The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1879-01-23

e menced in any State Court for any cause
: whatsoever against any person who Is denied
J. or cannot enforce ia the judicial tribunal OIL
s the State or any part OF the State where sucl
q suit or prosecution is pending, any right Sc
l cured to him by any law providing for the
: Iequal rights Of citizens OF the United State:
Q *'* such suit or prosecution may up
p on the petition OF such defendant, filed in
# such State Court at any time before the tri-
: al or final hearing Of the cause stating the
facts and verified by oath, be removed for
I. trial into the United States Court, to be held
in the district where it is pending 1t fur.
ther provides that upon filing said petition
r in the State Court in this cause shall cease.
r All and everything required by the Act had
: been done in this case. 1 claim that the
I force and effect of this act is so peremtory
! that anything else except the removal of the
t case to the Federal Court by simple order
! entered in the State Court for that purpose,
4 is null and void. l believe that State Court
r that tries and convicts a man after
he has presented and filed his pc
, tiion in conformity with the Civil
Rights Act gal sec.) is guiltyof judicial
/ CT ime against the laws of the country.
r care not whether the facts alleged in the Pc
tition are true or not, it is not within the
: power or authority of the State Court to de-
, eide. The Court has but one thing to do
obey the requirements of the statute-anv-
; thing else is beyond its jurisdiction, and
null. Obey the statute, and when the cause
| is by virtue of the Act, docketed in the Uni
ted States Circuit Court, motion to remand
it to the State Court, upon the ground that
I it is not one that comes under the Civil
Rights Act, would be in order and admlssi-
i IL l.cIN a. I'll 1.,u kIxx
case to the State Court or retain it according
to the truth or falsity of the allegations in
the petition.
In my opinion, there is no conceivable
plan by which the apparent conflict of juris.
diction can be reconcled. Had this been
done in the case, the unfortunate excitement
now prevailing, would never have occurred.
Judge Rives did only what the law required
him to do. Judge Tredway refused to obey
the law. The result is the present unfortu-
nate state of excitement, and the abuse
heaped upon the head of Judge Rives.
Had not been thoroughly convinced that
olation of the 18th Amendment and the Civ
/ il Rights Act, I certainly would not advise
my clients to petition to remove their cases
to the Federal Court.
Think that I can show that this Act has
been violated in this case, and done know
lingly, both by the Legislature and by the
county judges, who select the ijuries. Keep
in mind that we have all sworn fealty to the
18th .Amendment-as men of honor, we
should all adhere to this great, solemn oath
as State and great people, however disa-
greeable or repulsive to our feelings. Any
evasion or subterfuge to get rid of it, is Ger
tainly unworthy the great name OF Virginia.
But for fear tnat we should not comply with |
our oath, or rather, had not complied, the |
United States on March LIST, 1875, passed an |
Act of which the following is the 4th section: |
s'Hhat no citizen possessing all other quail |
f1cations which are,or may be, prescribed by |
law, shall be disqualified for service as grand |
or petit jurors in any Court of the United |
States, or, of any State, on account of race,
color, or previous condition of servitude, and |
any officer, or other person, charged with |
the duty in selecting or summoning of Jurors |
who shallexclude or fail to summon any citi-
zen for the cause aforesaid, shall, on convic-
ton thereof be deem guilty of misdemean-
or, and fined not more than $4,000"
The Legislature of Virginia in 1S70-l |
passed the following Act:
.'AU male citizens 81 years old and not |
over 60, who are entitled to vote and hold Of
flee under the Constitution aud laws of the |
State, shall be liable to serve as jurors" OF |
course this includes negroes.
Now let us see how this law has been |
evaGed, at least, in the county where the |
homicide occurred. For the eight years fol- |
lowing the passage of this Act, there has |
never been negro on a jury in Patrick |
county. The population of tile county is |
about II, 1000, OF which 1000 are negroes
Thi is an evasion OF the Act, and deliber- |
ately so. The Legislature was bound to pass |
the Act, but how to get rid of its effects was |
the next problem. 1t was elfecGually done.
T cho1 mi fho 10 tot
veniries under which the accused were tried |
| at the last term:
The writ OF centre facids IN a case OF fell |
ony ,other than when the punishment may be |
death. shall command the officer to whom it |
it is directed, to summon sixteen lin case
where the punishment is death, twenty four
persons OF his county or corporation to be
taken from list to be furnished him by the
Judge OF his county or corporation, residing
remote from the place where the offence is
charged to have been committed, and quail
itied in other respects to serve as jurors, SC.
The Act under which they were first tried
was equally bad, but have not space to
quote it.
The Act of the Legislature, just quoted,
was passed the year we were re-admitted |
into the Uuion--lS7O, and is the law to-day. |
Solar as it goes it literally complies with
| the 18th Amendment. The laws passed to
put it in practical operation are equally
| SO, apparently. But appeal to every can
did man in the State if 1T has ever been ex-
ecuted according to the spirit of it, or that |
| it ever was intended to be. The Legislature
passed the law of 1870 in such a form that it |
might be evaded. They were afraid to pass
| it in such form as to require the negro to
be a constituent part of the juries. They |
passed other laws to carry it into effect by
throwing the responsibility upon the local
county judges to decide who were qualified
The venire is to be summoned ''from a list
furnished by the County Judge.
Now, is it not absolutely within the pow
er OF the County Judge to practically abro-
gate and annul the Act of 1870 providing
who shall be jurors? Is not this the most
absolute power that ever was vested in the
hands of mere local officer in a Republican
Government? It nearly approximates the
power OF life and death. A man is arrested
| for crime; the Judge is a citizen of the
county in which the alleged offense Is com.
m;tted, hears and becomes acquainted with
the facts, forms an opinion for or against
the accused, and then selects the jury to
try him, and cannot be held responsible
for partial Selection. He lives in a county
in which the white race has a vast pre-
dominence-in county overwhelmingly
Conservative. The only Radical or Re-
publican element is composed OF the ne
groes. and very small number of
whites. A negro is charged with the muir
der of white man. Would the Judge dare
to put on the jury list single negro, how
ever grateful, to try the accused? 1t would
be worth at least his place to do it. The law
does not force him to do it,; and by his IN
genious, but disengenious method, the whole
spirit anG purpose of the XIV Amendment,
and all the subsequent acts of Congress, pass
ed to enforce it, are evaded and nullified, so
far as the rights of the negro are concerned.
do not think any honorable man in the
State will now deny, that such was the OBJ
ject and purpose Of all the legislation in the
State since her re-admisson in the Union
in 1870. l SO regard it myself, and approx
ed it, and DO so yet, SO far as setting the Or
binary questions that arise in our courts, be-
leying in the supremacy Of my race. l
think white jurors are superior, of more en-
larged experience, and should be selected to
try all ordinary cases in which this strange,
rrepressible race question is not involved.
But when this great question is involved,
/ question rising up and reaching far beyond