The Conway log cabin., 1901-04-16
As to Negro Jurors.

question, as applied. to the jury system. Fasting was indicted, tried and convicted in Perry coun- | ty of murder in the first degree. The principal contention in this case, for reversal, was because it was alleged the jury commissioners appointed to select the grand jury, which indicted Eastling, negro, selected no negroes to serve on the said jury, but excluded all colored people because of their race and color; and that fully one fourth of the population of the legal electors of Perry county were ne- groes, and that they had been ex- cluded from serving upon any jury for the past IS years, which, it was alleged, is a discrimination against the defendant and that such dis crimination is denial to him of the equal protection of the laws of the United States as set out in the Fourteenth amendment to the con- stitution.
 In his opinion, Chief Justice Bum said, in part:
 'It is sufficient to say, in the out set of the discussion of this partic- |.ular subject, that mere absence of negroes from the grand jufy cannot, of itself, be considered as suffi- cient showing to sustain the motion to quash on this ground. It must appear that the exclusion of the ne groes from the grand ~jury was brought about for the purpose solely of denying the equal protection of the laws to the defendant, or his race, on account of race or color.
 Primarily, the effect of the first section of the Fourteenth amend ment is to prohibit the states from making laws which discriminate against the negro race but recently emancipated when the amendment was adopted, and it has been so construed in many decisions of the federal supreme court. The pro- visions of this amendment have ref erence to state action exclusively and not to any action of private in- dividuals. If the subordinate off cers, (jury commissioners), whose duty it is to select jurors, fail to discharge their duties in the true spirit of the law, if they exclude all colored men solely because they are colored, or if the sheriff to whom the venue is given, composed of both white and eolored citizens, neglects to summon the colored ju- TOTS for the same reason, it can with no propriety be said that the de- fendant's right is denied by the state and cannot be enforced in the judicial tribunals. The court will correct the wrong, will quash the in- dictment of the panel, or if not, the error will be corrected in the supe- rior court.
 "The case is this: On motion to quash an indictment, it is purely a question of fact, to be proven, whether the equal rights of the de- fendant have been observed in the selection of .jurymen, and whether or not he has been discriminated against on account of solely of his race or color. If there are other lawful reasons for the exclusion, then the motion to quash will not be necessarily sustained. The cir cult court jury which tried him were composed wholly of white men, and that no negro had been a juror in Perry county in which a colored man was interested for Is years, falls short of showing that any civil right was denied or that there had been any discrimination against the defendant because of his color or race. The facts may ac- tually have been as stated and yet the jury which indicted him, and the panel summoned to try him, may have been impartially selected.
 ''Testimony, on the motion to auash. was introduced, and it was shown by the jury commissioners that they did not discriminate, in their selections, because of race or color, but chose the jurors for their efficiency and ability. The verdict of the jury was reversed, not on the ground that negroes were excluded from the jury, but on the ground that the evidence was not sufficient to convict of murder in the first de- gree.