The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1896-05-19
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.
The Louisiana Separate Car Law is De-
Clared 10 be Valid.
THE ROAD DID NOT LEAYE THE STATE
In the Case Which Was Heard ana y"
Question Regarding the Interstate Com
merce Law Was Involyed-Georgia
sunday Rest Law Valid

WASHINGTON. ID. c., May S.-Ihe
Supreme Court to-day, in an opinion re"u
by Justice Brown, sustained the cohslllu-
tionality of the law ia Louisiana requiring
r. railroads OF the State TO provide sepA-
rafe cars for white and colored passeh-
gers. There was no interstate commeI'o
feature in the case, for the railroad upon
which the incident occurred slNlhs IISo
to me case-plessy against Ferguson
the East Louisiana railroad, was ahd -
operated wholly within the state. Inc
opinion states that by an analogy 10 lhe
laws of Congress and or many OF thc
States requiring the establishment Oh sep
arate schools for children OF the TWO
races. and other similar laws, the statute
i'm question was within the competency
OF the Louisiana Legislature, exercising
the police power OF the state. me Jug
meut OF the Supreme Court Of the state,
UNFOLDING the law, was therefore upheld'
Mr.. Justice Harlan announced very
yigorous dissent, saying that he saw
nothing but mischief IN all such laws.
Ia his view of the case, no power in the
land had the right TO regulate the en-
joyment OF civil rights upon the basis OF
race. 1t would be just as reasonable and
proper. he said, for States TO pass laws
requiring separate cars to be furnished Tor
Catholics and Protestants or for descend
ants Of those OF the Teutonic race ana
those Of the Latin race.
GEORGIA SUNDAY-REST LAW.
The validity and constitutonahty OF
the Sunday-rest law of the state OF
Georgia were sustained by the supreme
Court Of the United States to-day. l..
r. Hennington, superintendent OF trans
portatiou OF the Alabama Great Southern
railroad. was indicted in Dade county,
Ga. on Sunday March 1j 1891, for viola
ton OF the State law, which forDids the
running OF any freight trains in the state
on the Sabbath day. lie pleaded not
guilty. setting up in defence That the
statute, rs applied ~ the case, was IN
conflict with the provision OF the Fed
eral Constitution giving Congress power
10 regulate commerce among the States.
lie was convicted. and the conviction was
affirmed by the Supreme Court OF the
State. From that judgment, the case
came 10 the Supreme Court OF the United
states Mr.. Justice Harlan delivered the
opinion OF the Court. lt reviewed at
length the history Of the legislation. the
views Of authorities. and the decisions
pertinent thereto. and the conclusion
reached Is "that such law. although in
a limited degree affecting interstate com
merce is not for that reason needless
Jurisdiction. nor strictly a regulation OF
interstate commerce. but. considered IN
| its own nature IS an ordinary police regu-
latton. designed "a secure the well-being
and nromote the general welfare OF the
| neonIe within the state by which II was
established and therefore not Invalid
/ bv force alone Of the Constitution OF the
/ United States"
| TWO JUSTICES DISSENT.
| Chief Justice Fuller announced that
| himself and Justice White were unable
| Ia concur I'm the conclusion Of the court
| Interstate traffic. he said, was national
| in its character, and could be subject
! only 10 relations OF a uniform character.
| The statute in question. he said, amount
| ed TO a regulation Of Interstate commerce.
| the enactment of which by the terms OF
| the Constitution was reserved to Con-
| rress alone. The claim that the statute
was passed In the exercise of the police
mower of the stats made no difference
! in the view Of the dissenting justices,
the result was the same. II 1t came IN
conflict with power to be exercised
! alone by Congress it must give way.
OTHER CASES.
The following cases among others, were
! disposed Of
lanes Murray alias Greasy jim ys.
| the State OF Louisiana. Murray was con-
| vlcted of murder, and his counsel asked
! the Supreme Court 70 grant new trlal
ON the ground that his rights were not
! duly recognized. I'm that the African race
! was Disseminated against IN constituting
the grand and petit juries for the term
of court at which he was tried. Justice
| Shirad stated that no error had Deeh
committed. and the judgment or the Su-
nreme Court OF the State was affirmed.
TIE fourth section of the Chinese eNclu'
sion law OF 1892 was construed by the
Supreme Court to-day the opening pelhe
read bv Mr.. Justice Shras. The question
! involved was whether or not Chinese
! persOn adjudged not entitled TO be"ithin
| the limits Of the United states may De
| sentenced to imprisonment for a year al
hard labor. and at the expiration OF that
| limit deported By a United States com
missioner. or whether It must be done IN
| accordance with law. Wing Wang, and
! other Chinese arrested In Michigan un-
der the law. were thus sentenced by tho
| United States commissioner before whom
they were examined. and they appealed
| TO the Federal Court for the Eastern
district of Michigan for release on wriis
| OF habeas corpus That court refused
tn release them, and they came 10 the
| Supreme Court. Justice Shiras said they
could not be disposed Of in that manner
| and the Judgment Of the Circuit Court
WAS reversed without prejudice TO the
right to hold and deport the appellants II