CIVIL RIGHTS. A term applied to cer tain rights secured to citizens of the United States by the 13th and 14th Amendments to the constitution, and by various acts of congress made in pursuance thereof.
The act of April 9, 1866 ("ordinarily called the 'Civil Rights Bill' ;" Bradley, J., in U. S.
v. Stanley, 109 U. S. 3, 16, 3 Sup. Ct. 18, 27 L. Ed. 835), provided that all persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are citizens of the United that such citizens of every race and color shall have the same right in every state and territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, etc., and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceed ings for the security of person and property, as is enjoyed by white citizens, and be sub ject to like punishment, etc., and none other, This act was said by Swayne, J., to be not a penal statute but a remedial one to be construed liberally; U. S. v. Rhodes, 1 Abb. U. S. 28,. Fed. Cas. No. 16,151.
This legislation was substantially replaced by the 14th Amendment which was broader in its scope, manifestly intended to vindi Gate those rights against individual aggres sion; Kentucky v. Powers, 201 U. S. 1, 26 Sup. Ct. 387, 50 L. Ed. 633, 5 Ann. Cas. 692. This amendment was finally promulgated as adopted in July, 1868 (see FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT) and thereafter Congress enact ed several laws intended to enforce its pro visions. The first was the act of May 31, 1870, known as the Enforcement Act (sup plemented by an amending act of February 28, 1871). The purpose was to protect negro voters by requiring in sections 1 and 2 that all citizens should be accorded equal facili ties without distinction of race or color ; in sections 3, 4 and 5 for the punishment through federal courts of persons who vio lated the act ; and in section 6 for punish ment in like manner of conspiracies to de feat the elective franchise. There was also provided an elaborate scheme of supervision of all elections, which included member& of Congress, through the federal courts, which became R. S. §§ 2011, 2012, 2016, 2017,
2021, 2022, 5515 and 5522. The power of Congress to impose this system of super vision was upheld in Ex parte Siebold, 100 U. S. 371, 25 L. Ed. 717 ; U. S. v. Gale, 109 U. S. 65, 3 Sup. Ct. 1, 27 L. Ed. 857 ; and sections 3 and 4 of the Enforcement Act were held unconstitutional ; U. S. v. Reese, 92 U. S. 214, 23 L. Ed. 563; while section 6 was, in effect, held unenforceable, as not providing for the punishment of any act punishable under the constitution and laws of the United States; U. S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 23 L. Ed. 588.
The uext act in the series was that of April 20, 1871, known as the "Ku Klux Act." It was an effort to create both civil and criminal liability for the action of individ uals against individuals; and also gave au thority to the President to employ the army and navy in cases of domestic disturbance within a state and to suspend the writ of habeas corpus, and disqualified for jury serv ice all persons involved. It also contained a remarkable section (6) making any person liable who could, by reasonable diligence, have prevented any other person from de priving individuals of the equal protection of the laws, and failed to do so. This act was practically rendered ineffective by the construction given by the Supreme Court to the power of Congress to enforce the 14th Amendment by legislation. Cases in which various provisions of it were held to be un enforceable in the cases in which it was resorted to are : U. S. v. Harris, 106 13. S. 629, 1 Sup. Ct. 601, 27 L. Ed. 290; Carter v. Greenhow, 114 U. S. 317, 5 Sup. Ct. 928, 962, 29 L. Ed. 202; Bowman v. Ry. Co., 115 U. S. 611, 6 Sup. Ct. 192, 29 L. Ed. 502; Baldwin v. Franks, 120 U. S. 678, 7 Sup. Ct. 656, 763, 30 L. Ed. 766; Holt v. Mfg. Co., 176 U. S. 68, 20 Sup. Ct. 272, 44 L. Ed. 374; Giles v. Harris, 189 U. S. 475, 23 Sup. Ct. 639, 47 L. Ed. 909.