The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1880-08-21

The Whiq, In speaking 81 the iou!'een'n
.,.srdment 10 The Federal Constitution, IN
ouIrcs q follows;
mvow. vst IA csk, What do the words
80 ss.sc sha;I make Or enforce any law
sn,ch anal abr,Jge the priyileges or immu, |
~,s,cs a. citizens Of the United states
mean, what would any ordinary man
think they meant Is the right 10 vote
privilege OF Immunity OF c'tzen VI
not?
Wen. tina, Il strange question 10 be
sSked In what purports TO be an arguments
"a ,aw points. Read The opinion Of the SUI
rrvme Court Of the tinted States In the
celebrated sIaughter.house cases from LOU
isiana, and you Will see that Il has already
been decided By the highest court in the.
land that the right to vote is not one Of The
apriyiIeges and immunities" guaranteed 10
c,,ixeps Of the United States by the four.
teeuth amendment. Therefore, all our
ne,chbor's arguments on the subject are
worse than thrown away. In that famous
opinion the Supreme Court ',f the United
States held thar the privileges and immuni-
tics which belong to pcfsori as citizen OF
a State and those which PEI tain to citizes
of the United States are u o. THE same, and
that Inc latter oely are protected by the
fourteenth amendment.
But surely V ought rot 70 require de-
cision Of the Supreme Court Of the Usited
states TO satisfy anybo dy that as the four
teenth amendment in. express terms con-
cedes TO the States the right 20 regulate SUI
frsge, the "privilt.gcs and fmmunities y
guaranteed by the ssmc amendment cann0
possibly include II re right TO vote.
The language 'ipctcd ny the Wing from
the Constitution Is as follows
"Ns State she'll ueake or enforce any law
whoa shall abr'tlce sbe privileges or immi'
mites Of eitizep.s Of the United Stdtes."
Notice the words in italics, and then read
what the Supreme Court OF the United
Ststes says. We quote:
<Tbe language is Ne State shall make
or enforce any laws which shall abridge the
privileges or immuDities OF citizens OF the
p,nited States IL Is a little remarkable, III
this clause was intended as projection TO
the citizen Of State against the legislative
mower OF his Own State, that the words 'cit-
liens OF the Ssste' should be }eft out, when
IL IS so caref nIiy used, and used in contra
distinction TO citizens OF the United States,
In the very sentence which precedes II. IL
is too clear for argument that the change in
phraseology was adopted Intentionally.
"Of the privileges and immunities ofthe
citizen OF the United States and OF the priv
ieges aud immuniiies OF the citizen OF the
State, and what they respectively are, we
will presently consider: but we wish TO
a !. .lx,f a faVyN Nfh A
are placed bv this clause under the protec-
tion OF the Federal Constitution, and that
the latter, Whatever they may be. are not
intended TO have any additional protection
by this paragraph OF the amendment. IL,
then, there Is a difference between the priv
ileges and immunities belonging TO citizen
of the United States as such and those be-
longing TO the citizen Of a State as such, the
latter must rest for their security and pro-
lection where they have heretofore rested,
so far as this paragraph is concerned, for
they receive no additional aid from It,"
"Wbat are the privileges and immunities
OF citizens OF the several States? We feel
no hesitation in conhDing these expressions
to those privileges and immunities which
are fundamental--whch belong Of right TO
the citizens OF all free governments, and
which have at all times been enjoyed by cit.
this Union from the time OF their becoming
free, independent. and sovereign. What
these fundamental principles are it would
be more tedious than difficult TO enumcrate.
"Tbey may all, however, be compre-
bepded under the following general heads:
Protection by the Government, with the
right 10 acquire and possess property OF
every kind. and TO pursue and obtain hap
piness and safety, subject, nevertheless, TO
such restraints as the Government may pre-
scribe for the general good OF the whole"
1Was 1t the purpose OF the trainers OF the
fourteenth amendment, by the simple de-
claration that no State shall make or enforce
any laws which shall abridge the privileges
and mmunites OF citizens OF the United
States, 10 transfer the security and protec-
ton Of all the civil rights which we have
mentioned from the States 10 the Federal
Government"
"Such a construction. followed by the
reversal OF the judgments Of the Supreme
Court OF Louisiana ia these cases, would
constitute tbs court perpetual censor
upon all legislation Of the States on the civil
rights OF its own citizens, with authority TO
nulIify such as IL did not approve as consist
ent with those rights as they existed at the
time OF the adoption OF this amendment.
The argument, we admit, Is not always the
most conclusive where 1t Is drawn from the
consequences urged against the adoption
OF particular construction OF an instru-
ment. But when, as In the case before us,
these consequences are so serious, so far
reaching, and peryading, so great depart
ure from the structure and spirit OF our
institutions; when the effect Is 10 fetter and
degrade the State Governments by subject
ing them to the control OF Congress in the
exercise OF mowers heretofore universally
conceded 70 them Of the most ordinary and
fundamental character; when, In fact, 1t
radically changes the whole theory OF the
relations OF toe State and Federal Govern
neuts to each other, aud of both these Gov
erDmeAts to tie people; the Argument has
force that Is irresisl itle In the absence OF
language which expresses this Ixlrpose too
clearly TO need construction.
We are convinced that no such results
were intended ty the Congress which pro-
posed these amendments, nor by the Gegis.
1atures OF the States whieh ratified them"
The Supreme Cont u the United States
thus proves itself q far iseiter friend and
advocate OF States riglas and home rule
than the Whig, aud puts an end to all the
Gne-spun theories Of our neighbor us to
the right Of Virginia 10 regulate suffrage TO
suit herself. We take 1t fer granted that
the Wing will "own up" aud let its read
ers know how far It's arguments havelais-
led them out OF the true path Of constili-
tional construction.
The Wing proceeds TO argue that Viz
gina will lose a congressman OF two be-
cause Der Constitution requires the pay
mpnt If n rotl ray ae n pIpreHUi site To