Daily Los Angeles herald., 1883-10-18
THE CIVIL RIGHTS BILL.
Its First Two Sections Declared Un-
constitutional.

WASHINGTON, Oct. l3.-The most i'm
portant decision rendered by the Su
premc Court of the United States to-day
was that in five cases commonly known
as the civil rights cases, which were sub.
mitted to the Court on printed argu.
ments about year ago. The titles OF
these cases aud the States from which
! they came, are as follows: No. |, the
United States against Mary Stanley,
from the United States Circuit Court for
| the District of Kansas; No. 2, the
United States against Michael Ryan,
| from the United States Circuit Court for
the District of California; No. 3, the
United States against Samuel Nichols,
from the United States Circuit Court for
the Western District of Missouri; No.
20, the United States against Samuel ID.
Singleton, from the United States Cir
cult Court for the Southern District of
New York; and No. 2S, Richard A.
Robinson and wife, against the Mem
phis 4 Charleston Railroad Company,
from the United States Circuit Court for
the District of Tennessee
These cases were all based on the first
and second sections of the Civil Rights
Act of 1875, and were respectively
prosecutions under that Act for not
admitting certain colored persons to
equal accommodations and privileges in
inns or hotels and railroad cars and
theatero. The defense set up in every
case was the alleged unconstitutionality
of the law. The first and second sec.
tions OF the Act, which were the parts
directly in controversy, are as follows;
SECTION |. That all persons within the juiis-
dctions of the United States shall be entitled TO
full and equal enjoyment of the accommodation,
advantages, facilities and privileges Of inns,
public eonveyanees on land and water, thoaters
and other places of public amusement, subject
only 10 the conditions and limitations established
by law, and applicable alike to every race and
color, regardless Of any previous condition Of
servitude.
Section . provides that any person
who violates the first section shall be
liable to forfeit of $500 for each ofTense,
to be recovered in civil action, and also
to a penalty of from $500 to $1,000 fine
or Imprisonment from thirty days to a
year, to be enforced in criminal prosecu-
tion. Exclusive jurisdiction is given to
the District and Circuit Courts of the
United States in cases arising under the
law.
The rights and privileges claimed by
and denied to colored persons in these
cases were full and equal accommoda-
ton in hotels, in ladies' cars on railway
trains and in the dress circle in theatres.
The Court, in long and carefully pre-
pared opinion by Justice Bradley, holds;
ThatlCongress had no constitutional eu-
thorty to pass the sections in question, under
either the Thirteenthor or Fourteenth Amendment
which is prohibitory upon States only, and that
tho legislation authorized to be adopted by Con
gress for enforcing either amendment is not
direct legislation on matters respecting which
States are prohibited from making or enforcing
sets, but is corrective legislation necessary or
proper for counteracting and redressing the
effect OF such law or acts.
Second-rhat In forbidding States, as, for eX-
ample, to deprive any person of liberty or prop.
erty without due process of law and giving Con
gress power to enforce the prohibition, it was not
intended TO give Congress power to provide due
process of law for the protection OF life, liberty
and property-which would embrace almost all
subjects of legislaton-but to provide the mode
of redress for counteracting the operation and to
enact State laws obnoxious to prohibition.
Third-That the Thirteenth Amendment gives
no power to Congress to pass the sections referred
to, because that amendment relates only to
slavery aud involuntary servitude which il
for its enforcement. This power only extends to
the subject matter Of the amendment itself
namely slavery aud involuntary seryitude and
the necessary incidents and consequences OF those
conditions, and has nothing to do with different
races colors, but only refers to slavery fhe
legal equality OF different races and classes OF
citizens being provided for in the Fourteenth
Amendment, which prohibits the States from
doing anything to interfere with such equality
1t is no infringement of the Thirteenth Amend.
ment to refuse TO any person equal accommoda-
tions and privileges in inns and places of public
entertainment, however 1t may be volative of
his total rgths, that it imposes upon him no
badge OF slavery or involuntary servitude, which
implies some sort Of subiecton of one person to
another and in capacity incident thereto, such
as inability TO hold property, to make contracts,
to be parties in Court, etc, and that II the origi-
nal Civil Rights Act which abolished these inca
pacities might he supported by the Thirteenth
Amendment, It dees not therefore follow that the
act of 1874 can be supported by 1t.
Fourth-That this decision affects only the
validity OF the law in the States. and not in the
Territories or District Of Columbia, whore the
le ,islatiYe power Of Congress is Unlimited and
it docs not undertake to decide what Congress
might or might not do under power to regulate
commerce with foreign nations and amongst the
several states, the law not being drawn with any
such view.
Fifth-That 1t is the opinion of the Court that
the first and second sections OF the Act of Con.
gress OF March l, 1875, entitled An Act to pro
tect All Cltkells IN tholf CIVIC ana legal rights,
are unconstitutional and void. Judgment should
be rendered upon the indictments accordingly
At the confusion of the reading of
Judge Bradley's opinion, which occupied
more than an hour, Justice Harlan said
that under ordinary circumstances and in
an ordinary case, he should hesitate to
set up his individual opinion in opposi.
tion to his eight colleagues, but in view
of what he thought the people of this
country wished to aecomplish-what
they tried to accomplish and what they
believed they had accomplished by
means of this legislation he must ex.
press his dissent from the opinion of the
Court. He had not had time since hear
ing that opinion to prepare a statement
of the grounds of his dissent, but he
should prepare to file one as soon as
possible, and in the mean time desired |
to put upon record this expression of his |
individual judgment.
Tho National Republican will contain |
tomorrow interviews with Fred Doug.
lass, Minister Langston, Professor Greener
and other prominent colored men on the
decision Of the Supreme Court upon the
Civil Rights Act. They agree in con.
,idering the decision matter fer regret.
Douglass thinks that it is step back.
ward, and places the United States in
he rear OF the civilized nations of Eu.
'ope and America.