The Journal of Negro History, Volume 6, 1921 | Page 5

to
enforce its provisions by appropriate legislation. Such legislation must
act upon persons, not upon the abstract thing denominated as State but
upon the persons who are the agents of the State, in the denial of the
rights which were intended to be secured."[16]
The Supreme Court of the United States soon fell under reactionary
influence and gave its judicial sanction to all repression necessary to
establish permanently the reactionaries in the South and to deprive the
Negroes of their political and civil rights. It will be interesting,
therefore, to show exactly how far the United States Supreme Court,
supposed to be an impartial tribunal and generally held in such high
esteem and treated with such reverential fear, has been guilty of

inconsistency and sophistry in its effort to support this autocracy in
defiance of the well established principles of interpretation for
construing the constitutions and laws of States and in utter disregard of
the supremacy of Congress in the exercise of the powers granted the
government by the Constitution of the United States.
THE RIGHT OF LOCOMOTION
In 1875 Congress passed a measure commonly known as the Civil
Rights Bill, which was supplementary of other measures of the same
sort, the first being enacted April 9, 1866.[17] and reenacted with some
modifications in sections 16, 17, and 18 of the Enforcement Act passed
August 31, 1870.[18] The intention of the statesmen advocating these
measures was to secure to the freedmen the enjoyment of every right
guaranteed all other citizens. The important sections of the Civil Rights
Bill of 1875 follow:
Section 1. That all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States
shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the accommodations,
advantages, facilities, and privileges of inns, public conveyances on
land or water, theatres, and other places of public amusement; subject
only to the conditions and limitations established by law, and
applicable alike to citizens of every race and color, regardless of any
previous condition of servitude.
Section 2. That any person who shall violate the foregoing section by
denying to any citizen, except for reasons by law applicable to citizens
of every race and color, and regardless of any previous condition of
servitude, the full enjoyment of any of the accommodations,
advantages, facilities or privileges in said section enumerated, or by
aiding or inciting such denial, shall for every such offense forfeit and
pay the sum of five hundred dollars to the person aggrieved thereby, to
be recovered in an action of debt, with full costs; and shall also, for
every such offense be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon
conviction therefor, shall be fined not less than five hundred nor more
than one thousand dollars, or shall be imprisoned not less than thirty
days nor more than one year. Provided, That all persons may elect to
sue for the penalties aforesaid, or to proceed under their rights at

common law and by State statutes; and having so elected to proceed in
the one mode or the other, their right to proceed in the other jurisdiction
shall be barred: But this provision shall not apply to criminal
proceedings, either under this act or the criminal law of any State: and
provided further, That a judgment for the penalty in favor of the party
aggrieved, or a judgment upon an indictment, shall be a bar to either
prosecution respectively.
Although the Negroes by this measure were guaranteed the rights
which were granted by the Constitution to every citizen of the United
States, the members of the Supreme Court of the United States instead
of upholding the laws of the nation in accordance with their oaths
undertook to hedge around and to explain away the articles of the
Constitution in such a way as to legislate rather than interpret the laws
according to the intent of the framers of the Constitution. Subjected to
all sorts of discriminations at the polls, in the courts, in inns, in hotels,
on street cars, and on railroads, Negroes had sued for redress of their
grievances and the persons thus called upon to respond in the courts
attacked the constitutionality of the Civil Rights Bill, and the War
Amendments, contending that they encroached upon the police power
of the States.
The first of these Civil Rights Cases were: United States v. Stanley,
United States v. Ryan, United States v. Nichols, United States v.
Singleton, and Robinson and wife v. Memphis and Charleston R. R. Co.
Two of these cases, those against Stanley and Nichols, were
indictments for denying to persons of color the accommodations of an
inn or hotel; two of them, those against Ryan and Singleton, were, one
on information, the other on indictments, for denying to individuals the
privileges and accommodations of a theatre. The information against
Ryan was for refusing