Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

No State shall deprive any person, &c. Are we to understand this as prohibiting only such acts as are done by the complete State government, acting through all its departments? Clearly not. For, if so, a class of citizens or of persons, may be effectually deprived of the equal protection of the laws, by the action of some one of the departments of the State government, and no remedy can be had, because the act is not that of the State. If the word "State, " means all the departments of the State government, then it is easy to see that the constitutional provision under consideration, may be rendered entirely nugatory. Thus the Legislature may fail to provide the necessary laws for the protection of a class of persons, or the judiciary may refuse to enforce such laws if enacted, or the executive may so administer them as to deny the equal protection guaranteed by the Constitution. It would seem, therefore, that whenever, by the action of any department or officer of the State, any person or class of persons are deprived of the equal protection of the laws, this clause of the Constitution is violated, and for any and all such cases Congress may provide a remedy. The State must be held to have denied the equal protection of the laws, when her officers, servants or agents have done so.

§ 16. It must be conceded that the question of the nature and extent of the power of Congress under the Constitution, as recently amended, to enact laws to protect and enforce the right to vote in the several States, is one of great importance, and of considerable difficulty. As we have seen, this question has not yet been settled by a decision of

the Supreme Court, although the decision of that Court in the Slaughter House cases, certainly indicates that the Court is inclined to construe the recent amendments to the Constitution, as conferring power upon Congress to protect only the newly enfranchised people, and not as authorizing Congress to legislate generally for the regulation and enforcement of the right of suffrage in the States. And this view is fully sustained by the very recent decision of the Circuit Court of the United States for Louisiana. (The United States vs. Cruikshank, 13, Am. Law Reg. (N. S.) 630.) In this case a very learned and elaborate opinion was pronounced by Mr. Justice Bradley, of the Supreme Court, and as this is the latest and most authoritative exposition of the law upon this subject, it will doubtless be generally adopted and followed, unless it shall be reversed or modified hereafter by the Supreme Court. (a)

§ 17. By the fourth section of the first article of the Constitution, Congress is empowered to make "regulations" concerning the "times, places and manner of holding elections for Representatives in Congress." If the power to provide for a fair registration and election for Representatives in Congress, is not derived from the Fourteenth Amendment, may it not be found here? Everything which pertains to the manner of holding such elections, is included within the power here conferred, and no sound reason is perceived why a statute requiring that all legal voters at such elections shall be en

(a) This case was one arising upon an indictment framed under the Act of Congress of May 31, 1870, commonly called the enforcement

act.

[ocr errors]

titled to registration, and to be permitted to vote upon equal terms, is not a regulation of the manner of conducting the election.

This question of the power of Congress to pass laws to prevent or punish frauds in an election for Representatives in Congress, is not discussed in any of the cases to which we have referred. It would seem that the government of the United States, like all other governments, should possess the power to protect itself against frauds and crimes aimed at the purity of its legislative department.

§ 17a. Since the publication of the first edition of this work, the cases of the United States vs. Reese et al., (92 U. S. 214) and the United States vs. Cruikshank, et al.,, (ibid 542) have been decided by the Supreme Court of the United States. By these cases the following important legal propositions have been settled.

1. Only such rights and immunities as are created by or dependent upon the Constitution of the United States are within the protecting power of Congress. (U. S. vs. Reese et al, supra.)

2. The Fifteenth amendment to the Constitution only operates to prevent the States or the United States from discriminating against a voter on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. (ib.)

3. Prior to said amendment there was no guarantee against such discrimination. Now there is. "It follows" says the Court by Waite, Chief Justice, "that the amendment has invested the citizens of the United States with a new constitutional right,

which is within the protecting power of Congress. That right is exemption from discrimination in the exercise of the elective franchise on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude. This, under the express provisions of the second section of the amendment, Congress may enforce by appropriate legislation." (ib.)

4. The power of Congress to legislate at all upon the subject of voting at State elections is derived from the fifteenth amendment. The effect of Art. 1, Sec. 4, of the Constitution in respect to federal elections, was not before the Court. The third and fourth sections of the Act of May 31, 1870, (16 Stat. 140) not being confined in their operation to unlawful discrimination on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude, are beyond the limit of the fifteenth amendment and unauthorized. (ib.)

5. The right of the people peaceably to assemble for the purpose of petitioning congress for a redress of grievance, or for any thing else connected with the powers and duties of the national government is an attribute of national citizenship, and as such, under the protection of, and guaranteed by the United States. (The United States vs. Cruikshank, et. al.,. supra.)

6. The fourteenth amendment prohibits a State from depriving any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law, and from denying to any person within its jurisdiction, the equal protection of the laws; but it adds nothing to the rights of one citizen as against another. It simply furnishes an additional guaranty against any encroachment by the

States upon the fundamental rights which belong to every citizen as a member of society. The duty of protecting all its citizens in the enjoyment of an equality of rights was originally assumed by the States and it still remains there. The only obligation resting upon the United States is to see that the States do not deny the right. This, the amendment guarantees; but no more. The power of the national government is limited to the enforcement of this guaranty. (ibid.)

7. To bring a case within the operation of the sixth section of the enforcement act of May 31, 1870, (16 Stat. 141) it must appear that the right, the enjoyment of which, the conspirators intended to hinder or prevent, was one granted or secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States. If it does not so appear, the alleged offense is not indictable under any act of Congress.

A conspiracy to prevent persons described as persons of African descent and persons of color, from exercising their right to vote, is not punishable by any act of congress, unless it be alleged and shown. that the intent of the accused was to prevent the exercise of such right on account of the race, color or previous condition of servitude of such persons. (ib.)

8. The Constitution of the United States has not conferred the right of suffrage upon any one, and the United States have no voters of their own. (Ibid, and see Minor vs Happensett, 21 Wall., 178.) *

§ 18. By the 21st section of the Act of Congress,

* Since this (second) edition was in type the Supreme Court, U. S. has affirmed the power of Congress to make regulations concerning the election of representatives in Congress, and to punish State election officers for their violation. The national election laws are held constitutional. (Ex parte, Seibold et al. Ex parte, Clark, Oct. term, 1879.)

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »