CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



159 



before it did not come within the constitu- 

 tional prohibition, the court says -. 



Having shown that the privileges and immunities 

 relied on in the argument are those which belong to 

 citizens of the States as such, and that they are left 

 to the State government for security and protection, 

 and not by this article placed under the special care 

 of the Federal Government, we may hold ourselves 

 excused from denning the privileges and immuni- 

 ties of citizens of the United States which no State 

 can abridge until some case involving those privi- 

 leges may make it necessary to do so. 



" But there are some Democrats, and, if I am 

 not mistaken, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. 

 Stephens) is one among the number, who are 

 willing to admit that the recent amendments 

 to the Constitution guarantee to the colored 

 citizens all of the rights, privileges, and immu- 

 nities that are enjoyed by white citizens. . But 

 they say that it is the province of the several 

 States, and not that of the Federal Govern- 

 ment, to enforce these constitutional guaran- 

 tees. This is the most important point in the 

 whole argument. Upon its decision this bill 

 must stand or fall. We will now suppose that 

 the constitutional guarantee of equal rights is 

 conceded, which is an important concession 

 for those calling themselves Jeffersonian Demo- 

 crats to make. The question that now pre- 

 sents itself is, has the Federal Government the 

 constitutional right to enforce by suitable and 

 appropriate legislation the guarantees herein 

 referred to ? Gentlemen on the other side of 

 the Hoiise answer the question in the nega- 

 tive ; but the Supreme Court answers the 

 question in the following unmistakable lan- 

 guage : 



Nor shall any State deny to any person within its 

 jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, lu 

 the light of the history of these amendments and the 

 pervading purpose of them, which we have already 

 discussed, it is not difficult to give a meaning to this 

 clause. The existence of laws in the States where 

 the newly emancipated negroes resided, which dis- 

 criminated with gross injustice and hardship against 

 them as a class : was the evil to be remedied by this 

 clause, and by it such laws are forbidden. 



If, however, the States did not conform their laws 

 to its requirements, then by the fifth section of the 

 article of amendment Congress was authorized to 

 enforce it by suitable legislation. We doubt very 

 much whether any action of a State not directed by 

 way of discrimination against the negroes as a class, 

 or on account of their race, will ever be held to come 

 within the purview of this provision. 



" It will be seen from the above that the 

 constitutional right of Congress to pass this 

 bill is fully conceded by the Supreme Court. 

 But, before leaving this subject, I desire to 

 call attention to a short legal argument that 

 was made by a distinguished lawyer in the 

 other end of the Capitol (if it is parliamentary 

 to do so) when the bill was under considera- 

 tion before that body : 



Mr. Carpenter: "Mr. President, as I shall vote 

 against this bill in its present form, I wish to state 

 very briefly why I shall do so. Without discuss- 

 ing other provisions of the hill, one makes it impos- 

 sible for me to vote for it, and that is the provision 

 in regard to State juries. I know of no more power 



in the Government of the United States to deter- 

 mine the component elements of a State jury than 

 of a State bench or of a State Legislature. I can see 

 no argument which shows the powers of this Gov- 



ment. 1 cannot vote for a bill as an entirety which 

 contains even one provision which I deem unconsti- 

 tutional. For that reason I shall vote against this 

 bill." 



u The Clerk will now read the fourth section 

 of the bill ; the section referred to by the dis- 

 tinguished Wisconsin Senator." 



The Clerk read as follows : 



SEC. 4. That no citizen possessing all other quali- 

 fications which are or may be prescribed by law shall 

 be disqualified for service as juror in any court, na- 

 tional or State, by reason of race, color, or previous 

 condition of servitude ; and any officer or other per- 

 sons charged with any duty in the selection or sum- 

 moning of jurors who shall exclude or fail to sum- 

 mon any; citizen for the reason above named shall, 

 on conviction thereof, be deemed guilty of a misde- 

 meanor and be fined not less than $1,000 nor more 

 than $5,000. 



Mr. Lynch : " The position assumed by the 

 eminent lawyer is so unreasonable, untenable, 

 and illogical, that it would have surprised me 

 had it been taken by an ordinary village law- 

 yer of inferior, acquirements. There is noth- 

 ing in this section that will justify the asser- 

 tion that it contemplates regulating State ju- 

 ries. It simply contemplates carrying into 

 effect the constitutional prohibition against 

 distinctions on account of race or color. 



" There is also a constitutional prohibition 

 against religious proscription. Let us suppose 

 that another section conferred the power on 

 Congress to enforce the provisions of that ar- 

 ticle by appropriate legislation ; then suppose 

 a State should pass a law disqualifying from 

 voting, holding office, or serving on juries all 

 persons who may be identified with a certain 

 religious denomination; would the distinguished 

 Wisconsin Senator then contend that Congress 

 would have no right to pass a law prohibiting 

 this discrimination, in the face of the consti- 

 tutional prohibition and the right conferred 

 upon Congress to enforce it by appropriate 

 legislation ? I contend that any provision in 

 the constitution or laws of any Stfate that is 

 in conflict with the Constitution of the United 

 States is absolutely null and void; for the 

 Constitution itself declares that 



. This Constitution and the laws of the United 

 States which shall be made in pursuance thereof 

 .... shall be the supreme law of the land ; and 

 the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, 

 any thing in the constitution or laws of any State to 

 the contrary notwithstanding. 



" The Constitution further declares that 

 No State shall make or enforce any law which 

 shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citi- 

 zens of the United States, .... nor deny to any 

 person within its jurisdiction the equal protection 

 of the laws. 



"And that 



The Congress shall have power to enforce this ar- 

 ticle by appropriate legislation. 



