Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub

legislatures of two-thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing
amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as
part of this constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the
several states, or by conventions in three-fourths thereof, as the one or the other
mode of ratification may be proposed by the congress; provided, that no amend-
ment, which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight,
shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the
first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal
suffrage in the senate.

Art. 5.

ARTICLE VI.

17

63. All debts contracted, and engagements entered into, before the adoption of Art. 6. Sect. 1. this constitution, shall be as valid against the United States, under this constitution, as under the confederation.

Debts.

Art. 6. Sect. 2.

64. This constitution, and the laws of the United States, which shall be made in pursuance thereof, (u) and all treaties (v) made, or which shall be made, (w) Supreme law of under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; (x) the land. and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.(y)

Art. 6. Sect. 8.

Oaths of office.

65. The senators and representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound, by oath or affirmation, to support No religious test. this constitution; (z) but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

ARTICLE VII.

66. The ratification of the conventions of nine states shall be sufficient for the establishment of this constitution between the states so ratifying the same. 67. Done in convention, by the unanimous consent of the states present, the seventeenth day of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven, and of the Independence of the United States of America, the twelfth. subscribed our names. In witness whereof, we have hereunto

GEORGE WASHINGTON, President,

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

And deputy from Virginia.

[blocks in formation]

(u) A lien given by the maritime law is a right thus protected. The Henrietta, 1 Newb. 284.

(v) Whenever a right grows out of, or is protected by, a treaty, it is sanctioned against all the laws and judicial decisions of the states; and whoever may have this right, it is to be protected. Owings v. Norwood, 5 Cr. 348. People v. Gerke, 5 Cal. 381. Stockton v. Williams, Walk. Ch. 120; s. c. 1 Doug. 546. 6 Opin. 291. But though a treaty is a law of the land, and its provisions must be regarded by the courts as equivalent to an act of the legislature, when it operates directly on a subject, yet, if it be merely a stipulation for future legislation by congress, it addresses itself to the political and not to the judicial department, and the latter must await the action of the former. Foster v. Neilson, 2 Pet. 253. A treaty ratified with proper formalities is, by the constitution, the supreme law of the land, and the courts have no power to examine into the authority of the persons by whom it was entered into on behalf of the foreign nation. Braden, 16 How. 635. Though a treaty is the law of Doe v. the land, under the constitution, congress may repeal 2

George Clymer,

Thomas Fitzsimons,

Jared Ingersoll,

James Wilson,

Gouverneur Morris.

Delaware.

George Read,

Gunning Bedford, jun.,
John Dickinson,
Richard Bassett,
Jacob Broom.

Connecticut.

William Samuel Johnson,
Roger Sherman.

it, so far as it is municipal law, provided its subject-
Morton, 2 Curt. C. C. 454. Edye v. Robertson, 112 U.S.
matter be within the legislative power. Taylor v.

580.

treaties. Ware v. Hylton, 3 Dall. 277.
(w) This included subsisting as well as future

United States, by treaty, become citizens of the United
(x) The inhabitants of a territory ceded to the
States, without naturalization under the acts of con-
gress. Harrold's Case, 1 Clark 214. United States
ply to naturalized citizens, whose statutory allegiance
v. Lucero, 1 N. Mex. 422. But this rule does not ap-
shaw, 1 McAll. 186.
cannot be transferred by treaty. Tobin v. Walkin-

() The authority of the federal courts to declare
flict with the constitution, is well settled. Darby
void an act of a state legislature, manifestly in con-
v. Wright, 3 Bl. C. C. 170.

(z) The judges being sworn to support the constitution, the courts have necessarily the power to declare whether a law be constitutional or not. Emerick v. Harris, 1 Binn. 416.

[blocks in formation]

Amend. Art. 1. Freedom of reli

gion, of speech, of the press, and right of petition. Amend. Art. 2.

Right to bear arms.

Amend. Art. 3. Quartering of troops.

Amend. Art. 4.

Searches and

seizures.

Warrants.

Amend. Art. 5.

Attest: William Jackson, Secretary.

AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION.(a)

68. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; (b) or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

69. A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.(c)

70. No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner; nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. 71. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no warrants (d) shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, (e) and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.(g)

72. No person shall be held to answer for a capital or other infamous crime,(h) unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury,(i) except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service, in time of war or Trials for crimes. public danger; nor shall any person be subject, for the same offence, to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb;(k) nor shall be compelled, in any criminal case, to be witness against himself;(1) nor be deprived of life, liberty or property, without Rights of property. due process of law;(m) nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.(n)

(a) These fifteen articles proposed by congress, in addition to, and amendment of the constitution of the United States, having been ratified by the legislatures of the requisite number of the states, are become a part of the constitution. The first ten amendments were proposed by congress at their first session in 1789. The eleventh was proposed in 1794. The twelfth in 1803. The thirteenth in 1865. The fourteenth in 1866. And the fifteenth in 1869.

(b) The constitution makes no provision for protecting the citizens of the respective states in their religious liberties; this is left to the state constitutions and laws; nor is there any inhibition imposed by the constitution of the United States, in this respect, on the states. Permoli v. First Municipality, 3 How. 609. The first amendment deprived congress of all legislative power over men's religious opinion; but left it free to reach practices which are in violation of social duties, or subversive of good order; it may, therefore, prohibit polygamy in the territories, though the practice of it is alleged to be sanctioned by the religion of the inhabitants. Reynolds v. United States, 98 U. S. 145, 164.

(c) See Bliss v. Commonwealth, 2 Litt. 90. State v. Reid, 1 Ala. 612. State v. Mitchell, 3 Blackf. 299. Nunn v. State, 1 Kelly 243. Cookman v. State, 24 Texas 394. Wright v. Commonwealth, 77 P. S. 470.

(d) This refers only to process issued under the authority of the United States. Smith v. Maryland, 18 How. 71. And it has no application to proceedings for the recovery of debts, as a treasury distress-warrant. Murray v. Hoboken Land and Improvement Co., Ibid. 272.

(e) See Conner v. Commonwealth, 3 Binn. 38. (g) See Ex parte Burford, 3 Cr. 448. Wakely v. Hart, 6 Binn. 316. 1 Opin. 229. 2 Ibid. 266.

(h) No crime is infamous, within the meaning of this provision, unless expressly made so, or declared a felony, by act of congress. Therefore, the offence of passing counterfeit money may be prosecuted by criminal information. United States v. Field, 16 Fed. Rep. 778. So may the offence of passing counterfeit trade dollars. United States v. Yates, 6 Ibid. 861.

Conspiring to make counterfeit coin. United States v. Burgess, 4 Hughes 278. And the offence of stealing from the mail. United States v. Wynn, 3 McCrary 266. United States v. Baugh, 4 Hughes 501. And see United States v. Coppersmith, 2 Flippin 546. United States v. Petit, 11 Fed. Rep. 58. United States v. Black, 4 Sawyer 211. United States v. Barger, 19 Bl. C. C. 249. United States v. Isham, 17 Wall. 476. United States v. Butler, 3 McCrary 512. Ex parte Wilson, 114 U. S. 417. R. S. § 1022. Mackin v. United States, 117 U. S. 348.

(i) It is sufficient, to describe the grand jury, as jurors of the United States. United States v. Williams, 1 Cliff. 5.

(k) This only applies to capital cases. McCreary v. Commonwealth, 29 P. S. 325. See McFadden v. Commonwealth, 23 Ibid. 12. The court may discharge a jury from giving a verdict in a capital case, without the consent of the prisoner, whenever, in their opinion, there is a manifest necessity for such an act, or the ends of public justice would be otherwise defeated. United States v. Perez, 9 Wheat. 579. See United States v. Haskell, 4 W. C. C. 402. United States v. Gibert, 2 Sum. 19. United States v. Harding, 1 Wall. Jr. C. C. 127. 2 Opin. 655.

(1) See Boyd v. United States, 116 U. S. 616. (m) See Murray v. Hoboken Land and Improvement Co., 18 How. 276. This implies the right to notice to appear and answer, and to a remedy in court. Ervine's Appeal, 16 P. S. 257. And see Banning v. Taylor, 24 Ibid. 292. Improvement Co. v. Jennings, 127 P. S. 397.

(n) This provision is only a limitation of the power of the general government; it has no application to the legislation of the several states. Barron v. Baltimore, 7 Pet. 243. Bonaparte v. Camden and Amboy Railroad Co., Bald. 220. It is now settled, that the amendments to the constitution do not extend to the states. Livingston v. Moore, 7 Pet. 551. They are exclusively restrictions upon federal power, intended to prevent interference with the rights of the states, and of their citizens. For v. Ohio, 5 How. 434. James v. Commonwealth, 12 S. & R. 221. Barker v. People,

73. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy Amend. Art. 6. and public trial, by an impartial jury(o) of the state and district wherein the crime Rights of defendshall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by ants in criminal law. (p) and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation;(q) to be con- cases. fronted with the witnesses against him; (r) to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor;(s) and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence.

74. In suits at common law,(t) where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty Amend. Art. 7. dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved;(u) and no fact tried by a jury Trials in civil shall be otherwise re-examined (v) in any court of the United States than according cases. to the rules of the common law.(w)

75. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, (x) nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted. (y)

76. The enumeration in the constitution of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.(z)

Amend. Art. 8.

Bail, fines, &c.
Amend. Art. 9.

Reserved rights.

Amend. Art. 10.

77. The powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively or to the people.(a) Powers not dele78. The judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to gated, reserved. any suit in law or equity, (b) commenced or prosecuted against one of the United Amend. Art. 11. States. (c) by citizens of another state, or by citizens or subjects of any foreign Limitation of state.(d) judicial power.

79. The electors shall meet in their respective states, (e) and vote by ballot for Amend. Art. 12. president and vice-president, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of Meeting of presithe same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted dential electors for as president, and in distinct ballots, the person voted for as vice-president; and and election of president. they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as president, and of all persons voted for as vice-president, and of the number of votes for each, which list they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed (g) to the seat of the government of the United

3 Cow. 686. Withers v. Buckley, 20 How. 84. Griffing v. Gibb, 1 McAll. 212. Pervear v. Commonwealth, 5 Wall. 476. Twichell v. Commonwealth, 7 Ibid. 321.

(6) This is only to be intended of those crimes which by our former laws and customs had been tried by jury. United States v. Duane, Wall. C. C. 106.

(p) It must have been ascertained by law, previously to the commission of the crime, not merely previously to the trial. United States v. Maxon, 5 Bl. C. C. 360.

(2) This does not entitle him to a copy of the indictment at the expense of the government. United States v. Bickford, 4 Bl. C. C. 337.

(r) This is a privilege that pertains to the trial in court, not to the preliminary proceedings. 2 Story Const. § 1785-6. United States v. Bates, Pamph. p.

46.

(8) Any person charged with a crime in the courts of the United States, has a right, before as well as after indictment, to the process of the court to compel the attendance of his witnesses. 1 Burr's Trial 179-80. (t) This includes not merely modes of proceeding known to the common law, but all suits, not of equity or admiralty jurisdiction, in which legal rights are settled and determined. Parsons v. Bedford, 3 Pet. 433. La Vengeance, 3 Dall. 297. Webster v. Reid, 11 How. 437. The James and Catharine, Bald. 544. It does not apply to a motion for summary relief. Banning v. Taylor, 24 P. S. 289. See Motte v. Bennett,

2 Fish. 642.

(u) The guarantee of trial by jury is intended as well for a state of war as a state of peace; and is equally binding upon rulers and people, at all times and under all circumstances. Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 3. The right to trial by jury is for the benefit of the parties litigating, and may be waived by them. United States v. Rathbone, 2 Paine 578. Parsons v. Armor, 3 Pet. 413. But the circuit courts have no power to order a peremptory nonsuit, against the will of the plaintiff. Elmore v. Grymes, 1 Pet. 469. De Wolfe v. Rabaud, Ibid. 476. Crane v. Morris, 6 Ibid. 598. Thompson v. Campbell, Hemp. 8. Castle v. Ballard, 23 How. 172. The 7th amendment applies only to the courts of the United States. Pearson v. Yeirdall, 95 U. S. 294.

(r) See Davidson v. Burr, 2 Cr. C. C. 515. Maddor v. Stewart, Ibid. 523. After a trial by jury, in a state court, it is not competent to remove the cause for a retrial on the merits in a federal court. Justices v. Murray, 9 Wall. 274.

(r) The common law here alluded to, is not the common law of any individual state, but the common law of England; according to which, facts once tried by a jury are never re-examined, unless a new trial be granted, in the discretion of the court before which

the suit is depending, for good causes shown; or unless the judgment of such court be reversed by a superior tribunal, on a writ of error, and a venire facias de novo awarded. United States v. Monson, 1 Gall. 20.

(x) See Ex parte Watkins, 7 Pet. 573-4.

(y) The disfranchisement of a citizen is not an unusual punishment. Barker v. People, 20 Johns. 459. Huber v. Reiley, 53 Penn. St. 112. The punishments of whipping and of standing in the pillory were abolished by act 28 February 1839, § 5. 5 Stat. 322. See James v. Commonwealth, 12 S. & R. 220.

(z) See 1 Story Const. § 447. United States v. New Bedford Bridge, 1 W. & M. 401. Moore v. Houston, 3 S. &. R. 169.

(a) See United States v. Bailey, 1 McLean 234. The rule of interpretation for a state constitution differs totally from that which is applicable to the constitution of the United States. The latter instrument must have a strict construction; the former, a liberal one. Congress can pass no laws but those which the constitution authorizes, either expressly, or by clear implication; while the state legislature has jurisdiction of all subjects in which its legislation is not prohibited. Commonwealth v. Hartman, 17 P. S. 119. Weister v. Hade, 52 Ibid. 474.

(b) It does not extend to suits of admiralty or maritime jurisdiction. Olmsted's Case, Bright. 9. See Ex parte Madrazzo, 7 Pet. 627.

(c) If the state be not necessarily a defendant, though its interests may be affected by the decision, the courts of the United States are bound to exercise jurisdiction. Louisville Railroad Co. v. Letson, 2 How. 550. United States v. Peters, 5 Cr. 115. Otherwise, if the state be an indispensable party. Cunningham v. Railroad Co., 109 U.S. 446.

(d) A state, by becoming interested with others in a banking or trading corporation, or by owning all the capital stock, does not impart to that corporation any of its privileges or prerogatives; it lays down its sovereignty so far as respects the transactions of the corporation, and exercises no power or privilege in respect to those transactions not derived from the charter. Bank of the United States v. Planters' Bank of Georgia, 8 Wheat. 904. Bank of Kentucky v. Wistar, 3 Pet. 431. Briscoe v. Bank of Kentucky, 11 Ibid. 324. Louisville Railroad Co. v. Letson, 2 How. 497. Darrington v. Bank of Alabama, 13 How. 12. Curran v. Arkansas, 15 Ibid. 309. And see Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264. New Hampshire v. Louisiana, 108 U. S. 76.

[blocks in formation]

Amend. Art. 12. States, directed to the president of the senate; the president of the senate shall, in the presence of the senate and house of representatives, open all the certificates, (h) and the votes shall then be counted; (i) the person having the greatest number of votes for president shall be the president, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers, not exceeding three, on the list of those voted for as president, the house of representatives shall choose immediately by ballot the president.(k) But in choosing the president, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote: a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the house of representatives shall not choose a president, whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the vice-president shall act as president, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the president. 80. The person having the greatest number of votes as vice-president shall be the vice-president, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the senate shall choose the vice-president; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice.

Ibid.

Election of vicepresident.

Amend. Art. 13.

Slavery abolished. Ibid.

Power to enforce.

81. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of president shall be eligible to that of vice-president of the United States.

82. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. (1)

83. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. 84. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the Amend. Art. 14. jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they Citizenship reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges defined. or immunities of citizens of the United States; (m) nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.(n)

(h) On the second Wednesday in February, 1 R. S. $142. (i) The constitution does not provide by whom the votes shall be counted.

(k) On a motion to discharge a defendant arrested upon a capias ad respondendum, by a marshal appointed by the president de facto of the United States, the court will not decide the question whether he has been duly elected to that office. Peyton v. Brent, 3 Cr. C. C. 424.

(1) See United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 543; s. c. 1 Woods 308.

(m) It was determined at an early day (1869), that this amendment did not execute itself, but required legislation on the part of congress. Griffin's Case, Chase's Dec. 364. And this led to the passage of the civil rights act of the 1st March 1875 (18 Stat. 395). Under the 4th section of this act, it has been determined, that the amendment not only gave the privileges of citizenship to the colored race, but denied to any state the power to withhold from them the equal protection of the laws, and invested congress with power to enforce its provisions; consequently, that a state law which denied to them the right of serving as jurors, though qualified in other respects, was a violation of the constitution. Strauder v. West Virginia, 100 U. S. 303. And that an indictment will lie against a state officer, for excluding persons of color from the jury list. Ex parte Virginia, Ibid. 339. A state law confining the selection of jurors to persons possessing the qualifications of electors, was enlarged in its operation, by the 15th amendment, so as to embrace persons of the negro race. Neal v. Delaware, 103 U. S. 370. But the prohibitions of the 14th amendment have exclusive reference to state action; it is the state which is prohibited from denying to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws; the federal statute was intended to protect the colored race against state action, and against that alone. Virginia v. Rives, 100 U. S. 313. Neal v. Delaware, 103 Ibid. 370. Bush v. Kentucky, 107 Ibid. 110. Smoot v. Kentucky Central Railroad Co., 13 Fed. Rep. 337. Le Grand v. United States, 12 Ibid. 577. And as a consequence of this doctrine, it has been determined, that the first and second sections of the civil rights act, which forbid the denial to persons of color of equal accommodations in inns, public conveyances and places of amusement, are unconstitutional, as not within the power of congress. United

States v. Washington, 4 Woods 349. United States v. Stanley, 109 U. S. 3. Judge Bradley there says, "the implication of a power to legislate in this manner is based upon the assumption, that if the states are forbidden to legislate or act in a particular way, on a particular subject, and power is conferred upon congress to enforce the prohibition, this gives congress power to legislate generally upon that subject, and not merely power to provide means of redress against such state legislation or action. This assumption is certainly unsound. It is repugnant to the 10th amendment to the constitution, which declares, that powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states, respectively, or to the people." A state law which prohibits a white person and a negro from living together in concubinage is not unconstitutional, though it prescribes penalties more severe, than if both were of the same race. Pace v. Alabama, 106 U. S. 583. Ex parte Hobbs, 1 Woods 537. Goss v. State, 24 Alb. L. J. 118. Ford v. State, 53 Ala. 150. Green v. State, 58 Ibid. 190; s. P. Ex parte Francois, 3 Woods 337. Ex parte Kinney, 3 Hughes 9. Neither does the amendment prevent a state from establishing one system of law in one portion of its territory, and another system in another portion. Missouri v. Lewis, 101 U. S. 22. Personal rights of state citizenship, such as those of attendance at the public schools, are not within the 14th amendment. People v. Gallagher, 93 N. Y. 438. United States v. Buntin, 10 Fed. Rep. 730. State v. McCann, 21 Ohio St. 129. Cory v. Carter, 48 Ind. 327. Ward v. Flood, 48 Cal. 36. And a common carrier of passengers, independently of state legislation, has the right to make a regulation for the separation of negro and white passengers in a public conveyance. West Chester and Philadelphia Railroad Co. v. Miles, 55 P. S. 209. The Sue, 22 Fed. Rep. 843. Logwood v. R. R. Co., 23 Ibid. 318. Murphy v. R. R. Co., Ibid. 637. The right to sell intoxicating liquors is not one of the privileges secured by this clause. Bartmeyer v. Power, 18 Wall. 129. Beer Co. v. Massachusetts, 97 U. S. 25. Foster v. Kansas, 112 Ibid. 201.

(n) This is a guarantee against any encroachment upon an acknowledged right of citizenship, by the legislatures of the states. Munn v. Illinois, 94 U. S. 124. The term, "due process of law," when applied to judicial proceedings, means a course of legal proceedings according to those rules and principles which

Apportionment of representatives.

85. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to Amend. Art. 14. their respective numbers, excluding Indians not taxed; but when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for president and vice-president of the United States, representatives in congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being of twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

86. No person shall be a senator or representative in congress, or elector of president and vice-president, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who having previously taken an oath, as a member of congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each house, remove such disability.

87. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

88. The congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Ibid.

Disqualification

for office.

Ibid.

Public debt.

.Ibid.

Power to enforce.

89. The right of citizens of the United States to vote, shall not be denied or Amend. Art. 15. abridged by the United States, or by any state, on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude.(0)

90. The congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legisla

tion.

have been established by our jurisprudence for the protection and enforcement of private rights; to give such proceedings any validity, there must be a competent tribunal, to pass upon the subject-matter; and if that involves merely a determination of the personal liability of the defendant, he must be brought within its jurisdiction by service of process within the state, or by his voluntary appearance. Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U. S. 714. Davidson v. New Orleans, 96 Ibid. 97. A trial by jury, in suits at common law, pending in the state courts, is not a privilege or immunity of national citizenship which the states are forbidden to abridge. Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U. S. 90. Nor does this clause necessarily require an indictment by a grand jury, in a prosecution for a capital offence. Hurtado v. California, 110 U. S. 516. See Louisiana v. New Orleans, 109 Ibid. 285. Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36. It does not impair the police power of a state. Barbier v. Connolly, 113 U. S. 27. But it prohibits unequal taxation. Santa Clara Co. v. Railroad Co., 9 Sawyer 165. The local act of 10th May 1866, providing a greater license for peddlers residing out of Lebanon County than for those residing therein, is in conflict with this amendment. Groh v. Commonwealth, 6 C. C. 130. See Improvement Co. v. Jennings, 127 P. S. 397.

(0) The 15th amendment does not confer upon the negro the right of suffrage; but it secures him from discrimination in the exercise of the elective franchise, on account of race, color, etc. United States v. Reese, 92 U. S. 214. The right to vote comes from

Elective franchise.

Ibid.

Power to enforce.

the states; but the right of exemption from the prohibited discrimination comes from the United States; the first has not been granted or secured by the constitution, but the last has been. United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542. And see United States v. Amsden, 10 Biss. 283. Ex parte Yarbrough, 110 U. S. 651. The 14th and 15th amendments do not confer the elective franchise upon women. United States v. Anthony, 11 Bl. C. C. 200. Minor v. Happersett, 53 Mo. 58. Spencer v. Board of Registration, 1 McArthur 169. Burnham v. Laning, 8 Phila. 241. People v. Stebbins, 4 Chicago Leg. News 97. So also, an Indian, born a member of one of the Indian tribes, which still exist and is recognized as a tribe by the federal government, who has voluntarily separated himself from his tribe, and taken up his residence among the white citizens of a state, but who has not been naturalized, nor taxed or recognized as a citizen, either by the United States, or by the state, is not a citizen within the meaning of the 14th amendment, and consequently not entitled to the right of suffrage, under the 15th amendment. Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U. S. 94. In this there was a strong dissenting opinion by Justices HARLAN and WOODS. On this question, see the opinion of Chief Justice GIBSON, on the subject of negro suffrage in Pennsylvania, prior to the adoption of the 15th amendment, in Hobbs v. Fogg, 6 W. 553; and that of Judge Fox in the court below, in the pamphlet report of that case. But a person born in the United States of Chinese parents residing therein, is a citizen. Ex parte Look Tin Sing, 21 Fed. Rep. 905.

case,

« FöregåendeFortsätt »