Clearfield Republican. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1851-1937, 1880-03-17
IMPORTANT DECISIONS OF
THE UNITED STATES iSU-
PREME COURT.

On the lst inst, the Supreme Court
OF the United States rendered decis.
ions in number of cases involving
the validity of the reconstruction laws
OF Congress, in which the centralizing
tendency of the Government was made
more than ever manifest.
In the case of Strader VS.. West Vir.
ginia, involving the constitutionality
of Il statute of that State which ex.
cludes colored people from being
drawn and acting as jurors. Under
the ruling of the court no State can
pass any such law and in the case
ex.parte Commonwealth of Virginia
and ]. d. Cowles also decided to. day,
the court goes still further In this
case Cowles, being a county court
Judge in Virginia, under the State
statute, by virtue of bis Office, selected
the jurors to serve in the circuit and
county courts of his county. He was
indicted in 1878 in the United States
Court in Virginia, under the civil
rights bill, charged with having ex.
cluded from the jury list for bis county
citizens of his county on account Of
their color and previous condition OF
servitude. 1t was not denied that the
colored citizens were otherwise quail.
fed. In this case the court hold that
not only can State not discriminate
against the colored race, but that nc
agency of the State or officer can dc
without being liable and punishable
under the act Of March 4, 1875. The
practical effect of this decision ia to
render liable to indictment and pun.
ishment in the Federal courts every
person who, by virtue of any public
position under a State Government
deprives another of any right of per.
son or property without due process
of law.
In ox.parte Commonwealth of Vir
ginia, involving the right of transfer
of a criminal case from the State to the
Federal court, under section GAL of thC
United States Revised Statutes, it il
held that the refusal of the State oourr
to amend venire so that q portion o
the jury should be colored men, Is no
such denial of right secured by Law
to a colored man as to Justify re
moval Of the cause from the State Il
the Federal court. The acts of Con
gress and the constitutional provision
have, the Supreme Court say, "mad,
the rights and responsibilities, civi
and criminal, Of white and black peo
pie the same Under these deoisionI
State cannot, through its executive
Judicial or legislative department, o.
through other agencies, deprive ,
black man of any right which q whit,
man has under the law. And If Con
gress has failed to provide an adequat,
remedy, one can be found in the re
visory power of the Supreme Court o
the United States.
The fourth case referred TO as decid
ed to-day (State of Tennessee vs.. Da
vis) settles oil dispute about the righ
of the United States revenue officers
where they are indicted in a Stat,
court for any act done by them in tb'
discharge Of their duty, or under colo
of their Office, or for any act which
they claim was done in such manner
to remove such State prosecutions from
the State courts to the Federal courts
there TO be tried.
Many Of the ablest iurists view with
surprise, if not alarm, this isr-reachinf
demolition, by the highest judicial au
thority of the country, of what has
been considered as left OF the reserved
rights Of the States.