204 



CONGEESS, UNITED STATES. 



second section of the bill as affording discrim- 

 inating protection to colored persons, as pro- 

 viding for counteracting forbidden legislation 

 by imposing fine and imprisonment upon legisla- 

 tors who may pass conflicting laws, he said: 

 " But, sir, there is another answer, in my judg- 

 ment, more conclusive, to all these objections 

 to this second section, which is the vital part 

 of the bill. "Without it, it would scarcely be 

 worth the paper on which the bill is written, 

 a law. without a penalty, without a sanction, is 

 of little value to anybody. "What good does it 

 do for the Legislature to say, ' Do this, and for- 

 bear to do that,' if no consequence is to follow 

 the act of disobedience ? This is the vitality of 

 the bill. "What is the objection that is made to 

 it, and which seems even to have staggered 

 some friends of the measure ? It is because it 

 reads in the first section that any person who 

 ' under color of law ' shall commit these offences 

 shall be subject to the penalties of the law. 

 Suppose those words had been left out and the 

 bill read, 'any person who shall subject any 

 inhabitant of a State to different punishment by 

 reason of his color shall be punished,' would 

 there have been any objection to the bill then ? 

 That is the way most criminal laws read. That 

 is the way the law punishing conspiracies 

 against the Government reads. If two or more 

 persons conspire together to overthrow the 

 Government, or by force to resist its authority, 

 they are liable to indictment, and, upon convic- 

 tion, to imprisonment in the penitentiary and 

 to heavy fine. "Would the fact that the persons 

 engaged in the conspiracy were judges or Gov- 

 ernors or ministerial officers, acting under color 

 of any statute or custom, screen them from 

 punishment ? Surely not. 



u These words ' under color of law ' were in- 

 serted as words of limitation, and not for the pur- 

 pose of punishing persons who would not have 

 been subject to punishment under the act if 

 they had been omitted. If an offence is com- 

 mitted against a colored person simply because 

 he is colored, in a State where the law affords 

 him the same protection . as if he were white, 

 this act neither has nor was intended to have 

 any thing to do with his case, because he has 

 adequate remedies in the State courts ; but if 

 he is discriminated against under color of State 

 laws, because he is colored, then it becomes 

 necessary to interfere for his protection. 



"The assumption that State judges and other 

 officials are not to be held responsible for vio- 

 lations of United States laws, when done under 

 color of State statutes or customs, is akin to 

 the maxim of the English law that ' the king 

 can do no wrong.' It places officials above the 

 law. It is the very doctrine out of which the 

 rebellion was hatched." 



Mr. Johnson, of Maryland, in opposition to 

 the bill, said : " Now, what does this bill do ? 

 It says that every man born within the United 

 States, whether born as a slave or not for it 

 is not prospective, operating only upon those 

 who may be born subsequent to the abolition 



of slavery in the United States but whoever 

 was born at any time, though born in slavery, 

 is to be considered a citizen by reason of the 

 fact of his being born alone. The States where 

 slavery existed declared, at the time of the 

 birth, if he was born of a slave' mother, that he 

 was a slave. The constitutions and laws of the 

 States, undisputed, declared I mean the States 

 in which slavery existed that no descendant 

 of a colored mother, whether she was free or 

 not, was to be considered a citizen by virtue of 

 birth ; and yet my friend from Illinois, and the 

 Congress of the United States in passing this 

 bill, have declared that those who were born in 

 a state of slavery, who were never citizens as 

 long as that condition existed, who were pre- 

 vented from becoming citizens by the constitu- 

 tion of the State in which they resided, which 

 has never been changed, shall, by force of this 

 enactment, be considered as citizens of the Uni- 

 ted States, and of course for all purposes. If it 

 be true that whether birth is to give citizenship 

 of the United States depends upon the fact 

 whether the party born by the laws of the 

 State in which he is born becomes a citizen of 

 that State, then I should like to know where is 

 the authority in Congress to interfere with what 

 the State has done in the past, or may be doing 

 in the present, or may do in the future, unless 

 it can be accomplished under the constitutional 

 amendment." 



The debate on the message was continued 

 by Messrs. Cowan, Stewart, "Wade, Brown, 

 Doolittle, and others, when the question was 

 taken on the passage of the bill, " the objections 

 of the President of the United States to. the 

 contrary notwithstanding," and the vote re- 

 sulted as follows : 



YEAS Messrs. Anthony, Brown, Chandler, Clark, 

 Conness, Cragin, Creswell, Edmunds, Fessenden, 

 Foster, Grimes, Harris, Henderson, Howard, Howe, 

 Kirkwood, Lane of Indiana, Morgan, Morrill, Nye, 

 Poland, Pomeroy, Eamsey, Sherman, Sprague, 

 Stewart, Sumner, Trumbull, Wade, Willey, Wil- 

 liams, Wilson, and Yates 33. 



NAYS Messrs. Buckalew, Cowan, Davis, Doolittle, 

 Guthrie, Hendricks, Johnson, Lane of Kansas, Mc- 

 Dqugall, Nesmith, Norton, Riddle, Saulsbury, Van 

 Winkle, and Wright 15. 



ABSENT Mr. Dixon. 



The President pro tempore thus announced 

 it : " The yeas being 33, and the nays 15, the 

 bill has passed the Senate by the requisite con- 

 stitutional majority, notwithstanding the objec- 

 tion of the President to the contrary." 



On April 9th the bill and message were re- 

 ceived by the House from the Senate. A mo- 

 tion was made to lay the same on the table, 

 and lost yeas 37, nays 122. The question of 

 the passage of the bill was then taken and de- 

 cided as follows : 



YEAS Messrs. Alley, Allison, Delos R. Ashley, 

 James M. Ashley, Baker, Baldwin, Banks, Barker, 

 Baxter, Beaman, Benjamin, Bidwell, Boutwell, Bran- 

 dagee, Bromwell, Broomall, Buckland, Bundy, 

 Reader W. Clark, Sidney Clarke, Cobb, Colfax, Conk- 

 ling, Cook, Cullom, Darling, Davis, Dawes, Defrees, 

 Delano, Deming, Dixon, Dodge, Donnelly Eckley, 



