Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser., 1885-07-24
Concerning the Selection of Juries

1t has been contended in some quarters
that the extra ordinary action of the young
counsel who We're appointed to defend the
negro, Howard Cooper, in availing them
selves OF a bare technicality to take his
case to the Supreme Court Of the United
States, which led to his summary execu-
tion, was in some measure justified by a
purpose of obtaining an adjudication up
on the abstract question as 20 where the
responsibility rests for the colored popu-
lation not getting into the jury boxes in
Baltimore county. If we are not mistaken
that question has already been decided
by the Supreme Court in the cases which
came up from Virginia some years ago
We think it was then decided that, if
State. By lao, excl-de negroes from jury
service, then a criminal of that race, when
put upon trial in the courts OF such State,
shall have the right to transfer his case to
the Federal court for such State, in con-
formi'y with the provisions of the civil
rights bill ; but if there is no law in the
State warrauting such exclusion, then any
judge of court, who shall exclude them
on account of race, color, or previous con-
dition of servitude shall be liable to in
dictment under the civil service act, and
tried in Federal court and if it can be
affirmatively established that the indict-
ed judge has excluded colored jurors for
such cause alone, he will be liable 10 the
penalty provided by the act.
Several judges of the State courts of
Virginia were indicted for this course
several years ago, but when their cases
came to trial it was found impossible to
prove that the exclusion of negroes from
juries was due to prejudice against their
race, color or previous condition OF servi
tude, rather than to an impartial consid-
Grafton of their lack of intelligence, sobri-
ETY. and integrity-the essential requisites
of the good men and true who are % be
put upon juries. The prosecutions were
therefore all abandoned
AS the TIMES took occasion to remark
some years ago when co,ored jurors were
first put into the panels in this county, the
laws Of Maryland require the judges to
select their juries from the body of the
county fairly and impartialy, with spe-
cial reference to the intelligence so5riety and
integrity' of the persons selected. This
law, we took occasion to say, could not
be regarded as IL any manner in conflict
with the civil rights act or the 14th amend
ment, and We then expressed tie opinion
tha', when the relative eI'igence, sobri-
ely aid integrity of the two races in this
county were taken into consideration. w it'll
the law governing the appointment Of
ju les, that, instead of the exclusion Of
colored jurors being presumptive evidence
OF race or color prejudice, the inclusion of
them in the pane's was strongly presump
tive evidence that their selection was due
t. race and color prejudice in their favor.
We have seen nothing since to alter our
opinion in that gard and We now again
affirm it.
There cannot be any reasonable doubt
that the judges of the Balti
more county court, who are honorable,
men, in their selection Of
200 men from the body of their county
with specin reference to their intelligence,
sobriety and integrity, as required by law,
found the most intelligent, sober and hon
est men among the white population of
that county and made their selections ac
1t is fact, however, that un-
der the civil rights act and the adjudica-
tions of the Supreme Court, the U. S. Cir
cult Court for Maryland may take cogni-
zance of the matter and that the remedy
to the wrong, if any there has been, has
already been adjudicated to lie in that
direction. 1t is true that more recent |
decision of the Supreme Court has thrown
doubts upon the constitutionality of the
civil rights bill itself; but ~ any event, it is
manifest that the whole question pretend
ed to be involved in this case of Howard
Cooper has already been adjudicated by
the highest Federal tribunal. There was,
therefore, no possible justification fer the
action of his counsel in attempting to de-
lay indefinitely the just sentence of the
law in this case and, if there ever was a
sufficient apology for lynch law, it is found
in the case of Howard Cooper.
Attorney General Garland's opinion in