacl'
wc NAV infer from what the Repub'i'
can papers say what the Republican
Justices think; and we have not yet seen
an article on the subject in single Repup'
Iicsa journal published In the North WHICH
did not Justify Judge RIvEs. We are no'
surprised that southern RepubiIcah Jour
na,s should fihd no fault with bis usurpa
ton. seeing that they are scneia'iy eaiteu
nv men who have become embittcrso
AGAINST their own neighbors, ana are more
;nto,erant than he northern Republicans.
we are rather surprised, however, TO hnd
s,,;. not even the fairest and most lnteili-
gent OF northern Republican papers seem to
Goo ANYTHING in the case but q manifestation
q, the {" old spirit OF the rebe!lion,' ana
means of disciplining the southern people
srbry seem 10 have no idea that every 1udge
in The North has violated the same law
which the Virginia judges are charged with
having violated, and for which alleged Vio'
lations Judge RIvEs has usuTped 3uriSdic'
ton in murder case.
Here. for instance, is that respectable
journal the philadelphia North American
which sees in the case only "the oid quar-
rci reyiyed,'' and actually suppoSes that
Virginia wants to nulliIy n constitutional
Iaw. 1t even tells us that the way to get ria
of an unconstitutional law Is to test IL De-
fore the Supreme Court OF the Uhi'eu
States, but iorgets4to inform its readers that
that is exactly Whist Virginia Is DONG. II
declares that the doctrine OF paramount
State rights " is at tie bottom OF the d'fl-
Guilty; and. in word, that the southern
neonle don't intend to concede practically
The validity OF the new amendments.
Now. we would like it il the North Ame-
,.;can would candidy answer a few ques-
tions in reference to the two cases from fir-
uinia which Judge RIvEs has been The means
OF originating. How many cases were ever
tried in Philadelphia by iuries having ne
s-rocs upon them? How many negroes
mast a Judge summon upon every jury in
ORDER to prove himself innocent under the
law under which Judge RIvEs has had our
Virginia judges indicted? Would one ne
gre upon each jury clear our judges? Ii
moi. would two? or three? or four? Think
OF il. Why should Virginia judges be IN
t!ictcd for dong exactly what northern
jude es do with impunity? Ismurder IS such
an offence against any law OF the United
State>: And if not, low can trial for murder
bc carried on in Il Federal court! Suppose
the indictment were quashed, would the
prisoner be set free? Could the District
Attorney frame a new indictment Could
q Grand jury in Federal court find true
bill in such murder case as those oil TIE
REYNoLDsEs? And then supposing all these
difficulties overcome, and remembering that
the oneuce for which our judges are in
d!c ed is that they failed to summon negroes
because they were negroes, how in the
name OF common sense is it to be proved
that the negroes were left off the jury
lists for that reason? Suppose the
Judges plead that the negroes were left
of because they were unfit to serve as jul
rors, how can it be proved that they were
LETT of for the reason charged in the indict-
Ment? We have never served OF a jury
since the fourteenth amendment was added
to the Constitution. Can't we make out as
good case as any negro? Couldn't we just
as easily prove that we were always left of
because we are white as any negro
could prove that he was LETT oil
because he was black? If Virginia
Judge should allow himself to be
buldozed by Judge RlvEs, and thus be
induced to summon negroes because they
are negroes, would he not thereby clearly
violate the spirit OF the law which Judge
R1vEs processes to hold in such high esteem
Would it not, in word, certainly be un'
lawful to summon egro because he was q
negro? II not, how can it possibly be un
lawful to summon a white man because be
is white man? When these questions are
answered satisfactorily the North 4mcrican
will have opened the case.
-----------------------