The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-11-22


censed by law. The authority to maintain
them comes from the public. The colored
race being part of the public, representing
the power granting the license, why should
the colored people license a manager to open
his door to the white man and shut them in
the face of the black man? Why should they
be compelled to license that which they are
not permitted to enjoy? Justice Harlan
shows that Congress has the power to pre-
vent discrimination on account of race or
color on railways, at inns, and in places of
public amusements and has this power
under the Thirteenth amendment
THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT.
'In discussing the Fourteenth amendment,
Justice Harlan points out that a prohibition
upon State is not power in Congress or
the national government. but is simply
denial of power to the State; that such was
the constitution before the Fourteenth
amendment. He shows, however, that the
Fourteenth amendment presents the first in
stance in our history of the investiture of
Cogress with affirmative power by legisla-
ton to force an express prohibition upon the
States. This is an important point. 1t is
stated with great clearness, and defended
with great force. He shows that the first
amendment is of a distinctly affirmative
character, and that Congress would have
had the power to legslate directly as to that
section simply by plication, but that as to
that as we'll as the express prohibitions upon
the States, express power to legislate was
given.
There is one other point made by Justice
Harlan which transfxes, as with a spear the
decision of the court. 1t is this: As soon as
the Thirteenth and Fourteenth amendments
were adopted the colored citizen was enti-
tied to the protection of section 2, article 4,
namely: The citizen of each State shall be
entitled to all the privileges and mmunties
of citizens of the several States Now, sup
pose that colored citizen of Mississippi re-
moves to Tennessee. Then, under the sec
ton last quoted, he would Immediately be-
come invested with all the privileges and
immunities of a white citizen of Tennessee.
Although denied these privileges and immu-
mites in the State from which he emigrated,
in tine State to which he immigrates he could
not be Disseminated against on account of
his color under the second section of the
fourth article. Now is it posi- bic that he
gets additional rights by immigration? Is it
possible that the general government is I'M
der greater obligation to protect him in a
State of which he is not citizen than in
State Of which he is a citizen? Must he
leave home for protection, and after he has
lived long enough in the State to which he
immi@rates 10 become citizen there, must
he again move in order to protect his rights?
Must one adopt the doctrine of peripatetic
protection-the doctrine that the constitu-
ton is good only in transitu-and that when
the citizen stops the constitution goes on and
leaves him without protection?
Justice Harlan shows that Congress had
the right to legislate directly while that
power was only implied, but that the mo-
ment the power was conferred in express
terms, then, according to the Supreme Court,
il was lost.
There is another splendid definition given
by Justice Harlan-a line drawn as broad as
the Mississippi. 1t is the distinction between
the rights conferred by a State and rights
conferred by the nation. Admitting that
many rights conferred by a State cannot be
enforced directly by Congress, Justice Har-
Ian shows that rights granted by the nation
to an individual may be protected by direct
legislation. This is a distinction that should
not be forgotten, and it is a definition clear
and perfect.
"Justce Harlan has shown that the Su-
preme Court failed to take into consideration
the intention of the trainers of the amend
ment; failed to see that the powers of Con-
gress were given by express terms, and did
not rest upon implication; failed to see that
the Thirteenth amendment was broad enough
to cover the civil-rights act; failed to see
that under the three amendments rights and
nTIViIepRS conferred DV the nation n
a:+;1os of tba sayor.f c,o+os' - H. ~ ~
rights are under the perpetual protection of
the general government and that for their
enforcement Congress has the right to legis
late directly; failed to see that all implica-
tions are now in favor of liberty instead of
slavery; failed to comprehend that we have a
new nation with new foundation. with
different objects. ends, and aims. for the at
tainment of which we use different means
and have been clothed with greater powers:
failed to see that the republic changed front:
failed tc appreciate the real reasons for the
adoption OF the amendments, and failed to
understand that the civil-rights act was
passed in order that citizen of the United
States might appeal from local prejudice to
national justice
Justice Harlan shows that it was the OBJ
ject TO accomplish for the black man what
had been accomplished for the white man