The Wellington enterprise. [volume] (Wellington, Ohio) 1867-188?, 1880-04-01
y Grow, l,ren ylrrinla.

TX = - = % IA n
ss A 0rswi lron Virginia. .E :
The Virginia Senate is sorely dis
tressed by the recent decision OF the
United States Supreme Court in the
case of Judge Coles, indicted in the
Federal Court for the Western District
of Virginia, upon charge of excluding
all colored citizens from jtfries ON &C.
count Of their race, color and previous
condition Of servitude, and IN violation
of the act of March Is. For this offense
Judge Coles was indicted in the United
States Court, and convicted and SEN
fenced to imprisonment. The point
made before the Supreme Court was
that his arrest and imprisonment were
unwarranted by the Constitution OF the
United States, and in violation OF his
rights and the rights of Virginia, and
the inferior court had no jurisdiction to
proceed against him. The Supreme
Court were of different opinion, and
held that the fourteenth annendmentAto
the Federal Constitution means that no
agency Of the State, nor-of the officers
or agents by whom its powers are
exerted, shah deny to any person with
in its jurisdiction the equal protection
of the laws, and whoever, by virtue OF
his public position under State Gov
ernment, deprives another OF property.
life or liberty, without. due process OF
law, or denies or takes away the equal
protection of the laws, violates the
Constitutional inhibition. In regard to
the particular offense of Judge Coles,
A - L. Lot rr>vS a<,R
jurors was a ministerial, not q Judicial
act, and being charged with the per
formance of that duty, although he
derived his authority from the State,
Judge Coles was bound, in the dis
charge of his duty, to obey the
Federal Constitution and laws passed
which has reused the patriotic indigna-
ton of the Virginia Senate to the point
of adopting a preamble and resolutions
denouncing the decision of the Su-
preme Court. The preamble recites
that "the decision threatens the very
existence of State governments as dis
tinct sovereignties, and it places the
judiciary of the State completely under
the control of the United States, and,
il followed to the logical results, will
enable the United States Congress To
coerce the State Judiciary, as well as
the State Executive and Legislative De.
partments in all matters, thus destroy.
ing every yestige of State sovereignty
IA most alarming doctrine to all who
security of which the United States
Constitution itself was established and
ordained" The resolutions urge Vir.
ginia's Senators and Representatives in
Congress to procure. the repeal of oil
laws Of Congress which tend to the ex.
ercise of powers not delegated to the
United States by the Constitution, mol
prohibited by it to the States, especial
ly of that act under which the decision
mentioned was rendered, and they re
quest the Governor to communicate
copies of the resolutions to the Govern
| ors of the several States, with view
| to having the Legislatures thereof take
similar action. '...t,... 80 ,..,.4
The Virginia Senate deserves and vii
doubtless receive the thanks of tn
Democratic party for thus prompt
rushing to the defense of. the doctrin
of State sovereignty. but its action WI
only excite the contempt OF sensibl
men. The decision OF the Suprem
| Court in the case referred to announce
no new doctrine. 1t simply declares 1
effect that NO State, and no departmen
/ or officer of State, can perform an &C
forbidden ty law OF the United States
made in accordance with the Constitr
ton, without incurring the condemns
ton of the Supreme Court, to be er
forced by the entire power OF the n,
ton, If necessary. To this extent tn
decision does attack and overthrow th
doctrine Of Stale sovereignty, but. q
we said before, the decision announce
nothing new. II Is simply reaffrm,
ton of the paramount authotity of th
Constellation Of the United States IN
the laws made under it.. The Virgin
Senate saws the decision, .if followe
to the lo3ical results, win enable Il
United States Congress to coerce Il
State Judiciary, a. wen Is the State E
ecutive and LeRislative departments
IN mnt&srs;' to which we reply that q
United States Governments has peffet
right to coeree all State. officers int
obedience with United States Law
PASSED in accordauce with the Const
tuition thereof. There is no hardship
this doctrine. It does not extend n,
II enlarge the powers of Congress or Ii
National Government in any way ic
simply declares the doctrine of the Co
stitution, which, followed to its logic
results, means only that State laws al
/ State officers, legislative, executi'
and judicial, must yield to the Cons'
1 tuition and laws of the United State
The opposite doctrine, followed to
logical results, would lead to col
plete emasculation OF the Nation
. Government, and woulo make not on
every State official, but every citiz'
, of q State, superior to the Constit
, ton of the United States.-Indiossap
Us journal. ,,~ f.sl.-