Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1880-03-06

court for the western district of Vir.
ginia for excluding and falling tC
select as Jurors certain colored men
who possessed all the quali6ca-
tons for service, on account
Of their color, etc. The petition filed
for his release aSerred that his arrest
and detention were unwarrantable by
the constitution of the United States,
and in violation of his rights and the
rights Of the state, whose judicial
officer he was, aud that the inferior
court had no jurisdiction against him,
The state of Virginia also presented a
similar petition. The supreme court
of the United States held that while a
writ of habeous corpus cannot gener-
ally be made to subserve the purposes
of a writ of error, yet when a pris-
oner is held without any lawful au-
thority, and by an order beyond the
jurisdiction of an inferior federal
court, to take, this court will, in favor
Of liberty, grant the writ, not to re-
ceive the whole case, but to examine
the authority OF the court below to
act at all. The court examined the
section of the act of March 4. 1879
us stat, 1867, under which Judge
Coles was indicted, and held it to be
authorized by the Thirteenth and
Fourteenth amendments Of the con-
stitution. The Fourteenth amend
ment inhibits any agency Of the state
from denying to any person within its
jurisdiction the equal protection of the
laws. Whoever by virtue of a pub
lie position under a state government
deprives another Of property or life or
liberty without due process of law, or
denies or takes away the equal protec
ton of the laws, violates this, and as
he acts in the name of the state and
for it, is clothed with its power, and
his act is that Of the state. Other.
wise the inhibition would leave no
meaning, and the state coald clothe
one Of its officers with power to amend
or evade it. The act Of the defendant
in selecting jurors is held to be min
isterial, not a judicial act, and being
charged with the performance of that
duty, although he derived authority
from the state, was bound to obey the
constitution in the performance Of his
duty.
Justice Fields dissents from this
opinion, and first states the law OF
Virginia relative to the summening of
jurors. The judge of each county or
corporation court is required to pre-
pare annually a list Of such inhabit-
ants of the county or corporation ''as
he shall think well qualified to
serve as jurors, being persons of sound
judgment and free from legal excep-
tons The question is lett to the
judge whether the jurors possess those
qualifications, and from the tanner
in which he discharges this duty, he
is responsible only to the state, whose
officer he is, and whose law he is
bound TO enforce. Justice Field holds
that the district court, in Issuing its
process for arrest, excluded its juris-
diction. First, because assuming
that the act of 1875 is constitutional
and valid legislation the instrument
describes no offense under it, but is
void on its face, and second, because
that act in the section cited, so far as
it relates to jurors in the state courts.
is unconstitutional and void. The in
dictment names no citizens who are
excluded, and Of course designates no
specific traversable ofense. 1t is
essential to a valid instrument that
it should set forth the offense with
such particulars of time, place and
person that the accused may know the
nature Of the charge aud be able TO
prepare to meet it. Nothing could
have a greater t~endencytO destroy the
Independence and autonomy of the
states and reduce them to a humiliat-
ing and degrading dependence upon
the central government than that
doctrine asserted in this case, that
congress can exercise coercive author
ity over judicial officers Of the states
in the discharge Of their duties. In
tie case of Collector VS.. Day this
court held that, "any government
whose means employed in conducting
its operations are made subject to the
control of another and distinct govern.
ment can exist only at the mercy of
that government" Judge Field de-
MES that the amendments support the
legislation in question. The indie.
pendence of state consists OF its leg
islatiye, executive and judicial Off
GERS. Ii this were not so a state would
cease to be an independent member of
the union, and would be brought to
the level of a dependent municipal
corporation, existing only with sucb
powers as congress might prescribe
The Fourteenth amendment, it is
claimed, has M more reference to
political rights than it has to social
aud duties which do not rest on
any positive law.
In closing Justice Field said that
the case should not be delayed for the
slow process of trial in the court
below and a subsequent appeal in case
OF conviction Of this court. Mr.. Jus
tice Clifford concurred 10 the opinion
of Justice Field.
SALTUs MoHEGAN.