Daily Republican., 1883-10-16
UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
The civil Rights Bill Declared Un.
csnstltutlOnAl by tho Supreme Q

WASHINGTON, October Is The most i'm
pOrtant decision rendered by the supreme
Court Of the United tates to-day was tina
In the i've cases commonly known a3 thu
Civil Rights cases, which were submitted Il
the Court on printed arguments about veal
ago.
These cases were all based on the first and
second sections Of tae Civil Rights act o
1879, and were prosecutions under that act
for not admitting certain colored people "a
equal accommodations and pri sileKes In Inns
or hotels. In railroad cars and IN theatres
The defence set up In every case WAS the al.
legged unconstitutlonality Of the law.
| The Court, In long and carefully prcpar.
cd opinion by Justice Bradley, holds -
First-1'hat Congress had no Constitutional
authority to pass the sections Ia question, un-
der either the Thirteenth or Fourteenth
Amendments Of the Constitution. Second--
That the Fourteenth Amendment Is prohibit
tory upon the States only, and that the iegis-
latiOn authorized to be adopted by Congress
for enfJrcfng that Amendment is not direct
legislation on tho m alters respecting which
the states are prohibited from makkpS or CO.
forcing certain laws, or doing oeFt&sisEcts, but
Ia corrective legislation, necessary Or proper
for counteracting and redressing the effect OF
such laws or acts; that, In forbidding the
States, for example, 70 deprive any person OF
life, liberty or property without due process
Of law and giving Congress power to enforce
the prohibition, 1t was not Intended to give
Congress power to provide due process of law
for the protection of life, liberty and proper
~, (which wonld embrace almost ali subjects
Of legislation), but to provide modes ol re-
dress for constructing the operation and ef.
feet Of State laws obnoxious to the prohbi-
ton.
Third, That the Thirteenth Amendment
gave no power to Congress TO pass the sec
tons referred to, because that amendment
relates to slavery and involuntary servitude,
which It abolishes. and gives Congress power
to pas laws for its enforcement tnat this
power only extends to the subjectmattcr OF
the amendments itself, namely slavery and
involuntary servitude and the necessary incl
dents and consequences of those conditions
that 1t has nothing to do with different races
or colors, but only refers to slavery-,he legal
equality Of different races and class ofcitl-
zens being provided for In the Fourteenth
Amendment, which prohibits the States from
doing anything TO interfere with such equal
ity that II Is no Infringement Of the 1'hir-
teenth Amendment to refuse w any person
the equal accommodations and privilege Of
an Inn or a place Of public entertainment
however 1t may be In violation Of his legal
rights +; that II inn 0ses upon him no badge OF
slavery or involuntary servltude, which imply
some sort Of subsection Of ono person to an
other, and the incapacity incident thereto,
such Ms inability to hold property, make
contracts, to be parties IN courts. &c, and
that II the original OWL Rights act, which
abolished these incapacities, might be sup.
ported by the Thirteenth Amend ment, it
does not, therefore, follow that the act OF
1875 can be supported by II.
fOurth. That this decision affects only the
validity of tho law In the States and not
in the Territories or the District of Colum-
bia. where the leg lslatiye power Of Congress
is unlimit'd d, and 1t does not undertake to
decide what Congress might or might not do
under the power TO regulate commerce with
foreign nations and amongst the several
States, the law not being decisive with any
OpiDion Of the Court that the first and se-
c0nd sections of the act Of Congress of March
LIST, 1875, entitled AN act to protect all citi-
zens IN their civil and legal rights are un-
constitutional and void ndjudgn ent should
be rendered upon the indictments accord
ingly.
At the conclusion of the reading of JUS
tice Bradleys opinion, which occupied more
than an hsur, j stice Harlan said that under
ordinary circumstances, and in an ordinary
ca Sc, he should hesitate to set up his indt
vidual opinion In opposition to that OF his
eight colleagues but, in view OF what he
thought the people ofthis country wished to
accomplish, what tn tried to accomplish.
and what they believed they had accom-
plished by means of this legislation, he
must express his dissent from the opinion Of
the Court.
He had not time since hearing that opin-
ion to prepare statement OF the grounds Of
his dissent, but he should prepare and file
one as soon AZ possible, and In the
desired to put upon record
this expression Of his individual judy
ment.