484 HASTINGS—POLICE POWER OF THE STATE. [June 19, 
In ! Neal vs. Delaware the relations of the fourteenth and fif- 
teenth amendments to the jury laws of that state was considered. 
Neal, a colored man, had been indicted in the Court of General 
Sessions in New Castle county for rape. His case had been re- 
moved to the Court of Oyer and Terminer of the same county, the 
highest court to which it could be taken. 
There counsel was especially appointed for his defense, and filed 
a petition for its removal to the United States Circuit Court on the 
ground that both statute and constitution in that state denied to 
colored men the right to vote and only voters might serve on 
juries; that the officers of the court excluded colored persons in 
drawing juries, and he was denied the equal protection of the laws 
guaranteed him by the federal constitution. The petition was 
denied and the defendant excepted ; then, before being arraigned, 
he moved to quash the panel of jurors for the reason that all per- 
sons of African race had been excluded on account of race and 
color. This was also overruled for the reason that, although no 
Africans were on the panel, there was no evidence that their exclu- 
sion was on account of race or color. 
Defendant again excepted, and was arraigned. Before pleading 
he asked to be allowed to produce witnesses and the lists and panels 
of both the grand and petit juries of the court which found the in- 
dictment and of ‘the court of trial. This was also refused, on the 
cround that the time for this was before the motion to quash was 
passed upon. He was found guilty and sentenced to death by 
hanging. A writ of error was issued to bring the case into the 
United States Supreme Court. 
The constitution of the state confined the right of suffrage to free 
white male citizens of the age of twenty-one years and upwards. 
The statute on the subject of jurors provided that all persons quali- 
fied to vete at general elections, with certain specific exceptions, 
should be liable to serve as jurors; that the ‘‘ levy court’’ for each 
county at its March session should select one hundred sober and 
judicious persons to serve as grand jurors and one hundred fifty as 
pettit jurors in the courts for the year to be held in the county, and 
one hundred twenty more to serve as petit jurors if called. From 
these names the jurors were chosen by lot. This method had been 
followed in getting a jury in this case. 
1 703 U. S., 370 (1880). 
