208 



CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



nand liiin over to the Federal judge. It is 

 much less than I should have wished for my- 

 self; but, as the House had chosen to so limit 

 it, we though it not wise to undertake to 

 change it. 



" The fifth section of course explains itself, 

 as to not repealing any former law. 



" The sixth section provides for an inquiry 

 into the character and conduct of persons who 

 may be summoned to sit on juries in cases 

 arising under the provisions of this act. There 

 is an amendment which seems to be a mere ver- 

 bal one, but which carries a great deal of effect 

 in it, in the sixth section, which I did not call 

 attention to in that connection. 



"As the House passed the bill, this inquiry 

 into the conduct of juries was only in suits or 

 prosecutions based upon this act. All civil 

 suits, as every lawyer understands, which this 

 act authorizes, are not based upon it ; they are 

 based upon the right of the citizen. The act 

 only gives a remedy. The suit, therefore, in 

 the technical sense, instead of being based 

 upon the statute, as it would be if it were debt 

 for a penalty, is a suit arising under the 

 statute, and the consequence would be, when 

 you come to get before a judge and undertake 

 to challenge a jury, without inserting the 

 words ' arising under ' the provisions of this 

 act, as well as based upon it, any private party 

 would find himself debarred of having this 

 inquiry made for his protection at all, and it 

 would be only in criminal prosecutions based 

 upon the provisions of the statute that this 

 challenging of jurors could occur. "We thought 

 it important, therefore, to use words which 

 would enable a judge in all the cases of civil 

 redress to see that the party aggrieved should 

 have a pure and uncontaminated jury. 



" The last clause of this last section is also 

 of considerable importance, and I ought to 

 explain it to the Senate. It provides that 

 'the act entitled "An act defining additional 

 causes of challenge, and prescribing an addi- 

 tional oath for grand and petit jurors in the 

 United States courts," approved June 17, 

 1862, be, and the same is hereby, repealed.' 

 That act provides that it shall be a good cause 

 of challenge, upon suitable and proper inquiry 

 made in the way pointed out by the statute, 

 to any grand or petit juror, that he has been 

 engaged in the rebellion. This section repeals 

 that act, so that it will be no disqualification 

 in cases arising under this act, or arising under 

 any other .act in the courts of the United States, 

 either criminal or civil, hereafter, that the per- 

 son summoned as a juror and who is proposed 

 to be put in the panel has been engaged in the 

 rebellion; so that in no possible case can 

 participation in the late rebellion be made the 

 ground for setting aside a juror. I am bound to 

 say that that does not meet with my individual 

 approval, but I am instructed by the commit- 

 tee, and shall do so with pleasure, to report 

 the bill in that respect as it stands. 



"This, Mr. President, explains, I believe, 



the general scope, and, perhaps I might say, 

 the detailed operation of this bill. I feel some 

 confidence in saying that, upon discussion, I 

 think it will turn out that this bill is clearly 

 within the provisions of the Constitution of 

 the United States, and in respect to the matters 

 upon which it operates, and over which it 

 undertakes to exercise sway, it is much more 

 moderate and limited in its application and in 

 its remedies and punishments than the state of 

 the case if it be one-half as bad as the news- 

 papers in the Southern States, of all parties, 

 collating and putting together their facts, rep- 

 resent the case to be, it is much more moder- 

 ate and limited than the case would justify." 



Mr. Trumbull, of Illinois, said : "I am sorry 

 that, while a bill of so much importance is un- 

 der consideration, the Senate is so thin, and 

 should give so little attention to the principles 

 which are involved in it ; principles which go 

 to the foundation of the Government ; princi- 

 ples which, if carried out, may change the 

 character of the Government. Whether it 

 may be best to change the character of the 

 Government is a very serious question for the 

 consideration of the American people. It 

 should not be lightly done. "Whether we have 

 done so in the amendments which have been 

 made to the Constitution of the United States 

 since the war, is a question that deserves, and 

 should receive, serious consideration, before, 

 by legislation, we adopt a policy that virtually 

 does make such a change. 



"Mr. President, the Government of the 

 United States was formed for national and 

 general purposes, and not for the protection of 

 the individual in his personal rights of person 

 and property. The rights of individuals were 

 left, when the Constitution was formed, to the 

 protection of the States. It was thought by 

 the men who made the Government that per- 

 sonal liberty could be more safely left to the 

 protection of the local authorities of the States 

 than be conferred upon the General Govern- 

 ment. Hence, when the Constitution of the 

 United States was formed, it was formed for 

 general purposes, for the purpose of establish- 

 ing a nation with national authority authority 

 to make war, to conclude peace, to make 

 treaties, to regulate commerce between the 

 States and with foreign governments, and to 

 do various things of a national character ; but 

 the protection of the individual citizen was 

 left to the States, except that there is a clause 

 in the Constitution of the United States which 

 declares that the citizens of each State shall be 

 entitled to all the privileges and immunities of 

 citizens of the several States. That was a pro- 

 vision of a national character, too. 



"After the Union was formed, the whole 

 power of the Government was pledged to de- 

 fend the rights of an American citizen against 

 improper encroachments by foreign powers ; 

 and, inasmuch as the right of the States to pro- 

 tect their citizens outside of their limits was 

 conceded to the Federal Government, the Fed- 



