Seattle daily post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1883-10-19
DAILY
POST : MTELLI GENCER
T19 CIvuL Rscnrs DECIsses.

POST : MTELI1GENCEk.
T1g CIVIL RsGMTs DEG1sses.
The recent decision Of the United
States Supreme Court upon the CIVIL
RIGHTS act il the topic of discussion
throughout the country. Newspaper
opinions ON the subject are valueiess.
save a. indicating the feelings Of sheir
management towards the eolored race.
II this decision takes from the colored
man one jot or little Of the rights guar
aptsed, or intended to be established
BY the thirteenth and fourteenth amend
menfs, We are sincerely sorry At this
writing, and With the abstract OF the
decision a. teIegraphed before a., We
cannot $50 that its effect will be to
abridge or deny any civil right OF the
oolorsd man. II We correctly interpret
the opinion, it declares that the four
tenth amendment does not grant TO
Congress the power Of passing laws on
matters which are essentially subjects
of State regulation and legislation, and
enforcing such snactments In and
through process of Federal Courts ex-
clusivsIy. Under the consultation, be-
fore this amendment was adopted,
differences between citizens OF the
same State we're only cognizaoie
by State Courts, the jurisdiction
Of the United States Courts not
being extended 70 this class Of cases.
II vas claimed that the fourteenth
amendment authorized the enactment
Of Law which, while ls0isiasing upon
the subject Of civil privileges, also pro-
vided that cases arising Hereunder
should b. triable only In Federal Courts.
This claim the Supreme Court say il
mot well based. The Court say that the
legislation authorized to be enacted by
Congress under the fourteenth amend
msnt IL NOT " 10 provide due process of
law for the protection Of life, liberty
and property" bat to pass laws redress
ing the operation Of State enactments
in conflict with the prohibitions Of the
amendment. In other words, the Court
10 Of opinion that only when by State
Law the rights guaranteed by the four
tenth amendment have been abridged
or nsgatived. has Congress tbs right TO
Iegislats. and then for remedial pur-
poses only, or. a. the Court say, Cor
rsotive legislation necessary or proper
for counteraction Of or redreesing such
Law or acts." The danger Of the decis-
ION. il there be any, 10 tho colored man
10 not that il divests him Of any rights
now enjoyed, nor that laws will be
passed in any Of the States which will
deprive him of them, but that cases
which may arise under existing State
laws will be triable In State courts, in
some Of which he may encounter greater
prejudicss than in those of the Federal
Judiciary. But We do not apprehend
any such result. The coIored race has
been emancipated fer twenty years. A
nsw generation has grown up North and
South. In the latter the friction Of
years has worn OF the rough edges left
vhsn tho system of slavery was shat
tered. Whites and blacks are today
working together In the rebuilding and
progress Of the South. The sentiment Of
tie people Of that region IL not in favor
Of injustice toward the colorsd race,
and 10 have no good reason TO assume
that the effect of this decision will be to
work any harm or hardship TO the col
ored people of the Nation. II will, how
svsr, form q subject Of comment fruit
ful a that Of Chief Justice fancy, years
ago, In the bred Scott case.