New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-10-17
TIE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT.

THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACI.
For nractical purposes the Civil Rights act OF
1871 has ever been dead letter. The few and
isolated efforts made to enforce it by legal pro-
cess have barely served to call attention to It's
existence 1t can hardly be doubted that these
efforts. and occasional demands by cOlored cltl-
zcns under the authority Of the law, have tended
70 irritate public feeling to keep alive antago-
nism between the races, and to postpone that
gradual oblitcratiOn Of unreasonable race DIS
tinctions which the march OF events since emah-
cipation has tended to bring about Thus the
act though sincerely intended to benefit the
colored pcoplc, has really done them more harm
than good. In quarters where public opinion
supports no unjust discrimination against them,
no such law was needed, and it could be OF no
real service. In quarters where old prcjudices
prevailed, and public opinion sustained UNJUST
determinations, the law has been practically IN
effective to overcome those prGjudiccs, but has
often intensified them. The enforcement by
law of a right to the enjoyment OF the accom-
"mOdatiOns, advantages facilities and prlVl-
"lcges of inns, COnveyanCcs on land and water
" theatres, and other places OF public amuse-
@mcnt is in the nature Of things impractlcable
A man or woman cannot afford To get out
writs, and bear the cost of suits, every time
bed in hotel, ticket to u theatre, or a seat in
n particular railroad car is refused. Least OF all
can comparatively poor and friendlcss class
of citizens afford the loss of time and money
which would be involved by a general and per-
sistrnt endeavOr 10 enforce such rights by legal
process. Hence it was from the first inevitable
that i'm localities where public opinion was adj
verse TO the purpose Of tho law, ii would be
commonly disrcgardcd, and the occasional
efforts to enforce it would fail TO change the
prevailing custom.
All this was pointed out when the Civil
Rights bill was pending, by some of the most
earnest and truc-hcartcd friends of the colorcd
people. 1t is not nccdiul now to recall the
names of many who expressed this opinion III
debate in public Journals and in daily inter
course They urged that it was not an act OF
true kindness To the colorcd people 10 take any
step that would tend to keep alive unrcasOning
prejudice against them; that their free admls-
sion to the enjoyment of the facilities in question
could only come through the fading Of such
prejudice and that positive law would be found
ineffective for good where public sentiment was
still unfricndly. The objection that the meas
ure was not warranted by the Constitution, be-
cause not in pursuance of the amendments upon
which il was based, was also made in vain. II
is to be noticed that majority Of the Rcpub-
lean votes against the measure, when il was
pressed by General Butler in 1874, were cast by
Republicans from the Southern States. But it
was made serious charge against Speaker
Blaine that he did not heartily favor the BILL and
vote against it by Representative Phelps of
a. Il, fat b. vt al,
ton by seven majority. Yet no one could rca-
sonably doubt that these men were true hearted
advocates of full justice to the cOlorcd people,
as were the many prominent Republicans who
denied the wisdom or the constitutionality of
the measure in the form presented.
Experience ha, shown that the measure has
been ineffective for good, and that it has tended
to keep alive prcjudiccs of race at the South.
Now the Supreme Court holds that the act was
not warranted by the Fourteenth Amendment,
because that amendment is prOhibitory on the
States only and the legislation authorized to
/" be adopted by Congress for enforcing that
"amcndmcnt is not direct legislation on the
"mattcrs respecting which the States are pro-
"hbitcdn From this opinion Justice Harlan
only disscntS, and the grounds of his dissent are
to be filed hereafter. But the Court embraces
such Republicans rs Chicf-Justico Waite and
Justices Miller, Bradley, Woods, Matthews,
Gray and Blatchford, who appear to have con-
Cured in tho decision. 1t will probably meet
the approval of very large majority of Rcpub-
licans, not because they wish to sec the colorcd
people denied any part Of their rights, but be-
cause they wish to sec those rights fully en-
ioycd without controversy in every part of the
land. Nothing can bring about that desirable
result except an improvement Of public scnti-
mcnt in certain portions of the country. That
change of public scntimcnt-thc decay and OBJ
liberation of prejudice which denies privileges
to a colorcd man merely because he is a colorcd
man, regardless of his character or intelligence
his manners or wOTth-wil not be retarded, but
fastened we fully believe, by the removal of
an irritating law that cannot be enforced from
the list of valid statutes.