The Aberdeen examiner. [volume] (Aberdeen, Miss.) 1866-current, 1883-02-01
The Supreme Court Decides the
''ku k1ux Law" TO be I'm
constitutional.
CAREFULLY PREPARED OPINION IN THE
''CIvIL RIGHTS" CASES.

A decision was rendered by the
supreme court of the United States
Monday, Jan. 21st in the important
constitutional cnse of the United
States against r. G Harris and
Others, brought upon a certificate of
division of opinion from the United
States circuit court for the western
district Of Tennessee
This is one of the four or five so.
called "civil rights Gases which were
submitted to this urt upon printed
briefs in the early part of the Octo>
Der term of 1880. There were at that
time number of vacancies on the
bench OF the conrt, and in view of
the importance of the questions in
v"lved, it was thought best to ret
aside the submission of these cases.
and ordered them to be argued oral
ly before a full bench. When the
present case came up for hearing in
November last no counsel appeared
for the defendants, and instead of
being orally argued it was again sub
mitted in behalf of the United States
on the printed brief of the solicitor
general. The interests OF the de-
PENDANTS and of the State of Tennes
see were left without argument to
the care of the court.
The facts out of which this litiga-
ton arises, so far as they are disclose
ed by the record and the pleadings,
are briefly as follows: Some time in
the year 1877 four citizens of Ten-
nessee-supposed to be colored men,
although not so described in the re.
cord-were arrested by one Tucker,
deputy sheriff, upon warrants issued
by justice of the peace, and held to
answer certain criminal charges, the
nature of which is not set forth.
While in the custody of the deputy
sheriff these four prisoners were at
tackled by an armed body Of men, of
whom the defendant Harris was one,
and so severely beaten. wounded, and
maltreated that p. M. Wells, one Of
their number, died from the effects
of his injuries. An indictment was
found by the grand jury against
Harris, and his associates of the at
lacking party, under section 5519 OF
the Revised Statutes, charging them
with conspiracy to deprive the four
prisoners above mentioned of their
right to the due and equal protection
of the laws of Tennessee, and of
their right to be protected from vio-
lence while under arrest The de-
PENDANTS demurred TO the indictment
on the grounds: First that the
otfenses created by section 5519 of
the Revised Statutes are not consti>
tutionally within the jurisdiction of
the courts of the United States, but
are cognizable by State tribunals
only and, second, that the said sec.
ton 5519,in 80 far as ii creates often
ses and imposes penalties, is in v,ola>
ton of the federal constitution, and
an infringement of the rights of the
several States and of the people
thereof. Upon trial of the case the
judges of the circuit court found
themselves unable to agree as to the
constitutionality of the section of the
Revised Statutes above referred to,
and certified the question to this
court for decision. The section is
as follows:
'If two or more persons in any
State or territory conspire, OF 90 in
disguise on the highway, or on the
premises of another, for the purpose
of depriving, either directly or indi-
rectly, any person or class of persons
of the equal protec ion of the laws,
or of equal privileges and immuni-
ties under the laws, or for the pur-
pose of preventing or hindering the
constituted authorities of any State
or territory from giving or securing
to all persons within such State or
territory the equal protection of the
law, each of such persons shall be
punished by fine of not less than
$500 nor more than $4,000, or by
with or without hard
labor, not less than six months, nor
more than six years, or by both such
fine and Imprisonment"
The decision of this court was am