Saint Mary's beacon. [volume] (Leonard Town, Md.) 1867-1983, 1880-03-11


Judges, who had been indicted u
his court for excluding eolored men
frpm iuries il their courts. The prompt
mess of Judge Rives's action in these
cslses should suegest 20 the Legislature
elF this State that IL owes duty TO t.
cell. % it, courts and citizens, IN view
oil the recent decisions Of The Supreme
Court, performances Of which ought not.
q, be delayed . day longer shen = ne
casssry. In the case Of the indIesed
Virginia Judges ell that the Supreme
Court has decided IL that state Judge
may Be indicted under the act Of Con-
gress. and compelled to stand bis trial
in the United States Court. for exclnd-
ing from the jury lists the names Of col
fored men, otherwise qualified to De ju-
rors, IL such exclusion IL by reason Of
their race, color or previous condition
Of servitude. The law oi Virginia makes
no distinction ofrace or color inregard 10
the performances ofjnry duty. The prep
sration OF the jury lists il ieft 70 the
discretion Of the judges, who are 10 Sc
lect such persons. between the ages Of
81 and SO, entitled to vote and bold Of
fice, a. they shall deem "well qualified
to serve rs Jurors. being persons Of
sound judgment and free IRON legal ex-
cepiion." The exclusion Of colored iu-
rors, n there has been any for the causes
assigned, is treated, therefore, by the
court IS the individual otFense Of the
Judge, for which he is indictable under
the Federal statute. OF course, If
grand jury in the United States Court
here were disposed to act in the same
spirit, and under instructions as -eck-
lessly partisan as those of Judge Rlyes,
our own state judges could be indicted
upon the same grounds as the Virginia
Judges have eenindicted. While The re-
publican majority ofthe Supreme Court
have decided that such an indictment
will lie. Judge Field. in his dissenting
opinion in Judge Coles case. has pointed
out with irresistible clearnsss that that.
upon such an indictment, 40 conviction
can be sustained. There is no law requir-
ing colored men to be drawn upon juries.
The act OF Congress simply prohibits
and Furnishes their exclusion BY reason
Of their race. color, etc. When, as in Vir-
ginia and Maryland, the selection OF iu-
rors is left to the discretion OF the judges.
no individual, white or black, can claim
II 40 his individual right 10 be placed
upon the list. That is discretionary
with the Judges. Consequently, no
man can claim that he 10 wronged by
not being put upon the list. No man Is
excluded because he is not drawn
Neither, a. Judge Field points ont, will
an Indictment hold for excluding all
colored men. 1. e.. because none hap
pen TO be placed upon the lists. The
Judges are not required or authorized TO
place upon the lists any except such as
they shall think well qualified. That is
q matter OF discretion; The Judges may
err 10 their discretion; they. may put
some very Unqualified men. in point
Of judgment. temper. &c., upon the
lists. They may omit to put on others
who are well qualified, both white and
black. There il no such "exclusion"
in this case as will support an indict-
ment. The simple failure, therefore. to
put q single colored man on the jury
list, or given proportion OF colored
men, will never support q conviction nm
der the statute. unless there be other evi-
dence Of a Fixed determination not to
have colored jurors. without regard TO
their personal Qualification. simply be-
cause they are colored, can be estab-
lished by the declarations and admis-
sions Of the judges.
while this il one aspect ofthe case, and
one which Il is beyond the powers Of
State legislation to vary or control, SO
long rs Jurors have 10 be selected by
somebody who must Judge OF their quail
ification. there Is another matter, rs we
have intimaied, which demands proper
Legislative action. In the West Virgin
IL case Of Taylor Strander the Supreme
Court decides that State law which
requires jurors to be white operates as
''deniaI Of the equal protection Of the
laws" within the meaning OF the con-
siitulional amendment and the act of
Congress, which entities every colored
man indicted in that State 10 have his
case removed INTO the Federal courts
for triaf. The general jury law Of the
State Of Maryland, applicable to all The
counties Of the State. but not to Balti-
more city, requires The lIsts Of jurors 70
be made up from the taxable s0hite male
inhabitants Of .he county. Il has the
same vice. therefore, according 70 the
majority Of the Supreme Court, as the
West Virginia statute. and Is liable to
the same consequences. To prevent
those conseqnenees--to preserve the
Jurisdiction ofour own State courts and
the authority Of our own laws, and TO
prevent the wholesale transfer af cases
Of colored men indicted in The State
courts INTO the United States Court Tor
triaI--the Legislature should Ut once,
with the least possible delay. strike the
word "whiie" from the jury Law, and
also from every other statute. when IL
i liable to bring State law and aushs
iiy inio unnecessary and humiIiati
conflict with Federal Law and antht
", as The former has been molded al
The latter IL administered and interpr
ted By radical ihdueness.-Balti
Ssn.