A Scholarly Analysis of the Civil War Amendments

by Eric Foner

On June 13, 1866, Thaddeus Stevens, the Republican floor leader in the House of
Representatives and the nation’s most prominent Radical Republican, rose to
address his Congressional colleagues on the Fourteenth Amendment to the
Constitution. Born during George Washington’s administration, Stevens had
enjoyed a career that embodied, as much as any other person’s, the struggle
against slavery and for equal rights for black Americans. In 1837, as a delegate to
Pennsylvania’s
constitutional convention,
he had refused to sign the
state’s new frame of
government because it
abrogated African
Americans’ right to vote.
During the Civil War, he
was among the first to
advocate the emancipation
of the slaves and the
enrollment of black
soldiers. The most radical
of the Radical Republicans,
he even proposed
confiscating the land of
Confederate planters and
distributing small farms to
the former slaves.

Like other Radical

Republicans, Stevens
believed that
Reconstruction was a
golden opportunity to purge
the nation of the legacy of slavery and create a “perfect republic,” whose citizens
enjoyed equal civil and political rights, secured by a powerful and beneficent
national government. In his speech on June 13 he offered an eloquent statement
of his political dream -- “that the intelligent, pure and just men of this Republic . .
. would have so remodeled all our institutions as to have freed them from every
vestige of human oppression, of inequality of rights, of the recognized
degradation of the poor, and the superior caste of the rich. . . . .” Stevens
continued that the proposed amendment did not fully live up to this vision. But
he offered his support. Why? “I answer, because I live among men and not among
angels.” A few moments later, the Fourteenth Amendment was approved by the
House. It became part of the Constitution in 1868.

The Fourteenth Amendment did not fully satisfy the Radical Republicans. It did
not abolish existing state governments in the South and made no mention of the
right to vote for blacks. Indeed it allowed a state to deprive black men of the
suffrage, so long as it suffered the penalty of a loss of representation in Congress
proportionate to the black percentage of its population. (No similar penalty
applied, however, when women were denied the right to vote, a provision that led
many advocates of women’s rights to oppose ratification of this amendment.)

Nonetheless, the Fourteenth Amendment was the most important constitutional

change in the nation’s history since the Bill of Rights. Its heart was the first
section, which declared all persons born or naturalized in the United States
(except Indians) to be both national and state citizens, and which prohibited the
states from abridging their “privileges and immunities,” depriving any person of
life, liberty, or property without due process of law, or denying them “equal
protection of the laws.” In clothing with constitutional authority the principle of
equality before the law regardless of race, enforced by the national government,
this amendment permanently transformed the definition of American citizenship
as well as relations between the federal government and the states, and between
individual Americans and the nation. We live today in a legal and constitutional
system shaped by the Fourteenth Amendment.

The Fourteenth Amendment was one of three changes that altered the
Constitution during the Civil War and Reconstruction. The Thirteenth
Amendment, ratified in 1865, irrevocably abolished slavery throughout the
United States. The Fifteenth, which became part of the Constitution in 1870,
prohibited the states from depriving any person of the right to vote because of
race (although leaving open other forms of disenfranchisement, including sex,
property ownership, literacy, and payment of a poll tax). In between came the
Reconstruction Act of 1867, which gave the vote to black men in the South and
launched the short-lived period of Radical Reconstruction, during which, for the
first time in American history, a genuine interracial democracy flourished.
“Nothing in all history,” wrote the abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison, equaled
“this . . . transformation of four million human beings from . . . the auction-block
to the ballot-box.”

These laws and amendments reflected the intersection of two products of the
Civil War era – a newly empowered national state and the idea of a national
citizenry enjoying equality before the law. These legal changes also arose from the
militant demands for equal rights from the former slaves themselves. As soon as
the Civil War ended, and in some places even before, blacks gathered in mass
meetings, held conventions, and drafted petitions to the federal government,
demanding the same civil and political rights as white Americans. Their
mobilization (given moral authority by the service of 200,000 black men in the
Union army and navy in the last two years of the war) helped to place the
question of black citizenship on the national agenda.

The Reconstruction Amendments, and especially the Fourteenth, transformed

the Constitution from a document primarily concerned with federal-state
relations and the rights of property into a vehicle through which members of
vulnerable minorities could stake a claim to substantive freedom and seek
protection against misconduct by all levels of government. The rewriting of the
Constitution promoted a sense of the document’s malleability, and suggested that
the rights of individual citizens were intimately connected to federal power. The
Bill of Rights had linked civil liberties and the autonomy of the states. Its
language -- "Congress shall make no law" -- reflected the belief that concentrated
power was a threat to freedom. Now, rather than a threat to liberty, the federal
government, declared Charles Sumner, the abolitionist Senator from
Massachusetts, had become “the custodian of freedom.” The Reconstruction
Amendments assumed that rights required political power to enforce them. They
not only authorized the federal government to override state actions that
deprived citizens of equality, but each ended with a clause empowering Congress
to "enforce" them with "appropriate legislation." Limiting the privileges of
citizenship to white men had long been intrinsic to the practice of American
democracy. Only in an unparalleled crisis could these limits have been
superseded, even temporarily, by the vision of an egalitarian republic embracing
black Americans as well as white and presided over by the federal government.
 List of “Murders and Outrages” Reported to
the Maryland Freedmen’s Bureau
Assaults

June 26th, 1865 - Lloyd Johnson and James Sims, col'd, testify that they were assaulted by two
white men named Hobbs and McCauley without provocation, near Elk Ridge Landing, Md., one of
whom drew a knife and threatened the life of Johnson. On the 3rd of July they were again
assaulted in the same manner and Sims was beaten by the same man until Mr. Saffery, the
employer of the colored men, advised them to desist. Hobbs then went into Baltimore and
brought out a gang of Rowdies some of whom displayed knives, pistols and other weapons and
threatened the lives of Sims and Johnson who at once left home and came to Washington.

July 20th, 1865 - Calvert Lee, col'd, testifies that he was severely beaten without cause by Robert
Neal on the public road and he would have been shot by Neal, who threatened his life with a
revolver but for Neal's son who interfered to prevent the shooting.

July 27th, 1865 - The Assistant Commr. ordered the arrest of W. J. Miner (white man) near
Freedman's village for threatening the lives of colored people, collection of unjust claims &c.

August 8th, 1865 - McVeigh Beverly, a white citizen of Maryland, for the offence of having voted
for Abraham Lincoln, was assaulted on the public road at Port Republic, Calvert Co., Md. by
James and John Brown, who after striking him fired at him with a revolver but missed him, and he
finally escaped by flight. His life had been threatened before by these men and others. Beverly
was also assaulted and beaten with a club July 29th, by John Bond Jr., returned rebel soldier at
same village.

August 9th, 1865 - Isaac Brown, col'd, of Calvert Co., Md. was assaulted at the door of his
residence by Calvin Robinson, white, after throwing a heavy stick of wood at him threatened to
shoot him and sent for his gun for that purpose, whereupon Brown fled. This assault was because
of Brown's Union sentiments.

August 15th, 1865 - Isaac Craig, col'd, at a political meeting at Cracklingtown near Bryantown,
Charles Co., Md. cheered a speaker who alluded to the Emancipation Proclamation, upon which
Henry Burch, John Moran, Joseph Padgett, Osie Padgett, Kiah Canter, _______ Knighton,
______ Dudley, Samuel Smoot, Peter Nuttle, Frederick Dent (a Magistrate) and Dr. George Mudd
beat him till life was nearly extinct and attempted to hang him but desisted.

A few minutes before the outrage last recorded, four (4) of these men badly beat Marshall
Wilkeson (white) a discharged soldier for having declared himself a Union man.

Richard Butler, col'd, testifies that on the 16th of August 1865 at St. Joseph's Church, St. Mary's
Co., Md. he was struck with the butt of a whip by John L. Loyd and also with Loyd's fist, without
any provocation in presence of Robert Alvey, Constable, who did not interfere to prevent or
rebuke it.

Milly Sewell, col'd, testifies that on the 18th of August 1865, on a plot of ground rented by her of
Mrs. Jane Wood near Harrisburg, St. Mary's Co., Md., she was beaten by Mrs. Wood without any
provocation and Mrs. Wood threatened to take a club to kill or maim her. Bvt. Maj. Clark, A. A. I.
G. in a report alludes to this case and says Mrs. Woods' dislike to Milly arose partly from the fact
that Milly had a nice tobacco crop on her ground and Mrs. Wood was anxious to drive Milly away
and appropriate it.
August 19th, 1865 - Sidney Carter, a col'd woman living at Bladensburg, Md., cruelly beaten by
one Suit, white man, at the instigation of his daughter Mrs. Hardisty, who felt aggrieved at what
she called Sidney's impudence. The Civil Authorities refused to give any relief on account of the
complainant's color. Testimony given showed the general good conduct and trustworthiness of
Sidney Carter.

August 21st, 1865 - Surgeon R. B. Bontican, Md. Vols. reports a respectable clean freedwoman
was thrown from Car No. 35 7th St. R. R. Washington City by a number of white persons who
were encouraged by the Conductor. The Conductor refusing to check the speed of the car, she
was thrown down and injured.

September 2nd, 1865 - Thuresa Duffies, col'd, testifies that in 1863 she was held as a slave by ?
George Williams about one mile from Frederick City. That he beat and braised her severely, and
the Provost Marshal to whom she applied for protection told her to go back to her master. She
then went to the Major who committed her to jail. Her former master came and released her and
told her if she wanted to go back she could, otherwise she must leave Maryland. So she came to
Georgetown, and a year ago she went back for her children who were given her but her former
master kept all her clothes and household goods worth about $120.

September 2nd, 1865 - Samuel Buntz of Carroll Co., Md. testifies that a house of his occupied by
Samuel Thomas (col'd) and his wife was broken into during their absence by white men named
Cook Shipley, Sawyer and Fred Tipton and their household effects destroyed wantonly and a
portion of their wearing apparel taken away.

September 4th, 1865 - Samuel Brown, col'd, formerly employed by the Government went to
Thomas Allaby a white man near Smith River Ferry, Anne Arundel Co., Md. to hire by the month
or year. They did not agree as to price and something being said about the Government, Allaby
said "he wished the damned Government was in hell" and picked up some bricks and beat Brown
upon the head, knocked him down, cut him with an axe and cowhided him. When Brown, with
great difficulty, got to Annapolis, no Justice of the Peace would issue a warrant for Allaby's arrest.

John Conway reports that September 4th, 1865 John Grose (col'd) went to visit his mother on the
plantation of William Berry near Old Fields and was driven away by Berry's threats of shooting
him.

August 27th, 1865 - Shedrick Crump, colored, testifies that he attended a missionary meeting with
his wife at Wesleyan Methodist Church, 23rd Street bet. L & M, Washington, and on coming out of
the Church was attacked on the sidewalk by one of two Irishmen who were passing, who struck
him, kicked him & continued to maltreat him until they were separated by other persons - this
without any provocation. Crump's testimony is corroborated by the affidavit of his wife, Richard
Dyson, pastor of the Church, Charles Simon and Richard Clements, all of whom were witnesses
of the assault.

September 11th, 1865 - Wm. Berry at Old Fields, Va. is reported to have driven away with threats
of bodily harm John Grose who came to visit his mother.

October 31st, 1865 - R. E. Jordan, Emp. State Librarian, Annapolis, Md. reports that Richard
Purdy, white man, tried to break into a colored woman's door during her husband's absence. Not
finding access through the door he broke in through the window and beat her shamefully. No
white witness being present nothing could be done to him.

Also, two white men caught a colored woman and were beating her when her brother came to her
rescue. They turned on him and struck him on the head with a car coupling iron. The colored man
wrenched the iron away and they ran, the colored man pursuing to the door of the house of one
of them but did not enter. The white man's wife had the Negro bound over for striking her when
he actually never saw her and he was indicted by the Grand Jury and committed to jail and would
probably be convicted for want of white evidence.

Bailey Lemon, col'd, testifies that on the 23rd December, 1865 he was at Dick Posey's store with
Alexander Brooks, ex-soldier of 20th C. Infty. at Chickamucknow, Chas. Co., Md., that there
Brooks was assaulted on no provocation by Charles Gilroy (white). Brooks attempted to defend
himself and Mrs. Posey stepped in to part them & received a blow from someone. Brooks was
arrested and thrown into jail at Port Tobacco on charge of having struck a white woman. The
Magistrate refusing to take bail unless offered by white men, though colored men who were
known to be worth more than the bail required offered bail -- $200.

January 18th, 1866 - Revd. J. A. Ross of the Methodist Episcopal Church (North) states that on
Sunday 14th January on the public road on his way from Leesburg to Waterford to preach, he was
stopped by 3 men in rebel uniform with "Halt you God Damned Yankee son of a bitch," one
presenting a revolver, they said "Andy Johnson has sent the God Damned Yankees from
Leesburg and you must leave or we will blow you to hell" (Note: the troops had been
rumored the day before). Mr. Ross asked to proceed to Waterford and for the right to ?think of it.
They demanded his pocketbook but finding it empty threw it down. They said that "Andy Johnson
was their friend and Damned Yankees must leave with Yankee Soldiers." They then ordered him
on, threatening to blow out his brains if he looked back or to right or left. That night six men in
rebel uniform with revolvers were observed on the Harmony Road. Chaplain Ferree, in the
employ of the Bureau at Leesburg, was also threatened that he would be killed if he remained in
Virginia.

January 23rd, 1866 - William Rector, freedman, while pausing on the Military road through the
farm of George Martin was stopped by Martin and his son who took away from him his gun and
as he turned to flee they shot him, injuring but not killing him.

In January 1866, a gentleman living near Annapolis, Md. got a Contraband from camp near
Alexandria and as soon as he was off the cars he was assaulted and badly beaten by two white
ruffians. (Reported by R. E. Jordan, Emp. State Librarian).

February 5th, 1866 - Amos Hunt testifies that on the 3rd of February 1866 he went with Sandy
Henson, colored, to Surrats in Prince Geo. Co., Maryland to visit his (Henson's) daughter. Shot
on arrival at the place. Henson was met by threats of death by the man with whom his daughter
was living, and was compelled to return without seeing her.

February 7th, 1866 - Essex Barbour, col'd, late a soldier in the 30th USCI makes affidavit that on
February 3rd he was assaulted and beaten at Choptico, St. Mary's Co., Md. by four white men,
one of whom was a returned rebel soldier who makes it his business to injure col'd people,
especially colored soldiers at all times and places.

February 7th, 1866 - Richard Speakes, col'd, complains of his employer, who on the 16th of
January assaulted and beat him severely.

March 6th, 1866 - John G. Robinson, School Commissioner 3rd Dist., Dorchester Co., Md. reported
that a short time previous a very respectable colored female, teacher of colored school near
Vienna, Dorchester Co., Md. was assaulted on the high road by Cyrus Stock, white, and knocked
down, remaining for some time in an insensible condition. There was another white man nearby
but he "didn't see it."

March 13th, 1866 - Charles A. Watkins (col'd), Centerville, Queen Anne Co., Md. complains that
returned rebel soldiers beat colored men without provocation wherever they find them and shoot
at them on the public road.
March 19th, 1866 - Maria Hutchinson testifies that on the 9th of March at Nottingham, Prince
George Co. Henry Hutchinson, her husband, late a colored soldier, was assaulted and severely
beaten by white men and is now confined in jail at Marlboro to answer the charge of having
threatened the life of one of his assailants.

Philip Brown, col'd, makes affidavit that he was assaulted by a white man in Montgomery Co.,
Md. on the 22nd of March, 1866 while crossing the farm of this man and that he was shot at and
wounded in the head by the same white man while riding quietly along the public highway on the
evening of the same day. When he was shot he heard a companion of the white man say "shoot
the damned son of a bitch - he's nothing but a Union Soldier."

April 10th, 1866 - James Gray, colored, testifies he contracted for a year with H. H. Bean,
Bryantown, Charles Co., Md. and was to be paid monthly. He had received no pay up to April
2nd on which morning Mr. Bean knocked him down with the back of an axe at his own fireside on
the charge that he was not in the fields early enough and threatened to kill him, whereupon Gray
left him. The Magistrates there refused to issue a warrant for Bean's arrest.

May 22nd, 1866 - Dr. A. H. Somers of Montgomery County, Md. attacked and beat till he was
insensible Hillary Powell, col'd, while quietly returning from a Church celebration.

May 5th, 1866 - Lieut. M. Sullivan, 107th U. S. Col'd Infty. reports that he has been frequently
insulted by men formerly belonging to Mosby's Guerillas. Encloses a challenge from one of them
offering to "give him satisfaction with revolvers." Major Lee, Sub. Asst. Commr. in forwarding the
paper says: "I am informed that these men are the same persons who visited in the night the
private boarding house of Mrs. Watkins, teacher of a colored school at Fairfax C. H., Va. and
demanded her delivery to them, saying their intention was to tar and feather her. When informed
the lady was not at the house they left but soon afterwards returned making the same demand
and repeating the same threats."

Major W. L. VanDerlis reports the following: John Wilkinson in Calvert Co., Md. quarreled with Jim
and Bill Shannon, col'd, while crossing his farm because Jim did not address him as "Master" and
raised a single tree to strike Jim who drew a pistol & threatened to shoot if he struck him.
Wilkinson went away & got a warrant out for Jim & at night went to a colored Church where he
expected the Shannon's would be, accompanied by a mob who broke into the Church and
seized Bill Shannon & snapped pistols at him & otherwise maltreated him. Bill broke away & ran
& they commenced firing at him when he turned & fired into the mob killing one Robinson. The
mob arrested Bill and a Magistrate advised them to hang him but finally he was taken to jail &
indicted for murder. Venue was changed to Horran Co. where it was thought a loyal jury could be
got. On the trial the prosecution brought in five witnesses all of whom were parties to the assault
upon Bill Shannon and the defence brought in twelve witnesses all colored and ?ten entirely
disinterested. All were present at the assault, all members of the Church in which the affair took
place. All of them saw the occurrences and their testimony was unshaken in cross examinations,
but the jury rejected all the colored testimony and convicted Bill of manslaughter and he was
sentenced to 5 years imprisonment in the state prison. This verdict was a "compromise," two of
the jurors being in favor of a verdict of "willful murder."

September 7th, 1866 - Col. Rutherford reports that Mr. Swedes of Loudon County boasts of
having made "good hands" of colored people hired to him by the Bureau by beating and
threatening to kill them &c.
 Unjust Imprisonment

July 10th, 1865 - it is charged that Frederick Dent, Magistrate at Bryantown, Chas. Co., Md.
committed to jail George W. Slater, col'd, charging him with larceny, and refusing to release him
because Slater could not show his discharge from the Navy which was in the hands of an Agent
to settle his accounts with the Government.

August 16th, 1865 - Dola Ann Jones testified that in 1863 her husband, John Jones, with Richard
Coats and Caleb Day, all colored men, were tried, convicted and sentenced to the penitentiary for
eleven years and eleven months for aiding slaves to escape. Before turning them over to the
authorities George W. Carpenter, former master of Coats, whipped them so severely with a stave
having auger holes bored in it that they suffered greatly for two months. Jones and Day were
firemen.

September 27th, 1865 - Humphrey and Catharine Ware complain that they were formerly slaves.
In May 1864 they left their Master and started to come to Washington. They were arrested by
Alfred Kirby of Piscataway, Prince George Co., Md. and thrown into jail and a large amount of
household goods which were honestly theirs was taken away from them though they offered to
prove their title to them.

September 21st, 1865 - Jane Unsles of Brookfield, Montgomery Co., Md. testifies that on or about
the 1st of May 1863 her daughter Hannah Warfield, 15 years old and held as a slave by Thomas
Dorsey of Hood's Mills, Howard Co., Md. was tried, convicted and sentenced to ten (10) years
imprisonment in the Penitentiary for striking Mr. Dorsey, they charging that Hannah made an
unprovoked attack on Mrs. Dorsey when the truth was Mrs. Dorsey was whipping her and
Hannah, goaded by the lash, struck her.
 The Civil Rights Act of 1866

1866 Civil Rights Act

14 Stat. 27-30, April 9, 1866 A.D.

CHAP. XXXI.
An Act to protect all Persons in the United States in their Civil
Rights, and furnish the Means of their Vindication.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled, That all persons born
in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding
Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United
States; and such citizens, of every race and color, without regard to
any previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a
punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly
convicted, shall have the same right, in every State and Territory in the
United States, to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, and
give evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real
and personal property, and to full and equal benefit of all laws and
proceedings for the security of person and property, as is enjoyed by
white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, and
penalties, and to none other, any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or
custom, to the contrary notwithstanding.

Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That any person who, under color of
any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, shall subject, or
cause to be subjected, any inhabitant of any State or Territory to the
deprivation of any right secured or protected by this act, or to different
punishment, pains, or penalties on account of such person having at
any time been held in a condition of slavery or involuntary servitude,
except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been
duly convicted, or by reason of his color or race, than is prescribed for
the punishment of white persons, shall be deemed guilty of a
misdemeanor, and, on conviction, shall be punished by fine not
exceeding one thousand dollars, or imprisonment not exceeding one
year, or both, in the discretion of the court.

Sec. 6. And be it further enacted, That any person who shall knowingly
and willfully obstruct, hinder, or prevent any officer, or other person
charged with the execution of any warrant or process issued under the
provisions of this act, or any person or persons lawfully assisting him or
them, from arresting any person for whose apprehension such warrant
or process may have been issued, or shall rescue or attempt to rescue
such person from the custody of the officer, other person or persons,
or those lawfully assisting as aforesaid, when so arrested pursuant to
the authority herein given and declared, or shall aid, abet, or assist any
person so arrested as aforesaid, directly or indirectly, to escape from
the custody of the officer or other person legally authorized as
aforesaid, or shall harbor or conceal any person for whose arrest a
warrant or process shall have been issued as aforesaid, so as to
prevent his discovery and arrest after notice or knowledge of the fact
that a warrant has been issued for the apprehension of such person,
shall, for either of said offences, be subject to a fine not exceeding one
thousand dollars, and imprisonment not exceeding six months, by
indictment and conviction before the district court of the United States
for the district in which said offense may have been committed, or
before the proper court of criminal jurisdiction, if committed within any
one of the organized Territories of the United States.

Sec. 7. And be it further enacted, That the district attorneys, the

marshals, their deputies, and the clerks of the said district and
territorial courts shall be paid for their services the like fees as may be
allowed to them for similar services in other cases; and in all cases
where the proceedings are before a commissioner, he shall be entitled
to a fee of ten dollars in full for his services in each case, inclusive of
all services incident to such arrest and examination. The person or
persons authorized to execute the process to be issued by such
commissioners for the arrest of offenders against the provisions of this
act shall be entitled to a fee of five dollars for each person he or they
may arrest and take before any such commissioner as aforesaid, with
such other fees as may be deemed reasonable by such commissioner
for such other additional services as may be necessarily performed by
him or them, such as attending at the examination, keeping the
prisoner in custody, and providing him with food and lodging during his
detention, and until the final determination of such commissioner, and
in general for performing such other duties as may be required in the
premises; such fees to be made up in conformity with the fees usually
charged by the officers of the courts of justice within the proper district
or county, as near as may be practicable, and paid out of the Treasury
of the United States on the certificate of the judge of the district within
which the arrest is made, and to be recoverable from the defendant as
part of the judgment in case of conviction.

Sec. 8. And be it further enacted, that whenever the President of the

United States shall have reason to believe that offences have been or
are likely to be committed against the provisions of this act within any
judicial district, it shall be lawful for him, in his discretion, to direct the
judge, marshal, and district attorney of such district to attend at such
place within the district, and for such time as he may designate, for the
purpose of the more speedy arrest and trial of persons charged with a
violation of this act; and it shall be the duty of every judge or other
officer, when any such requisition shall be received by him, to attend
at the place and for the time therein designated.
Sec. 9. And be it further enacted, that it shall be lawful for the
President of the United States, or such person as he may empower for
that purpose, to employ such part of the land or naval forces of the
United States, or of the militia, as shall be necessary to prevent the
violation and enforce the due execution of this act.

Sec. 10. And be it further enacted, That upon all questions of law
arising in any cause under the provisions of this act a final appeal may
be taken to the Supreme Court of the United States.

SCHUYLER COLFAX,
Speaker of the House of Representatives

LAFAYETTE S. FOSTER,
President of the Senate, pro tempore.

In the Senate of the United States, April 6, 1866.

The President of the United States having returned to the Senate, in

which it originated, the bill entitled "An act to protect all persons in the
United States in their civil rights, and furnish the means of their
vindication," with his objections thereto, the Senate proceeded, in
pursuance of the Constitution, to reconsider the same; and,

Resolved, That the said bill do pass, two-thirds of the Senate agreeing
to pass the same.

Attest:

J.W. Forney,
Secretary of the Senate.

In the House of Representatives U.S. April 9th, 1866.

The House of Representatives having proceeded, in pursuance of the

Constitution, to reconsider the bill entitled, "An act to protect all
persons in the United States in their civil rights, and furnish the means
of their vindication," returned to the Senate by the President of the
United States, with his objections, and sent by the Senate to the House
of Representatives, with the message of the President returning the
bill:

Resolved, That the bill do pass, two-thirds of the House of

Representatives agreeing to pass the same.

Attest:
Edward McPherson, Clerk,
by Clinton Lloyd, Chief Clerk.

Civil Rights Act of 1875

18 Stat. Part III, p. 335 (Act of Mar. 1, 1875).

Chap. 114. -- An act to

protect all citizens in
their civil and legal
rights. Whereas, it is
essential to just
government we
recognize the equality of
all men before the law,
and hold that it is the
duty of government in its
dealings with the people
to mete out equal and
exact justice to all, of
whatever nativity, race,
color, or persuasion,
religious or political; and
it being the appropriate object of legislation to enact great
fundamental principles into law:

Therefore, Be it enacted by the Senate and House of

Representatives of the United States of America in Congress
assembled, That all persons within the jurisdiction of the
United States shall be entitled to the full and equal and
enjoyment of the accommodations, advantages, facilities,
and privileges of inns, public conveyances on land or water,
theaters, 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.

Sec. 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
eliciting such denial, shall, for every offence, 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 thereof, 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 State
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 proviso 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. .
Sec. 3. That the district and circuit courts of the United
States shall have, exclusively of the courts of the several
States, cognizance of all crimes and offenses against, and
violations of, the provisions of this act; and actions for the
penalty given by the preceding section may be prosecuted in
the territorial, district, or circuit courts of the United States
wherever the defendant may be found, without regard to the
other party; and the district attorneys, marshals, and deputy
marshals of the United States, and commissioners appointed
by the circuit and territorial courts of the United States, with
powers of arresting and imprisoning or bailing offenders
against the laws of the United States, are hereby specially
authorized and required to institute proceedings against
every person who shall violate the provisions of this act, and
cause him to be arrested and imprisoned or bailed, as the
case may be, for trial before such court of the United States,
or territorial court, as by law has cognizance of the offense,
except in respect of the right of action accruing to the
person aggrieved; and such district attorneys shall cause
such proceedings to be prosecuted to their termination as in
other cases: Provided, That nothing contained in this section
shall be construed to deny or defeat any right of civil action
accruing to any person, whether by reason of this act or
otherwise; and any district attorney who shall willfully fail to
institute and prosecute the proceedings herein required,
shall, for every such offense, forfeit and pay the sum of five
hundred dollars to the person aggrieved thereby, to be
recovered by an action of debt, with full costs, and shall, on
conviction thereof, be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and
be fined not less than one thousand nor more than five
thousand dollars:

And provided further, That a judgment for the penalty in

favor of the party aggrieved against any such district
attorney, or a judgment upon an indictment against any
such district attorney, shall be a bar to either prosecution
respectively.
Sec. 4. That no citizen possessing all other qualification
which are or may be prescribed by law shall be disqualified
for service as grand or petit juror in any court of the United
States, or of any State, on account of race, color, or previous
condition of servitude; and any officer or other person
charged with any duty in the selection or summoning of
jurors who shall exclude or fail to summon any citizen for the
cause
aforesaid
shall, on
conviction
thereof, be
deemed guilty
of a
misdemeanor,
and be fined
not more than
five thousand
dollars.