Richmond planet. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1883-1938, 1898-11-19

oSveral Negroes killed and wounded.
One white man killed aud several
wounded. ThursdaT there WIS also
come rioting. but condition Quoted -
From all information / have, i think
Federal Intervention too late DOW. It
seems the mobs were especially aux-
ious to get the Tolbsrts. and [ am in
formed that they are now safely out OF
their reach Intense excitsmsnt still
prevails there, but no violence now"
Here is q place where 9 United
tstes Collector OF Customs is not only
assaulted and injured. but is denied
the right to return to his home. But
this is the way the matter is dealt
with:
The Attorney General had another
conference with the President yester-
day morning in regard to the matter,
and che conclusion was promptly
reached that as the demonstrations
were not directed against the O Illector
OF Customs In the performance of his
duties as such. the governments had no
authority under the Constitution or
laws TO exercise its Federal authority.
Collector Tolbert was shot while away
from his home and on business entire
ly disconnected from that of his Office.
and under these circumstances, the
government, it is said, has not a shad-
ow OF . right to interfere.
II the Collector had been shot in the
discharge OF his official duties, and in
an Mort to enforce the laws OF the
United States the case would have
been been very different, aud the duty
OF The government would have been
clear. IN the present case, however,
/ IL IA aQih tho ~ -
were not directed against the execu-
ton Of the laws OF the United States
but against the Individual The case
would have been the same had rolbert
been shot on the highway as a robber
Ad Administration officials have no SYM
pRthy with the Carolina rioters, and
regard their acts with adherence, bus
up 20 this time it is said, there is no
evidence that would warrant any inter-
ference by the government"
This is a distinction without differ
ence It is the first time that we have
heard it stated that an official of the
ovOrnment was not en- official from
the time he received his commission
until the time for which it was given
expired.
But yielding that point. he is citi-
zen OF the United States. He was
wounded while exercising the rights
and privileges guaranteed by the Con-
stitution OF the United States. He is
denied the right to exercise the func-
lions of his Office as Collector OF Gus
toms of the United States.
Our point is that the government,
not only has the right, but that it is its
duty to interfere to protect the lives
and property of its citizens.
According to this ruling, the Presi-
dent Of the United States must depend
upon the local authorities for protec-
tion in any section of the country,
where he mavideem it advisable for him
Co recup crate. To surround himself
with body guard of any kind would
be to exercise a prerogaEive, not con-
ferrsd by the laws of this country. He
would not be in danger while acting as
President OF the United States, but as
private citizen.
This may be legal a construction of it
by apologists, but it will not be con-
strued by those who have taken the
time to examine into the matter.
The position of Attorney General
Griggs Is that Of the counsel for the
man who was killed by detective in
California, when he Was about to make
an attack upon the person OF one of
the United States Supreme Court JUS
tices. The detective had been detailed
Co protect this official on account OF
threats previously made.
The matter w6s contested IN the
courts with the result that this theory
was upset ana the detective was never
tried upon a charge of murder in the
courts of California.
But what about North Carolina? The
State Executive is said to have 'sgone
visiting" in neighboring state, the
city government of Wilmington is in
the hands Of the mob ?. What about
Wilmington, Mr.. Attorney General,
what about Wilmington, N. c..
The preamble of the Constitution of
the United States reads:
"We, the people of the United States
in order to form more perfect union.
ostuDllsHeu JUSTICES, lusur0 domestic
tranquility, provide for common de-
fence, promote the general welfare and
secure the blessings of liberty TO our.
selves and our posterity ETC."
This then was the purpose of the
constitution.
Article XIV reads:
nor shall any State deprive
any person of lie. liberty, or property
without due process of law; nor DENY
to any person within its Jurisdiction
the equal protection of the laws"
This then covers the case in question.
Have the ToLBERTs of South Carolina
and the city officials of Wilmington
been deprived of liberty? Have they
been denied the equal protection Of
the laws? If SO, Why is it that those
who are opposed to them can live
in peace and be undisturbed9 Why
are they not accorded equal protec-
tion2