Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1880-03-02
TAYLOR STRAUDER.
DECISION or THE UNITED STATES
SUPREME COURT.
The Law Excluding Negroes from Iuriss
Pronounced Unconstitutonal-Ihe
Case Remanded and Iudg-
ment Reversed.

WASHINGTON, March NO. 75S,
Taylor strauder vs., State OF West Nir-
ginia in error to the Supreme Court OF
Appeals OF West Virginia. strauder,
the plaintiff in error, Ia negro) was in
dicted in the Circuit Court OF Ohio
county, West Virginia, in October,
1874, for murder. When his case came
up for trial, he fled q petition for its ro-
moval to the United States Circuit Court,
on the ground Of the exclusion OF color
ed citizens from juries, by an act
Of the State Legislature OF March l2th,
1868; that it was virtually .
denial OF his right 10 equal protection
OF the laws. His petition was denied,
the case went to trial and he was found
guilty and sentenced. Upon appeal. the
Supreme Cour, OF Appeals OF West
Virginia affirmed the Judgment. The
case was then brought here upon writ
OF error, the plaintiff in error maintain
ing that the act Of the State legislature
which excludes colored men from juries
is in violation OF the Fourteenth
Amendment to the Constitution, and
that he Was entitled to have his
case removed to the L. :. Circuit
Court. This court, after fully consld-
ering the Fourteenth Amendment, Its
nature, intention and scope, holds:
|. That the statute Of West Virginia
which, in effect, singles out and denies
to the ColOrcd citizens the right and
privilege OF participating IN the admin
istration Of the law as jurors, because
OF their color, though qualified IN ail
other respects, is practically brand
upon them affixed by the law, and Is a
discrimination against that race for
hidden by the amendment. Ii Ia de-
NAL Ot equal protection OF the laws
TO the race thus excluded, since
the constitution oi juries is very
essential part OF the protection which
with a trial by jury 1t L intended TO
secure. The very idea OF jury Is
body Of men composed oil the peers or
equals Of the persons whose rights 1t Is
selected or summoned to determine
that is, OF persons having the same legal
status in society as that be holds.
2. That where, as here, the State
statute secures 10 every white man
the right OF trial by jury
selected from and without
discrimination against his race, and at
the same time permits or requires such
discrimination against the colored man
because of his race, the latter IL not
equally protected by law with the for
mer.
3. That section 64l of the revised
statutes, which provides for the re-
moval Of a case from State to Federal
courts when the defendant, for
any reason, is denied in the state
courts any right secured to him by
any law providing for the equal rights
Of citizens oi the United States, Is not IN
csntlict with the Federal constitution.
The judgment Of the lower court Is re-
versed, with costs, and the cause re-
manded, with instructions TO reverse
the judgment OF the Circuit Court OF
Ohio county.
Justice Strong delivered the opinion,
Justices Clifford and Field dissenting.
The Virginia Gases
Opinions were delivered in what aro
known as the Virginia ami Tennessee
cases. sustaining the action oithe Federal
Judges, except in the case OF two colored
prisoners taken from Virginia State Of
hcials by Judge Rives and held for trial
in the Federal Court. In this case the
Supreme Court holds that the Federal
Court had no righiiui jurisdiction OF the
case, and that writ Oi maHdGmuS Tor
the restoration of the prisoners TO the
State authorities must be granted, and