The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1882-11-17
had carried New York and Pennsylvania
for the Dcmocratsf M
Judge Hughes's Instructions.

A gentleman familiar with the decisions
Of the courts as TO the act Of Congress
under which Judge HUGHEs issued last
week Instructions to the Federal SUPER
visors Of election, and who tells us that as
Judge iiuGuEs issued them not as a Judge
but as ministerial officer he (Judge
IIUGHEs) would not necessarily consider
himself bound by them In any case which
might come before him as judge, never
theless proceeds 10 set us and Judge
GEORGE l.. CHRISTIAN right as TO the deci-
sions aforesaid in the following article,
which OF course we feel bound TO publish :
II Is not the accepted opinion either oil
the Bench or the Bar that the enforcement
act OF May 81, 1870 embodied in the Re
vised Statutes OF the United States as Sec
tons 1904 ct sea-, and $500 ct seq, Is re-
uealed as TO Federal elections by the de-
cision of the United States Supreme Court
In the case OF United States rs. Reese ct al.
That was case I'm which judges Tor in
spcctors) OF election, in local election for
town officers IN Kentucky, were indicted
under some Of the sections OF this enforce
ment act. The Court held
"That the power OF Congress to legis-
late upon the subject OF voting AT STATE
ELECTIONS rests upon the fifteenth amend
ment; and can be exercised by providing
punishment only when the wrongful re-
fusal to receive the vote OF qualified
elector AT SUCH ELECTIONS Is because OF
race. color, or previous condition oil serVi-
tude."
IL held that Congress has not provided
by appropriate legislation '-for the pun
ishment of an inspector OF MUNICIPAL
ELECTION for refusing to receive and count
AT SUCH ELECTION the vote OF citizen OF
African descent
This was all that the Court did decide,
or could have decided, in the case before
it. In subsequent cases the same court has
treated the act as in force, intimating no.
thing TO the contrary as to any OF It's sec
tions. Since that decision Congress has
published a new edition OF the Revised
Statutes, which retains all the sections OF
the original enforcement act intact, with
ont any note or memorandum that they are
no longer parts OF the law OF the land. L
have no doubt that they are in full force as
TO Federal elections.
IL is true that some sentences in the
opinion of the Court in United States Us.
Reese Ct a., II detached from the context,
seem to have general Specification indi-
eating the nullity Of some of the sections OF
the act. but it was not in the mind OF the
Court to coDstrue them with reference to
Federal elections; and it did cOnstrue them
only with reference to State elections.
Judge Hughes himself held in the Pc
terSburq election cases that as TO State cleo
tons those sections Of the enforcement act
on which the Petersburg indictments were
founded could not be applied to State cleo
tons, Judge Bond differing with him; but
he had no thought, / SUPPOSE that the Sec
tons were invalid as to Federal elections.
II is elementary law that statute may be
constitutional in respect to some subjects
and unconstitutional as to others. Judge
Hughcs's late instructions TO marShals and
supervisors were expressly limited to con-
eressional elections.