Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1880-03-11

death he was Judge of the Eighth Judicial
Circuit. '.'.'."The Chinese are leaving Cali
fornia and going to New York and Phila-
delphia 10 large numbers 1900" A Mormon
church has recently been established in
Paulding county, Georgia. .'''''''"Georgia has
1877 900 spindles in cotton factories
than any other Southern State. '''''''"The
Crawfordville (Ga.) Democrat says it is true,
but not generally known, that Gen. Long
street is related to Gen. U. S. Grant.
STATE AND FEDERAL CASES.
On the lst instant, the Supreme Court of
the United States rendered decision in the
following cases, which have been regarded of
Importance since their removal on appeal to
that tribunal: ,.1~
Er parte Commonwealth of Virginia, peti
toner. This was petition for writ of man.
damus to compel Judge Rives, of the United
States District Court for the Western District
of Virginia, to restore to State authorities two
colored prisoners named Reynolds, indicted
in the State Courts for murder, and taken by
Judge Rives out of possession of State off.
cials and held for trial in Federal Court on
the grounds that they (the prisoners) had
been denied in State tribunals trial by com.
petentjurors without distinction of race or
color, such as the law of the State guarantees
to them. The removal of the case of prison.
ers to the Federal Court was based on section
GAL of the Revised Statutes. This Court
held that the section in question has reference
to legislative, not judicial denial of the
rights secured by law, and that the Constitu.
tion and laws of Virginia do not exclude COL
ored citizens from juries. The petition for
removal did not, therefore, present case for
removal under 641st section of the Revised
Statutes. The defendant in this case de-.
manded that some part of the jury should be
composed of his own race The denial of
that motion was not denial of the right Sc
cured to him by any law providing for equal
civil rights of citizens of the United States,
or by any statute, or by the 18th amendment.
A mixture in a particular case is not essential
to equal protection of the laws. 1t is right
to which any colored man is entitled that in
the selection of jurors to pass upon. his life,
liberty or property, there shall be no exclu.
sion Of his race because of color, but that is
a different thing from what was claimed as Of
right and denied in the State Court, viz. A
right to have the jury composed in part Of
colored men. From these principles it fol.
lows that the Federal Court had no rightful
Jurisdiction of the case, and that the writ OF
aandamus for the restoration of the prisoners
to the Stats authorities must be granted, and
the Court 80 orders. Justice Strong deliver.
ed the opinion. 'a
Ez parte Commonwealth of Virginia and
j. D. Coles, petitioner. This was petition
for writ of habeas corpus to bring before
this Court the case of Judge Coles, of Vir.
ginia, indicted in the Federal Court for the
western district of that State, for violation oi
the act of March 4th, 1875, in excluding
colored citizens from the jury lists on account
of race and color This Court holds that the
act under which Coles was indicted is fully
authorized by the 18th and 18th amendments
to the Constitution, and that it was Judge
Coles duty to obey that act If he failed to
do so he was properly liable to indictment in
the Federal Court. The petition for writ
of habeas corpus is therefore denied. Justice
Strong delivered the opinion. Justice Field
in dissenting opinion, concurred iu by Jus
tice Clifford, holds that the act under which
the petitioner was indicted, 80 far as it relates
to Jurors in State Courts, is unconstitutional
and void. and even if it were not, the indict.
mentr Tribes no offence under it, but is void
on its face. f1s hollaas that nothing can be
found in the Constitution or its amendments
which authorizes any interference by Con,
gress with States in administration of their
government and the enforcement of their laws
in respect to any matter over which jurisdic.
ton was not surrendered to the United States.
Nothing, in his judgment, could have great.
er tendency to destroy independency and
anatomy of States, reduce them to humilia
ting dependence upon Central Government.
engender constant irritation and destroy that
domestic tranquility which it was one of the
objects of the Constitution to insure, than the
doctrine asserted in this case; that Congress
can exercise coercive authority over judicial
officers of States in the discharge of their du-
ties under State laws. 1t will be only anoth.
er step in the same direction toward consoli-
dation when it assumes to exercise coercive
authority over Governors and legislators of
States. After reviewing the history of the
Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments and
declaring that they offered no warrant for the
act of Congress under which Coles was in.
dicted, Justice Field says those who regard
the independence of States in all their re-
served powers as essential to the successful
maintenance of our form of government, can
not fail to view with gravest apprehension for
the future, indictment in the Courts Of the
United States Of a judicial officer of a State
for the manner in which he has discharged
his duties under her laws, and of which she
makes no complaint. The proceeding is +
gross offense to the State. 1t is an attack up
on her sovereignty in matters over which she
has never surrendered her jurisdiction. The
doctrine which sustains it, carried to its log
ical results, would degrade and sink her to q
level of mere municipal corporation. For if
Congress can punish an officer of State for
the manner in which he discharges his duties
under her laws, it can fix the nature and ex.
tent of the punishment. 1t may imprison for
life or punish by removal from Office. To
these results Justice Field thinks the doctrine
held by majority Of the Court necessarily
leads. t94
A Danville, Va, dispatch of the 4th in
slant says that in accordance with the above
decision, Judge Rives has ordered writ for
the arrest of County Judges Coles, Parish
and others for trial at his Court in Lynch
burg, at the March term. .-..
In case from Tennessee, of revenue Of
6cer charged with committing murder while
in the discharge of his duties as such officer,
the Snnreme Court decides that the accused,