Daily Kennebec journal., 1883-10-23
W.sHrxGroS ID. c.. Oct Is 1854

WAsHISGToN ID. c., Oct. Is, 1888.
Curiously enough, right upon the heels of
the late democratic success in Ohio, follows
decision of the Supreme Court of the United
States that the main provisions of the Civil
Rights Bill are unconstitutional. \ question
which il was thought settled forever by
the arbitrament of the sword and col gresson-
the front as question decidedly unsettled.
and the great doctrines of Federal rights and
State rights again must thrust themselves be-
fore the country with demand on the peo-
pie to decide which is to be superior The
decision may be legally correct, and no one
questions the honesty of the Supreme Court
but the decision is surprise and an unfor-
tunate one for those who had supposed the
great question of Civil Rights settled forever.
and for those whom it Immediately affects
Perhaps il may be fortunate one in the end.
The decision grew out of an appeal of a case
decided against a restaurant keeper in the
District of Columbia, who had refused
meal to a very respectable colored clergy
man, and other similar ones on the docket
While this decision must have been caused
by some peculiar construction or interpre-
tation of the Civil Rights bill, or of the laws
governing Federal and State Rights, it is an
tagonized by many able jurists already, as
wrong in the main and consequently unjust:
and the written dissent of Chief Justice Har-
Ian, not vet published, is looked forward to
with a great deal of interest Us likely 10 show
the issues thus made, and the apparent cause
for such decision.
Rnhcrt Ipuarsnll oe
yers, is out with strong condemnation of
the decision, arguing that it is wrong both in
letter and spirit. That the true meaning
and intent of the bill Of Civil Rights was to
guarantee to any citizen. of whatever color
the rights and privileges that belong TO any
other citizen, and that il all citizens cannot
have such rights and privileges in any part
Of the United States, then this is not free
country and that the war has been fought in
vain; that the country can and does
protect its citizens abroad and certainly ought
to protect them at home. He saws
in time of war this government has
a right to draft any citizen, TO put,
that citizen in the line of battle, and
compel him to fight for the nation. If the
government, when imperiled, has the right
to compel citizen, whether white or black.
to defend with his blood the flag. that citizen
when imperiled, has the right to demand pro-
lection from the nation. The nation cannot
then say. you must appeal to your State II
the citizen must appeal to the State for re-
dress, then the citizen should defend the
State and not the general government. and
the doctrine of State rights then becomes
complete" These are strong words but
they seem strictly true.
The Supreme Court has set the country
back fifteen years. and will be the mean. of
bringing these two dogmss of Federal and
State rights face to face again, as in the past
The question must be met. whether the
power Of the Federal government is superior
to that Of the States composing it, Can the
citizen of the United States be deprived IF
certain rights by stepping out of the confines
Of one State into another. when the constitu-
tion of his country and its amendments
and the intent and meaning of Con
gressional enactments have guaranteed TO
him these rights AWAY with such heresy
And yet such is the apparent construction OF
the decision nov rendered.
lfthese amendments of the constitution and
this law of Congress defining these amend
ments are comparative nuilties, then is il no,
plainly the duty of the people to settle for
ever by another amendment, unmistsksbl,
plain. that all rights pertaining to one citize n
of the United States shall be guaranteed and
maintained to erery citizen of the United
States and IN every part of the United States /:
If this cannot be done, the Federal Govern
ment 10. in fact, weak suhserviency to the
governments of the States. The old hide
bound democrats, both North and South. are
rejoicing with exceeding grea, joy over this
decision. The ex rebel is saying that the
Lost cause" was, after all. an honest one
and that he was fighting for the right one
IL this decision is to stand, without pro-
test or other action. who can gainsay
his opinion? The colored man, too. is
wide awake and excited over this sudden set.
back. and he looks again to the American
people to right his wrongs. wi it'll this difference
between the past and present: his