The Louisiana Democrat. [volume] (Alexandria, La.) 1845-1918, 1880-03-17
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.
IMPORTANT DECISIONS INVOLVING
STATE RIGHTS.

| STATE RIGHTS.
The United State, Supreme Coul
ha2lecently rendered several Yer
inn Ftant decisions bearing upo
State Rights and the operation {
Constitutional Amendments.
We deem it of sufficient geners
interest to present our readers wit
the text Of the decision in tea
case, and also the opinion of Justic
Field upon the same question, ren
dered on the same day in anothe
case.
mo. 1853. Taylor Strauder vs. Th
State Of West Virginia, In error t
the Supreme Court Of Appeals, o
West Virginia. Strauder, the plain
tiff in error-a negro was indicted
ID the Circuit Court of Ohio County
West Virginia, in October, 1874, TO
murder. When his case came up TO
rial he filed a petition for its re
moyal to the United States Circuit
Court, upon the ground that the ex
clusion of colored citizens from ju
rles by the act Of the State Legisis
:ure of March IL, 1863, was virtual,
denial of bis right to the equa
protection OF the laws. His petition,
was denied, the case went to iris
and he was found guilty aud sen
fenced. Upon appeal the Supreme
Court Of Appeals of West Virgins
affirmed the judgment. The case
vas then brought here upon a Wi.
of error, the plaintiff in error main.
tanning that the act Of the State
Legislature which excludes colored
men from juries is in violation Of the
fourteenth amendment to the Cousti
tuition, and that he Was entitled to
have his case removed to the United
States Circuit Court. This Court,
after fully considering the fourteenth
amendment-its nature, intention
and scope-holds: First-That the
statute Of West Virginia, which 10
effect singles out and denies to col.
ored citizens the right and privilege
Of participating ia the administration
Of the law as jurors because OF their
color, though qualified in all other
respects, is practically = fraud upon
hem, affixed by the law, and is q
discrimination against that race for.
oidden by tue amendment. It is a
lenlal OF the equal protection Of the
avs to the race thus excluded, since
he constitution Of jurics is a very
essential part Of the protection which
he trial BY jury is intended to Sc
'ure. The very idea OF a jury is a
'oay OF men composed Of the peers
II equals of the person whose rights
t is selected or summoned to deter.
nine-that is, Of persons having the
anne legal status in society as that
'lich he holds. Second-That
there, as here, the State statute sc.
ures to every white man the RICH,
+ trial by ajury selected from and
'Ittiout discrimination against his
ace and at the same time permits or
equires such discrimination against
he colored man because OF his race. |
ne latter is not equally protected
y law with the former. Third-l
hat section GAL of the Revised
tatutes, which provides for the re !
loval OF a case from the State to the |
ederal courts when the defeudsn, |
" any reason is denied in the Stste I
'urts any right secured to him By
ny law providing for the equal
ghts of citizens of the United
tates, is not in conflict With the
ederal Constitution. The judgmen,
the lower Court is reversed, With
'sts, and the cause remanded. with
structions to reverse the jadgmen.
the Circuit Court Of Ohio County.
r. Justice Strong delivered the
'inlon. judges Glihord aad Field
ssenting."
In a similar case Mr.. Justice Field
ssenting rendered the: ). following
'inion which. was CONQUERED IN by
astice Clifford:
"Mr. Justice Field dissented and
We an elaborate opinion. Judge
eld holds that the District Cont
issving its process for arrest ex
eded its Jurisdiction, first, because
Stunning that the act Of 1876 is con.
and valid as legislation,
Q indictmynt describes no offense
der it, but is void on it's face, and
cond, because that act in the sec. |.
On cited so far as it relates to the