Richmond planet. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1883-1938, 1922-06-24

tanned by the unanimous opinion Of
tho Court delivered by Mr.. Chief
Justice White in Home Telegraph &
Telephone Company v. Los Angeles,
227 U. s.. p. 278.
Tho head-note contains this state
ment:
Under the fourteenth amendment
the Federal judicial power can re-
dress the wrong done by a State
officer misueing the authority Of the
State with which he is clothed. Under
such circumstances inquiry whether
the State has authorized the wrong
is Irrelevant"
The Court distinctly overrules the
contention that "the prohibitions
and guarantees Of tho amendment
are addressed to and control the
States only in their complete gov
ornamental capacity" saying on the
contrary that the provisions of the
Amendment as conclusiyely fixed by
previous decisions are generic in
their terms, are addressed, Of course
to the States, but also to every per-
son whether natural or juridical who
is tho repository OF State power.
BY this construction the reach Of
the amendment is shown to be CO.
extensive with any exercise by q
State Of power, in whatever form
exerted )" :.
1t further deals with tho PROPOSE
ton That 1.-The terms Of the Four
teenth. Amendment reach only acts
done by State officers which are
within the scope Of the power con-
ferred by the State" and overrules
1t saying on tho contrary,
Here again the settled construc-
ton Of the amendment is that it
presupposes the possibility Of an
abuse by State officer or represent
ative Of the powers possessed and
deals with such contingency. 1t
provides, therefore, for case where
power uses that power to the doing
OF the wrongs which the amendment
forbids oven although the consum-
nation OF the wrong may not be
within the powers possessed If the
rendered possible or is efficiently
in the wrongdoer. "
.,,.-.. --s'-s-H'' .'-;;;s,as
adding:
''The amendment contemplates
the possibility Of State officers abus-
ing the powers lawfully conferred
upon them by doing wrongs prohib-
tied by the amendment"
Apply this language to the ques-
ton whether ''the equal protection
Of tho laws" is denied to the Me-
groes. If the jailer or officer in
charge OF the victim surrenders him
to the lynching mob, and all the
officers OF the State from the gov
ornor down take no steps to insure
him against the mob, Or to prosecute
the lynchers, do not these officers
use their power" to deny the pro-
lection Of the law? What protects
us all but the laws against crime and
their enforcement by the proper Of
ficers Of the law? Refusal to en-
force is denial OF protection.
The Chief Justice cites from Vir-
ginia V. Rives, 100 u. S. 31S:
"'It is doubtless true that State
may act through different agencies,
either by its legislative, it's executive
or it's judicial authorities; and the
prohibitions Of the amendment OK
tend to all action Of the State deny
ing equal protection of the laws,
whether it be action by one Of these
agencies Or by another"
Assuming that Congress is salts
fled that the occasion exists for the
exercise OF it's power to enfsrce the
provisions of the Fourteenth Amend
ment by appropriate legislation"
what form would that legislation
naturally and reasonably take? 1t
is not possible by any law to force
sheriffs and peace officers to resist
a mob, grand juries to indict, pros
ecuting officers to prosecute, wit
nesses to testify, or governors to
call out troops. Congress cannot
force a State and it's officers to do
their duty.
1t would be almost equally i'm
practicable to enforce law provid-
ing for the punishment OF State Of
ficials, who refuse Or neglect to do
their duty.
The only remedy is for Congress
to provide that the officers and
Courts of tho United States shall
stop into the gap left by the State
and its officers, and give that pro-
lection to which the citizen is enti-
tied and punish all who take from
him life, liberty or p1S2perty without
due process Of law. Congress may
also, following the analogy Of those
laws which impose upon city liza
bility for losses caused by riots,
punishment almost as old as the
common law, mako the communities
which tolerate lynching responsible
in damages, and these are the reme-
dies (which Congress has deemed ap-
propriate.
The argument under the Four
teenth Amendment may be stated
briefly.
Congress by the express language
Of the amendment is given power to
enforce it.
Whether at any given time the
occasions exists for the exercise of
that power is question of fact