*1 Slaughter-House Ct [Sup* Cases. 36-

Syllabus. is said, excessive however, she has mulcted in been con- The District and the Circuit Court damages. Court curred in made, the assessment and we do not perceive than, evidence that more was allowed to the libellants warranted. both the lower courts When agreed their set-aside we not to estimate of the damages, ought conclusions without evidence that satisfactory have no us- We such evidence before .mistaken.

Decree affirmed. Slaughter-House Cases. City New v. Butchers’ Association The Crescent Benevolent Orleans Landing Slaughter-House Company. Live-Stock and S. Firmberg, B. William Beaubay, L. J. P. W. Esteben, Ruch, Rouede, Maylie,

Paul Fagan, Gitzinger, Broderick, D. Seibel, Lannes, Aycock, N. M. J. P. J. D. Verges, and Butchers’ Association New Orleans, The Live-Stock Dealers’ Attorney- State ex rel. S. Louisiana, v. The Belden, Charles Cavaroc and General. City Association of New Orleans v. The Butchers’ Benevolent Crescent Slaughter-House Landing Company. and Live-Stock. Louisiana, March, on 1869, the 8th of an legislature passed Tire act 1. it, right, twenty- Created the. exclusive for granting corporation, to a cattle, slaughter-houses, for years, have and maintain landings five or yards inclosing and cattle intended for sale slaughter for within Orleans, Jefférson, Bernard, and parishes (a St. said, 85, which, infra, territory p. square it was —see —contained Orleans, miles, city population and a including the New of between prohibiting and thousand and people), per- two three all other hundred having slaughter-houses, or building, keeping, landings sons from intended, or cattle, slaughter, for sale within yards cattle those limits; all other animals requiring that intended for sale c.attle district, brought yards slaughter in that should authorizing slaughter-houses corporation; of the the corporation its fees for the use of and for prescribed to exact certain wharves each landed, for each prescribed slaughtered, certain fees animal animal head, feet, entrails, Held, gore, except : besides swine r'ight guarded grant privilege, of exclusive limitation proper this duty charged, imposing providing to be prices ample to, permission conveniences, all of stock land) owners and of Dec.

Syllabus. regulation for the slaughter places, police at those was a butchers to health locating them where people (the health and comfort of the statute unaf- power legislatures, within of the State required), and comfort adoption previous fected the Constitution United States and fourteenth articles amendment. thirteenth country legislatures 2. The Parliament of Great Britain and’theState *2 they exclusive when always power granting rights exercised the of necessary to a had in view the proper purpose and effectuate which class, power the exercised is of that and has until public good, and here now never been denied. of power by is not forbidden the thirteenth article amendment and Such of of by the first section the fourteenth article. Ah examination the history adoption of the causes led to the amendments and of.those themselves, of that main of purpose the demonstrates the .amendments race, the of the African the all the three last amendments freedom freedom, security, protection and of perpetuation and oppressions formerly slavery. the of the white.men had held them in who giving any necessary keep 3. In to of those articles it is to this construction view, of those arti- purpose steadily though spirit main the letter and apply coming purview, cles must to all cases within their whether the party concerned of or be African descent not. the thirteenth article of amendment was intended primarily While to slavery, equally abolish African peonage forbids Mexican or the Chi- trade, they nese coolie when slavery involuntary to servi- amount tude; the use of the word “servitude” is to prohibit intended .and involuntary slavery forms of of whatever class or name. confer, The first clause of the fourteenth article was primarily intended to citizenship race, on the negro secondly give and to of definitions citi- zenship States, of the United citizenship recog- and of and it nizes the distinction between citizenship of a State and citizenship of n the United States "thosedefinitions. protects The second clause from the legislation hostile of the States the privileges and immunities of citizens distinguished States the United of privileges from the and immunities of citizens of States. latter, These as defined in. Washington Justice v. and eld Coryell, Corf this court in v. Ward Maryland, generally embrace those funda- civil rights security mental and establishment which organ- instituted, society remain, ized they with certain exceptions Constitution, mentioned in the Federal under the gov- care the State ernments, and of this class are those up by plaintiffs. sot immunities of citizens of the United States are those Í. arise out of nature and essential character of the National government, the provisions Constitution, of its or its laws and treaties pursuance thereof; inmade and it is these which are placed under the protection Congress by this clause of the fourteenth amendment. necessary inquire It is not here into the full force of the clause forbid- ding State to enforce law which deprives a person life, liberty, Slaughter-House

Statement case. law, has been often without due property process phrase construction, judicial is, no admissible subject of .under view it, case. present .applicable equal deny protec- . person forbids State to 6 The clause which hostile discrimina- prevent clearly laws was intended tion where he had been so familiar the States negro race against tion power Congress slave, ample clause confers purpose for this equality and his before the law. rights his secure Court Louisiana. to the Supreme Error to which-as de- The three cases—the parties plaintiffs as a sub-title, are at the error, specifically fendants given but which head of report, reported together'also name in common which, parlance, under the general an act of the out of had legislature acquired grew— “ Ah Louisiana, act health protect State of entitled': the stock Orleans, to locate New City landings slaughter- ‘ City The Crescent Live-Stock houses, incorporate Land- which was Company,’” on approved ing March, 1-869,and went into on the 8th operation 1st and the three cases were June to- following; argued *3 gether. was as

The act follows: &c., Be it That from enacted, 1. and after the first “Section June, 1869, A.D. of shall be-lawful day land, or keep, cattle, calves, beeves, swine, or slaughter any other ani sheep,- have, or mals,'or to establish keep, any stock-lauding, yards, or abattoirs at or any pens, slaughter-houses, point place within Orleans, or the parishes Orleans, of New city Jefferson,and of or Bernard, or-at any point place'ort St. -the east bank of the within Eiver limits the.eorporate Mississippi .the city New on the west Orleans, any or at bank of the point Mississippi Eiver, present Orleans, above the New depot Opelousas, ‘ Railroad Company, and Great that the except Crescent Western and Stock City Landing Slaughter-House Company’ may estab at any lish ór point place themselves hereinafter provided. or or or persons, corporation Any person company on carrying act doing any business or any contravention this act, or or animal keeping any or slaughtering animals in landing, vio be act, shall liable a fine $250, of this lation each and Slaughter-House Dec. 1872.}

Statement case. suit, recoverable, costs of violation, the to be same before court any competent-jurisdiction.” and of the act one second section created Sanger with the usual sixteen other named, corporation, aof and appoint including power corporation,' and of office, and term officers, and fix their compensation and stock fix the amount of the corporation capital the number of thereof. shares act then went on : or enacted, That said dec., company 3. itBe further “Section at its and erect authorized to- establish

corporation hereby or bank the Mis- own on the east expense,’at point place cor- or River within the of St. parish Bernard, sissippi Orleans, below limits of the city New porate of, bank or or on the Barracks, at west point place of the New Or- River below the depot present Mississippi wharves, leans, and Great Western Railroad Company, Opelousas, stables, sheds, .land, stable, and yards, buildings necessary mules, horses, cattle, and all kinds of shelter, protect, preserve the time such animals; buildings, and other and from and after notice business, and yards, &e., ready complete State, the said thereof the official given journal Com- Crescent Live-Stock City Landing conducting have the sote exclusive pany.shall privilegeof on businesswithin the live-stock carrying slaughter-house landing this'act; and the limits and privileges granted by provisions of animals destined for sale or cattle other slaughter live- be landed at Orleans, environs, New or its shall city and shall yarded, stock said yards comjíány, landings cor- if or sheltered; said necessary, company protected,, be entitled to and said or shall corporation poration; company have and for each at the wharves steamship landing receive for each steamboat $10; the said or corporation, company cow craft, horse, mule, ox, other water bull, and for each $5; *4 for 10 cents; at their each and wharves, every day kept, landed calf, each every for each and or for sheep, goat, hog, com- cents, and said feed; all without kept, day including or shall entitled to and detain each be pany keep corporation of and all until But fully paid. animals said charges said

Statement case. if the of the afore- landing', keeping, any charges feeding shall the owners after animals not be thereof fifteen said paid days of their landed and in the of the said' being placed custody or then company corporation, corporation, said company in order to reimburse themselves for in- and expenses charges curred, shall power, by.resorting judicial proceedings, by auction, to advertise said animals for sale news- any'two in the five Orleans, for published papers days; city New after the five or expiration said the said days, company auction, advertised, to sell may proceed corporation as animals, said and the such be proceeds sales shall taken the said or company corporation, applied payment aforesaid, and other additional expenses charges balance, sales, tho if costs; and such shall any, remaining from be held the credit of and to the order or paid receipt owner or firm or of said animals. Any persons, corpo- person act, or ration violating any provisions interfering with the herein or or granted, landing, yarding, keep- in violation of the ac.t, animals of this or to any provisions ing of said to a shall company corpoi’ation, liable injury or. $250, fine or to be recovered with of suit costs before penalty court competent jurisdiction'. “ shall, 1869, first of. June, build and company before grand slaughter-house of sufficient complete capacity butchers, accommodate all 500 ani-- slaughter ruáis also a number of sufficient sheds stables shall per day; be erected before date aforementioned, to accommodate all the stock received at this all of which to be port, accomplished fixed before the date for the removal of the stock as landing; section this act, first under provided a for- penalty of their charter. feiture. enacted»,&c., 4. Be it That the said company Section further corporation erect, authorized to its own ex- hereby at one or more pense, live stock, aforesaid, at landing-places or places consistent with the of this points act, provisions thereof, and to have and from the and after' enjoy completion 1869, the first of June, A.D. day thé'exclusiveprivilege having intended, landed at their wharves or landing-places animals sale or in slaughter Jefferson; Orleans and are parishes of also authorized its own hereby to erect at ex- connection) (in one or more pense at places slaughter-houses, any points *5 Slaughter-House Nee. Cases.

Statement of case. consistent with the to act, of and provisions and enjoy, thereof, from the and after the first completion of day June, A.I). 1869, the exclusive having slaughtered privilege therein all of animals, the meat which is destined sale the parishes of for of and Orleans Jefferson. enacted, Be it That &e., said whenever further Section 5. and be shall and slaughter-houses accessory buildings completed thrown use of for the said open or public, company corpora- tion shall immediately notice for in the giye public thirty days, State, official of and within said journal notice, thirty days’ ,he within, 1869, from and after first of'June, A.D. other day all n stock within landings slaughter-houses Orleans, the parishes of Jefferson, closed, Bernard shall it St. be and will no be longer cattle, calves, or the meat slaughter hogs, sheep, goats, lawful of i¿ which determined sale aforesaid, within under a parishes for $100, offence,recoverable, each and eoery with costs penalty of for suit, jurisdiction; court animals any competent all before of meat to be is determined sale in the slaughtered,the par- whereof for Jefferson, or Orleans must be in the slaughtered slaughter- ishes of' said or houses erected company corporation; said or to allow refusal of animal or company corporation to be after animals the same has been slaughtered certified by as hereinafter to be fit for provided, food, human inspector, or shall be said to a company corporation subject fine $250, with recoverable, each case of suit, before costs said court of fines and to be competent jurisdiction; penalties accounts, over the auditor which sum or sums paid public credited fund. shall be to the educational further'enacted, &c., it 6. Be That-the governor “Section shall the State clothed appoint.a competent person, Louisiana to act as of all stock that powers, inspector be police will be and whose to examiue duty slaughtered, closely be intended to to ascertain whether slaughtered, animals not; human if and fit for food are sound sound and fit food, to furnish a certificate stating to the fact, human animals and without said inspected; certificate owners can' be for sale in slaughtered no animals slaughter-houses said owner' said company corporation. animals so 10 cents for pay'the inspector each ani- inspected one-half of mal bo which fee the inspected, said shall inspector his services, the other retain half of said fee be shall ’ - [Sap.

Statement the case. accounts, to be auditqr over to the said payment public paid made and sufficient Said shall quarterly. inspector good give n bond $5000', State, to the cf with sureties sum subject for the Louisiana, of the State approval governor fined his duties. shall be performance of Said faithful inspector $50 for dereliction of for each Said duty inspector neglect^ as be The half necessary. may appoint many deputies may above, over fees collected as provided paid the credit accounts, shall placed auditor public *6 fund. educational “ enacted,(fee.,That all Be it persons slaugh- 7. Section further animals in or be or to other causing slaughtered,-cattle tering shall to said or the pay company corpo- said slaughter-houses, rates or Viz.: For all beeves, the perquisites, ration following calves, each.; each; and 50 cents for all $1 for all sheep, hogs and, ; or lambs, cents each the said company corpo- and 30 goats, head, feet, the and entrails gore, to ration shall be entitled of and killed the entering slaughter-houses excepting hogs, animals and liver therein,it that the heart are con- understood being the said entrails, of and that heart as a the sidered part gore of liver all animals of slaughtered slaughter-houses in all to cases, said or company corporation belong, the .shall the owners of animals the slaughtered. &c., all the fines and enacted, 8. That Beit further

“Section of be this act shall recoverable incurred violations penalties of civil suit court said competent in a bbfore jurisdiction, or by company corpora- be brought'and prosecuted suit said the the com- where said tion all cases privileges granted the act violated or or provisions corporation pany ; one-half all the fines and re- with that penalties interfered or the said company corporation covered by [Sic copy Rep.], the this act, violation of of their consideration prosecuting auditor of shall be over public half paid other and the fund. of the educational accounts, the credit '&c., enacted, That said Crescent City. itBe Section 9. further shall have Company and Slaughter-House Live-Stock Landing their to the limits railroad from buildings to construct the right ran have the cars shall Orleans, right of New city as thereon, other power, they or drawn horses locomotive on either the public built fit; see said railroad on side of levee' each Mississippi running along roads 43 Dec.

Statement of the case. The said River. company shall corporation also to establish such steam ferries see fit to run they may River on between Mississippi buildings any points on either side said river. places 10. <&c., That at the expiration enacted, Be it further “Section from and after twenty-five years of this act the passage herein shall granted expire.” of Orleans parish an containing area (as said*) mile's; of 150 square Jefferson of parish 384; and the Bernard 620; St. parish three parishes together miles, between square two and three having hundred thousand resident péople therein, prior act above about passage quoted, em in the business daily ployed of procuring, preparing, food, animal act the passage selling necessarily pro hundreds suits duced Some were great feeling. brought other; the one side or on butchers, on not included n inthe as it was called, sometimes in “monopoly” acting combinations, in corporations, and some companies, themselves; the same times counsel, however, apparently much all of them. The pretty representing ground to the slaughter-house opposition company’s pretensions, far as cases on so iii this finally was, court passed *7 the act of the Louisiana that made a legislature monopoly violation of the most and was a of the important provisions and fourteenth Articles of thirteenth Amendment to the of the United Constitution States. relied on language these articles is thus:

amendment xiii. servitude, “Neither nor slavery involuntary except a punish- crime, for whereof the ment shall party have been duly con- victed, exist the States, shall within United nor anyplace subject their to jurisdiction.”

AMENDMENT XIV. “All born or naturalized in the United thereof, subject jurisdiction are citizens the United wherein State they reside. * 85, pp. See 86. infra, against the monopoly. Argument which shall enforce law any abridge “No shall make or State ates, nor the St citizens United the or immunities life, or property, any person liberty, shall any deprive its within law, to person due nor deny without process the laws.” protection jurisdiction equal in favor of the decided of Louisiana Court Supreme under came into this court and fiv.e the cases company, 1870; December, Act in section the 25th Judiciary a motion by of preliminary were subject where they a in an order in the of supersedeas. for error plaintiffs nature in, was March, 1871, that to this, After say, compromise certain effected, to be appar- parties professing, sought in act in behalf oppo- to representative way ently, that nents to they compromise company, referring u writs discontinue effected, assumed had been agreed now error said company, pending concerning States;” stipulating Court further Supreme for authority should be sufficient agreement of all and move the dismissal said attorney appear were of the cases thus dismissed. Some confessedly suits.” of which the names are as a But the three at given sub-title butchers, of this were, the head certain report not to have been dismissed. And M. asserted Messrs. II. Black, Durant, J. S. and' T. in new J. Carpenter, behalf of moved to dismiss them as embraced also corporation,having affidavits were filed on the one side and agreement, other; the affidavits of the butchers opposed on error affirming they “monopoly” plaintiffs cases, and that never consented to what three had no been done, and' that proper authority given been .had was This matter directed be' heard do it. heard these, The case advanced first on merits. being 1872; 1.1th, Mr. Justice Nelson indisposed being January it was in his seat.' ordered Being reargumeht, 5th, 3d, 4th, February heard 1873. again, Fellows,ar- also Mr. Q. A. Campbell, A. John Mr. on the authorities, at much case length *8 gued behalf of - Dec. 1872. Slaughter-House Cases. J Argument against the monopoly. in error. The plaintiffs reporter cannot pretend give than such an

more abstract of the show argument may to what thé of the court was opinion meant responsive. that,

I. The learned counsel Thiers,* contended quoting “the self, one’s to one’s own faculties, physical one’s own intellectual, brain, hands, in a feet, word eyes, his soul and was an incontestable body, one whose right; and exercise its owner enjoyment no one could com and one which no one could plain, take More than away. this, the to labor was a obligation ordained of duty, thing and which if God, submitted to secured a bless faithfully, to the human further ing family.” Quoting Turgot, Buckle, De Tocqueville, Dalloz, Leibei’, Sir G. C. Lewi?, others, counsel a vivid and gave very interesting account condition and of the lower grievances orders in various countries of Europe, especially France, its “ banalités jusiiciers,” those seigneurs when during days “ the followed the eye butcher to prying government and the baker oven;” the shambles to the when “the peasant cross a river could not without to some nobleman a paying nor take which he toll, raised to produce market until so; he had leave to do consume what bought .nor remained' his till he had sent it to the lord’s mill grain to be ground, cloths on works, nor full his his own nor hjs'tools sharpen at his own nor make wine, or- oil, cider grindstone, at his own 'days press;” monopolies; monopolies fol avocations, men .in their troubled lowed them daily with its' and worst of all diminished their meddling spirit, respon themselves. from- Scotland, which sibility Passing each cultivators of were barony regality obliged'to pay ” “ each on stack of multure or straw hay reaped by as it “thraldom,” “thirlage” was called—and farmer — when lands ” an astriction subject them astricting inhabitants to and their mills for the particular grinding them, raised on that'was to Great Britain, grain coming adverted the counsel Edward reigns III, and Rich- * 36, Propriété, laDe 47. [Snp.-Ct.

Argument against the monopoly. II, ard and their when the was successors, labor price woman, fixed and when man and law, able-bodied by ” not a merchant or was bounden serve craftsman, being fixed, and when the rural' laborer at the wages prevent was to leave his own from towns he forbidden .the seeking - in for civil It was that the earliest battle England village. had thus it:* been made. described liberty Macaulay which 1601, “It was in the Parliament of that the opposition had, been and during-forty years, husbanding silently gathering first battle and won its victory. fought great strength, its-first was The had The well chosen. sovereigns- ground English been with direction commercial supreme always intrusted coins, It their was undoubted prerogative regulate police. measures, markets, and fairs, appoint ports. weights, ovpr trade, usual, had, The line their as authority which bounded encroached therefore, usual, but drawn. as loosely They been on belonged legislature. the province rightfully was, borne, usual, till became The patiently encroachment Queen took herself to But at length grant serious. was scores. There monopoly by scarcely family patents did not feel itself in the realm that oppression- aggrieved Iron, oil, caused. extortion which abuse naturally coal, lead, starch, leather, could be glass, bought yarn, vinegar, The of Commons in an exorbitant House met at only prices. in vain that a mi- was courtly and determined mood. angry the‘Queen’s acts suffering blamed speaker nority of the discon- in The question. to be called language highness and was echoed tbe was menacing, .by tented high party of the chief nation. coach minister of voice of whole an who was surrounded cursed the crown indignant populace, exclaimed that should not be prerogative monopolies, old liberties of England.” allowed touch Queen’s in say proceeded reign Macaulay end, but that'she, of a shameful disgraceful danger the contest redressed declined admirable judgment, the. thanked Commons aud touching language' grievance, common care of the weal. tender * 1, 58. History England, p. vol.

Dee. against monopoly. Argument that, the time about our.ancestors grievance great was this John subject. left Sir very thej' England, largely thus Parliament, in .a spoke Long Culpeper, speech and. of the people: monopolies pollers of vermin have nest of swarm are a wasps “They —a have they Like the Egypt gotten the land. frogs, overcrept we scarce a room free our dwellings, possession in our dish; in our cup; they dip them. They sup wash-bowl, find them the dye-fat, sit our fire: We butler his box. They with the share They powderiug-tub. clothes without our We m-ay buy will not bait us a pin. have sucked the are the leeches that These their brokage. Mr. that it is almost hectical.' Speaker! so hard commonwealth *10 I will tell of the you I echoed to the-cries Kingdom. you look, on for this Par- to Heaven a blessing their hopes. They ” .- liament ... salt, dress- coal, starch,, the wine; Monopolies concerning j bone-lace, leather, -belts taverns, beavers, meat ing are -referred rags, and other gathering things, pins, to. in this speech. discussions Parliament than these more But important courts, of'Great Britain. of the were the solemn judgments that Lord Coke, ease was and reported by The great leading was Darcy granted Monopolies.* patent Caseof as he sea all such playing-cards thought to buy beyond and selhthem utter and. within kingdom, good-, should have-the whole he and his deputies agents and that merchandise trade, .traffic, playing-cards, should have the and none other making another person was suit within the A realm. brought against playing-cards and he a citizen of London for selling playing-cards, pleaded free he had a a citizen of the to do so. city right being And-;—

“Resolved totam the said per Curiam,.that (Popham, C;J.) of the sole of cards within the plaintiff making grant was for realm, utterly void, two reasons:

* 11-Beports, 85. monopoly. Argument against the commonlaw. it is a “1. That monopoly against divers acts Parliament.” 2. it That against Coke’s report read Sir Edward counsel learned [The case, in the brief which was fully in this given judgment case's before it to the at apply seeking length, court.] thus which had been oppressed from country con- And a ancestors came.- profound that our monopolies from sentiment already quoted viction truth of the of'the faculties, to his own has Thiers—that man right M. one that this intellectual, and right, is. physical him—was and no one deprive no one can- whjch complain, them. the .settlement country by at the bottom free business, enterprise, competition Accordingly,'free of all spolia- all tyranny, the absence of by petty exactions suppression tion of public authority private —the titles sinecures, exemption nobility, monopolies, what the.colonists duties—were exactly sought legal their here, their settlement and obtained long-contest for condition, colonial attended the evils that with physical efforts, exertions, and their struggle'for.independence, since. sacrifices was in the face

Now, act the Louisiana legislature for men to use made it unlawful principles; made it unlawful to for their own land purposes; then own to exercise a law of this the seventeen company except were as which others compe business ful and necessary one thousand which at .least tent they, *11 had framed themselves, named had qualified three parishes their in had invested life, property, their arrangements The act was of success on earth. their founded all hopes had common void as such right, against pure monopoly; a - void And it was law of the common equally at England. case of The Norwich v. Company Gaslight our own law. Connecticut, a case in City Company,* Norwich Gaslight v. Rumpff,† The City still, Chicago and more pointedly a Hudson v. City Thorne,‡ TheMayor case in Illinois, * Illinois, Paige, 261. Connecticut, 90. 7 19. 45 25 ‡ † Dec. against

Argument monopoly. were in entire York, Coke’s a case in New harmony are and declared common case, monopolies against great right.* authors and

How, do maintain a mo- indeed, inventors the works their own in even in that brain? nopoly their own. in sense»may .called large Only through such Constitution works to them. provision preserving constitutions have denounced Many monopolies by and it is certain that name, of exclusive every species privi- is an offence to the and that aversion lege people, popular to them does increase more b.ut largely they granted. were, But II. thus at common monopoly void law, if be so under both would thirteenth dnd the amend- fourteenth ments.

The thirteenth amendment and invol- prohibits “slavery servitude.” The are ancient untary expressions ones, and familiar even before were the time when they appeared of 1787, Ordinance for the of our vast great government Territory; Northwestern from which territory great In to arise. that ordinance are associated with enactments for affording comprehensive lib- protection, life, for the property; erty, spread religion, morality, knowledge; maintaining inviolability'of contracts, freedom rivers, and the navigation public unrestrained conveyance contract and devise, property of children equality inheritance of patrimonial estates. The ordinance became a law after Great Britain, the most form popular had government been Europe, from that expelled because of territory usur- “injuries in direct having an pations object establishment of ab- over the solute States.” tyranny Feudalism at that time prevailed nearly and serf- kingdoms Europe, dom and servitude and feudal service depressed people level slaves. The prohibition in- slavery servitude” in voluntary form as a and’degree, except * The statement of made, these eases being 106-109, infra, pp. in the dis- senting opinion Jñeld, Mr. Justice given. nothere

VOL. XVI. *12 Slaughter-House

50 Cases.

n Argument against the monopoly. crime, sentence a conviction for mrich more comprises or abolition African prohibition slavery. Slavery than.the in the annals world had been ultimate solution debtor; of controversies the creditor the con- between child; the father and his the state his queror captive; its laws. The laws enslave and an offender against might a man to the soil. The whole of in was Europe held crowded with -whowere as vassals to their land- his lord, serfs ou dominions. The American constitu- tion for that framed abolish slavery territory great in in all and iii all form,s, servitude involuntary degrees have existed- men', except punish- among crime ment for duly proved adjudged. of which we has made of three the act Now, complain “ “ enthralled The seven- Louisiana ground.”

parishes have asiricted not inhabitants those only par- teen” all other the earth who ishes, but portions may'have them at the animals for sale or for to land food, or cattle that that 'wharves of brought company (if territory), stables, in or and to them their pens, prepare yards, keep Lest, market-in abattoir them for slaughter-house. or convenient -moretempting some may present competitor these shall be closed act directs arrangements, one from prohibits any having, on day, particular other; and a .com- peremptory keeping, establishing sheltered, shall be all animals preserved, mand is given none under other, this and by and protected by corporation, heavy’penalties. “ be so considered- it not a servitude?” Is .Might the old Scotch Tt is like the sense ? a strict thirlage” ser-, France;- and the banalités seignioral law it is- a servitude, if not But, strictly vitudes’.undoubtedly. an and, sense, more in a being a servitude popular certainly areMen surely one, it is an involuntary.servitude. enforced three parishes, when, to a throughout servitude subjected woman man miles, every 1200 square embracing use of their own from'the refrain them compelled and the improve.- own of their industry exercise aiid land Dec.

Argument against the.monopoly. of their ment' own lawful and property, way confessedly tpid made unlawful itself, necessary unnecessary only because, c^st, at their an exclusive privilege granted-to *13 seventeen other exercise it for them. persons improve We have here the and the “dominants” and the “servients” “ servients in thraldom” old seignioral system. this case-are all the manner animals inhabitants using to the The dom- brought markets for sale or slaughter. “ inants are the seventeen” made into a corporation, these The masters are seignioral rights and'privileges. who aloue can members to seventeen, admit or refuse other The abused are the corporation. community, persons who are and bound of what a common deprived right under a thraldom.

III. act is evenmore in the plainly fourteenth face of of the That amendment was a amendment. development and is a thirteenth, more exposition comprehensive which lie at foundation of the thirteenth. principles had civil-war. been abolished as the issue of the Slavery servile, were More thau -three millions of a population lately civil liberated without duty. preparation political was a there slaves,, Besides population emancipated who came to this country large growing population the coun- and constitution of .education in the laws without exert, over influence a and who had try, perceptible begun un- number of were also our There large government. and National and difficult State settled questions war what the other settlement or solution but that had no from the It had maintained had afforded. been origin order one Constitution, high political party by —men influence—that exerted who yeat of ability, States; in the United was the political organization highest States the Union the consent separate that through was no that there for limited formed purposes; had been and that through union by social except cancel the several cases the obligations might extreme and reclaim the allegiance the Federal government were the doctrines of Mr. of its Siich members. fidelity Argument against monopoly. and those

Calhoun, others; and of who both those preceded who have in the Con- followed It is nowhere declared him. stitution citizen- is, what “a citizen” what constitutes .or ideas were one- what eutertained ship; citizenship in our class seen Carolina case South country may in.the of Hunt The -where State, v. J., Harper, referring argu- ments of Messrs. and Wil- McWillie, Petigru, 'Blanding, liams—men eminent in the South jurists op- —who nullification, posing says:

“ admitted, It has been all the counsel argument except of a one, that case secession- the State from the Union, the citizens and constituted authorities would be bound to obey effectto the act.” give -

But the fourteenth amendment does define citizenship and the relations of citizens to the State'and Federal gov- ernment. -It ordains that born or naturalized States and subject thereof jurisdiction *14 citizens of the United- States and of the State where they reside.” State made Citizenship residence and by 'without reference to the consent of the Yet, State. the by same amendment, when it no exists, State can its abridge “ The or immunities. doctrinó of the privileges States- led in modern times Mr. Rights party,” by Calhoun, was, was no that there whole United citizenship States, fhe. modo sub and the except States. permission Ac- States, their the United theory had no cording integral as an existence except combination incomplete sev- among The eral amendment integers. at, struck and fourteenth forever all such doctrines. seeriisto destroyed, have b.ee'n an under of a made destructive apprehension faculty ’ It consolidated the several' governments. State integers” a consistent whole. Were there into Brahmans in Massa- “the chief of all chusetts, and creatures, with the universe them,” held in and Soudras in charge Pennsylvania, had life “who the benevolence of the simply other,” through amendment them on the same places it footing. By national has an received indefinite principle enlarge- Dee. against

Argument the monopoly. citizen The tie'between United and ment. States every intimate of its made own has been part jurisdiction every and same extent the confederate features familiar. To the have been The States obliterated. government State, connection with members of closest and enforc- under the been placed oversight restraining to establish hand of manifest, purpose ing Congress. the whole through jurisdiction one shall under- and that member of empire people, immu- fact that his stand appreciate that State cannot State nities authority; abridged by life, laws must be so’framed to secure liberty, property .as law and secure violation all. protection arbitrary of each and as the Thus, personal rights every person great established reasonable confidenee'that guarded, would be seem to there be justified. good government might amendment embodies all that the statesmanship has conceived for the Constitution country accommodating and the institutions of to the vast additions of country increase of the of States territory, population, multiplication aliens, Territorial annual influx of governments, events, produced by revolutionary mightychanges industrial, commercial It is an social, act development. an act to determine the Union, relations of reciprocal millions of within the bounds of the United population numerous States —the and the entire governments United States administered common government —that sustain, for the might mutually support, co-operate and the assurance of of peace, security, property promotion and liberty. the fact of does not

Under citizenship depend upon nor the historical division of family, parentage, some of whom had a land into his- separate *15 glorious which its members proud. justly Citizenship tory, the United any nativity portion States, assigned so is a citizen. The naturalized born and every person per- same kind of the without action acquires citizenship son at all. So either this title of the State may by citizenship monopoly. Argument against make his residence at United any place must be he administration, under form of State whatever and im- His of that “privileges treated as a citizen State. and all the be munities” must not impaired, collected are in favor of freemen Charta English-Magna this amend- as derived from and overshadow him upon'him them. The nor ment. The must not weaken destroy States natural amendment, of this and.nec- comprehensiveness of some breadth of the history essary language; and do- contests, discussions, clauses; their connection in the annals landmarks mestic, commotions that form the circumstances under constitutional government; Constitution, demonstrate that it became part is not to be of what it ordains misunder- import weighty stood. or with whatever cause special

From whatever originating, the fourteenth passed, pressing purpose present had been is not confined to population amendment which had disabilities or dis- or to that servile, from race or from contract. The vast arising qualifications manufactories, commerce, laborers number of mines, are laborers on the defended well as the plantations, against of the Nor is the amend- States. the unequal legislation its men. The ment confined application laboring in its is universal application persons every mandate There millions condition. class forty to determine their who refer to it rank in may population Thére are States, and State. any particular the United to which di- it among thirty-seven governments and the States that be hereafter ad- command, rects be and thé hereafter horn or naturalized mitted, the same here declarations of will find import weighty (cid:127) there “Let them all. To the State says: governments or enforced to diminish one law made privileged no States;” nor and immunities people life, them of pro- to deprive liberty, property, law To the the declaration trial. is: tection .people without certificate of status and and hold this “Take your *16 I>5 Slaughter-House Dec. Cases. the .Argument against monopoly. and the Charta yonr liberties.” Magna rights

capacity, “ Take care to enforce this article the says: To Congress laws.” suitable “ When a then State The : passes only qqestion who have valu- a thousand law people, acquired depriving who, are en- its able through instrumentality, property, business, in an honest and which under- necessary they gaged use such their own stand, of right .property, to. in such their honest and labor necessary business, gives whole the monopoly, subject,- embracing including business, such to seventeen other to labor.in persons— right the State has or im- whether any abridged privileges of these thousand munities persons?” .what immunities” in Now, are the sense privileges the Constitution ? They undoubtedly personal which tradition, and civil habits of usage, rights society, and. the common law, written sentiments of people as the basis of the institutions forming reeogu.ized The first clause in the fourteenth amendment' country. does not deal with interstate nor any relations, relations manner laws, nor is depend any upon the States referred to for the among standard ascertainment and immunities.- It assumes privileges that there and immunities that to' an American belong citizen, and the State is’commanded neither to make nor to law enforce that will them. abridge The case of Ward v. Maryland* bears matter. That case involved the aof statute of validity Maryland tax. imposed form of a license to sell the agri cultural manufactured articles of other than Ma .States card, ryland by lists, or sample, printed catalogue. of the tax was to

purpose sales in that mode, and prohibit to relieve the resident merchant competition these itinerant transient .or dealers. This court decided that the on power commerce .in this carry form was “a privilege immunity” sojourner.

* 12 Wallace, 419. Argument against monopoly. 2. Hie act in imthe question equally face fourteenth in that it deniesto protection plaintiffs equal

amendment an act laws. it enriches seven- By legislative partiality teen a thousand others of the nearly deprives class, and as the seventeen, upright competent san^ earn their of the means bread. daily it, It is in violation sinceit them their deprives 3. equally due process without law. labor, property right self to one’s and to the physically intellectually, *17 faculties, one’s own of doubt arid product past property, a sacred Yet this of kind. property property destroyed due act; not .law, but destroyed process charter; a which allows monopoly; grant privilege, matter to no such in this one but to a favored rights “.seven- teen.” will of course be to as an act exercise sought justify matter in its police power; confessedly, general within Without

scope, jurisdiction doubt, States. in laws general scope, subject sanitary belong the exercise of the set but it not power up; does follow is no restraint on there State power legislation police was The invoked in the case police power matters. of Gib bonsv. New York had eminent citizens Ogden.* grafted-to steamboat in her waters as monopoly navigation com for their enterprise invention. set pensation They up should, that Gibbon's have, not or land with keep, establish, a steamboat on the carry passengers freight navigable of New York. waters Ofcourse State had great juris over'its waters diction but purposes police, none n and intercourse to control between navigation the United nations, foreign States. among Suppose . to Fulton and had been that all grant Livingston to the United or from the coming States around, should) because of their "services to State, land on one would, of their lots and pass This through gates. secured in the fourteenth abridge rights amendment.

*"9 203. Wheaton, Dee.

Opinion the court. with to choose his move freedom, highway, to the citizen. He exempt impositions,.belongs must to move his duties perforin power freely as a citizen. Cases, Howard, replete Passenger dis-

cussions of the States. The on powers police arguments in that case various titles which the freedom appeal action has been to be unlimited. Immi- supposed said, crime, would idleness, grants, pauperism, bring increased acts, conduct. The it was expenditures, disorderly were in the nature of health acts. But the said, said court that the could be invoked to police even power justify the small there tax disputed.' Messrs. M. H. Carpenter J. S. Black Mr. (a brief

CharlesAllen on the same being and Mr. T. Du- side), filed rant, addition the State representing Louisiana, contra.

Mr. Justice MILLER, now, 14th, 1873, delivered April of the court. opinion These cases are here of error brought by .writs Su- Court State of preme Louisiana. arise out of They *18 efforts the butchers of New Orleans resist the Crescent Live-Stock City Landing in the exercise certain of

Company powers conferred the by charter which created it, and which was the granted by of that State. legislature a

The cases named on with others preceding page,* beeu have here and dismissed brought by were agreement, all decided the of Court Louisiana by in Supreme favor of the we as shall Slaughter-House Company, hereafter call it sake of the and these brevity, writs are to re brought verse those decisions. records were filed in this court in 1870, were before it at aon motion made

argued length by in plaintiffs for an error order in the nature of an injunction super-

* supra, p. 36, See sub-title. Cf. Slaüghter-Hodsb

Opinion of the court. merits. The action of the court on the sedeas, pending .the Wallace, in 10 motion is 278. on that reported opinion the involved account of questions On importance taken the court, were, in these eases by permission in on the docket January, out their order argued up absent, was that one justices At hearing 1872. consultation, that there found, was diversity it was on with the who wore views those present. Impressed among the court raised in argument, questions gravity under, that the cases ordered be placed circumstances .these ar- a full bench. This the calendar and before on reargiled in last. had was early February gument is a consideration of those questions Preliminary t.he cases, the defendant to dismiss the on motion ground by n thatthe has contest between been parties adjusted into this court, made since the records came an agreement writs should is that these of that that part agreement was heard with the This motion dismissed. argument is merits, and was much counsel. It sup pressed by on of the written affidavits by copies agreement ported we do not find sufficient relied on. say evidence that the in them satisfactory agreement binding are named the record who the parties plain error, and writs of that there are several parties tiffs court, in each the three cases, now before names con on who have not preceding appear page,* dismissal, who are sented to- their not bound have those who so consented. action of They rigiat and the motion to dismiss cannot be heard, prevail. show that the error relied plaintjffs The records upon, the entire course and asserted throughout litigation the charter courts, grant a violation defendant, which they contesting, the thirteenth and four- provisions most important of- amendment of the Constitution articles of teenth and the this court jurisdiction duty Üñited States. *19 Rep. * subtitle, supra, p. See 36. — Slaughter-House Dec. Oases.

Opinion of court. to review court on those judgment questions and is clear imperative. thus

The statute as unconstitutional assailed was-passed and is March 8t-h,-1869, entitled'“An act to protect health of the New city o.f locate the Orleans, stock-land- and and to ings slaughter-houses,, incorporate Crescent Live-Stock and City Landing Slaughter-House Company.” first section forbids the or lauding slaughtering whose fiesh is intended for food, within animals city and New Orleans other and parishes boundaries named and defined, or keeping establishing any slaughter-houses abattoirs within those limits- except by corporation which is created, also limited to certain thereby after- places mentioned; Suitable wards are enacted for penalties viola- of this tions prohibition. (cid:127) second section designates corporators, gives name confers on it corporation, the usual corpo- rate powers. aud fourth

The -third sections authorize company limits, establish erect within certain territorial therein more defined, one or stock-yards, stock-landings, slaugh- it the ter-houses, imposes upon on- or duty erecting, before the first June, 1869, one day grand slaughter- house sufficient five capacity hundred slaughtering animals per day.

It declares that the after shall company, have-prepared all the and other necessary conveniences buildings, yards, for that shall have sole aud exclusive purpose, privilege on the live-stock conducting carrying landing business within the limits and slaughter-house privilege act, and that animals all such shall be granted by landed at the at stock-landings slaughtered slaughter- houses of the and nowhere company, else. Penalties are enacted for infractions of this fixed for provision, prices the maximum each steamboat charges company aud for each animal landed.

Section five orders the of all other stock-land- closing up *20 of the

Opinion court. Juné, of the and after the first day inga slaughter-houses Bernard, and makes Orleans, St. Jefferson,'and of parishes the of the permit any person slaughter duty company a for animals in their under penalty heavy slaughter-houses the fixes a limit to each- Another section refusal. charges so each animal be made the for slaughtered company 'by an of for in their and another inspection provides building, an so officer ap- intended-to be animals slaughtered, for that the State purpose. the pointed by governor are statute, of the features These the principal to be decided the upon all that questions any bearing us. a monopoly statute is denounced only creating This a small odious and exclusive upon conferring at the body number of. persons expense great it de- it is asserted that Orleans, New but community class of whole a citizens—the and meritorious prives large their to exercise the butchers of city right —of have been trained on to which trade, they the business of .themselves their support depend unrestricted exercise of the business families; and that the of the subsistence daily necessary butchering of the city. population act a examination of

But critical hardjy justifies assertions. twenty-five years, is true that it

It period grants, are at And whether those privileges exclusive privileges. sense of curtailment the expense community in the sense of or even of their fundamental rights, to considerations' is a them an open question injury, doing that it it is not true deprives But hereafter to be stated. trade, to exercise imposes the butchers of right with its successful restriction incompatible them any with the neces- city people pursuit, furnishing animal food. daily sary supply main into two privilege,—

The act divides itself grants stock-yards, one in reference stock-landings Dec.

Opinion of the court. live-, the other to That the landing slaughter-houses. bank of'the stock from steamboats on the droves, large river, and from for the trains, railroad should, safety be limited comfort of and the care of the animals, people and those not it needs no numerous, to proper places, argu- ment to can it com- prove. injurious general Nor that while the- munity duty ample nreparation making men, for this is a few or a imposed upon corporation, they to enable them to do it have the exclu- should, successfully, sive such landing-places, providing receiving fair for the service. compensation is, however, which is slaughter-house privilege, *21 relied on to

mainly the to justify charges injustice gross the invasion public, private right. is not, and cannot be it controverted,-that successfully

is'both the and the duty right legislative body—the of the State or power supreme municipality prescribe —tó determine the localities where the business slaughter- for a be conducted. To do this ing city may great effectively it is that all indispensable who animals slaughter food shall it in do those and nowhereelse. places

The statute under consideration defines these localities and forbids in other. It does slaughtering not, has been asserted, the butcher prevent his own doing theOn slaughtering. contrary,.the Slaughter-House Com- under a to required, pany heavy penalty, permit any per- son who wishes to do to- so, in houses; their slaughter and. are bound to make for the ample provision convenience the for the entire slaughtering city. butcher then is still to to permitted and to sell prepare, own his slaughter, meats; he but at a required slaughter specified place and to reasonable for the use pay compensation ac- commodations furnished him at that place.

The wisdom of the monopoly the granted by legislature it but is difficult may open to see a question, justifica- tion the assertion that the butchers are deprived the to labor in their or the occupation, people service food, or how this daily preparing statute, with the ' Ct the

Opinion of court. can be said duties and company, imposed upon guards the. interfere butcher, the the business seriously destroy with its pursuit. of Louisiana here exercised

The power legislature - one has been, its is, uature, up essential of this constitutional history country, present period it however may conceded always belong its now be in some of details. questioned “ offen trades, operations Unwholesome slaughter-houses, senses, sive to the powder, application deposit tq with combustible cars, steam power building propel materials, dead, all,” Chan and the burial of the says of dense- law’, the midst Kent,* cellor be interdicted by and rational masses on principle, population, general his as not to in so to use ought property every person interests be made his must that private jure neighbors; interests subservient community.” general of. is declared Chief-Justice and it This is called police power; realize easier to that it is much perceive-and Shaw † boundaries, its than to mark the existence and sources of it n tó exercise. limits its prescribe its nature, and-must be from is, very incapable This power ' limitation. exact definition or Upon depends of any very life and order, citizen, health social security of an existence in commu comfort thickly populated life, social and the bene the enjoyment private nity, *22 “It another extends,” eminent ficial úse of says property. lives, health, of the com limbs, “to the protection .judge,‡ and the all all of of fort, protection quiet persons, prop State; . . and are . persons property erty-within to all kinds of restraints burdens in order to subjected health, and of the comfort, prosperity secure general of the do this no State. -Of right legislature perfect ever was, or,' upon acknowledged general prin question so far as made, ever cau be natural con ciples, cerned.”

* Commentaries, Alger, 2 340. v. Cushing, Commonwealth 7 84. † Vermont, Burlington Co., Railroad v. Rutland and 27 149. Thorpe ‡ n Dec.

Opinion of the court. and manner of place regulation conducting animals, of business slaughtering butchering within and the a n city, animals to be inspect!' meat, killed for and of the meat afterwards, are among most of this necessary frequent exercises It is power.' .not, needed that we therefore, should seek for a comprehen- sive but-rather definition, look source its proper exercise. * In Marshall, v. Chief Gibbons Justice Ogden speaking laws passed form inspection .says: They of that immense mass portion .controls legislation within the of a State not surrendered to everything territory the General Government —all which can be most advanta administered themselves. States geously Inspection laws, health laws laws, quarantine every description, well as laws for the internal commerce of a regulating State, and those which respect roads, ferries, are com turnpike &e., No direct over these ponent parts. power general objects remain granted Congress; consequently they subject to State legislation.”

The exclusive of State over this authority sub legislation illustrated in the case of the City New ject strikingly Iu case York v. the defendant was prosecuted Miln.† with statute of New York which comply re failing of a master vessel from a quired arriving foreign in that New York names port, City, report his of their certain-particulars passengers, age, occupa last of their tion, settlement, place place birth. exclusive, this act was an invasion of the argued commerce. And it cannot be Congress right regulate denied that such statute at least operated indirectly upon -commercial intercourse between the citizens and of countries. But notwithstand foreign this it was held to an -exercise ing police power State, within the control of the and unaffected properly of the Constitution the clause on conferred Congress commerce. regulate * 'Wheaton, 203. 11 Peters, 102. † *23 Slaughter-House 64 Cases. of the court.

Opinion are the recent case's of The Li the same To purpose De latter case aud v. In the Tax,* cense UnitedStates Witt.† as a which undertook internal an act of part Congress a to mix for sale make it misdemeanor revenue laws to naph sell oil of to inflam oils, petroleum tha illuminating held a to be at less than prescribed temperature, mable to make such power a because as void, police regulation did to a to law belonged belong Congress. that statute under be consideration cannot denied more from the

is to densely populated .framed remove aptly noxious the city, slaughter-houses, large part animals incident collections of necessarily offensive a aud to business of locate them city, large slaughtering convenience, health, comfort where the people it And must be conceded shall located. require they the act for this are the means ap adopted purpose and effectual. But it is that in said stringent, propriate, for this a purpose, conferring upon corporation creating is which it said constitute it exclusive privileges privileges has exceeded its If a power. monopoly legislature —the of New Orleans on had city precisely statute imposed the same duties, the same accompanied privileges, it it is believed that created, on the it has corporation as- its been raised constitution would no question butchers in effect on the pursuit In that case ality. would have been and on public their occupation cannot the confer the is legislature same as it now. Why created lawful another on corporation, same powers it can on the useful object, municipal public corpo That wherever a has legislature ration already existing? result, certain and that result accomplish right has means of a it aStained corporation, best and to endow with the powers create such corporation, and lawful the desired seems to effect purpose, necessary dis admit- of debate. proposition ably hardly v. ease of The State McCulloch affirmed cussed power organize in relation .Congress Maryland,‡ * Wheaton, 41. 4 316. 9 Id. Wallace, 471. ‡ † Dec.

Opinion of the court. the Bank of-the United States to aid in the fiscal operations of the government.

It can be seen that the interested readily the vigilance of created the Louisiana corporation by legislature will be more efficient in the limitation enforcing prescribed the business for the stock-landing slaughtering of the good than the efforts of the city officers of the ordinary law. it can therefore, be maintained Unless, the that exclusive (cid:127) this charter to the

privilege granted by be- corporation, the yond power there can legislature Louisiana, be no to the just exception statute. And in validity this we are not able to see that these respect espe- are privileges or odious The cially objectionable. as a-con- duty imposed sideration the is well defined, and its privilege enforce- ment well The or to be guarded. prices made charges by the are limited the and we company statute, are by not ad- vised on the whole exorbitant they or unjust. reduced is, therefore, to these proposition terms: Can exclusive of its granted privileges citizens,

to a aof State? corporation, by.the legislature

The eminent and learned counsel who has twice argued this has a research question, negative displayed into and history- monopolies England, European continent, only equalled by eloquence are denounced. observed, it is to be that all

But such references are to the monarch in established monopolies the- derogation of his or arise out of transactions in subjects, which- rights and their interests unrepresented, uncared people Monopolies, for. The Case Coke, and reported by great was brief, stated so contést of fully undoubtedly the monarch. The commons decision is based against law, that it common and the' against ground .the the unlawful was aimed at assumption power argument doubted the crown; for whoever Parlia- authority ?, law common discussion modify ment change House, cited from of Commons Macaulay clearly ' XVI. YOL. court.

Opinion of the and'the crown, establishes that the contest was between in Parliament. people represented we

But think it that the Parlia- affirmed, bemay safely in their ment of Britain, Great representing people coun- bodies'of functions, legislative legislative con- have from time immemorial day, try, present tinued to exclusive privi- corporations grant denied to other leges privileges citizens— within definition of word any just monopoly, come ; .much as now under consideration and the power those can it do this has never been or denied.. Nor (cid:127)to questioned useful and bene- that some of most denied, he truthfully been set on foot for the ficial general good, enterprises means these exclusive made successful rights, in that conducted to success way. have been could only n that the established, considered as therefore, he It may, *25 to the of Louisiana pass present of the authority legislature restraint in the exercise' of unless some ample, statute in the that-State found in constitution that power States, Constitution of the United amendments to the the we decisions have already the date of the since adopted cited. in to exist the constitu-' restraint such supposed

If Court of Louisiana State, the Supreme hawing of the tion it not be would open that question, on necessarily passed in this court. review issue, that- the in this error accepting allege

The plaintiffs of the United States the Constitution is a violation statute several particulars: the servitude an forbidden it creates involuntary That amendment; article thirteenth of citizens immunities it the abridges

That States; United the the of the to the equal protection it denies plaintiffs That ánd, laws; without due pro- them their property it

That deprives oí of the first section the law; provisions contrary cess n of amendment. article fourteenth Slaughter-House' Dee.

Opinion of court. first, court This is thus called for the time to upon give construction these articles.

We do ourselves responsibility great conceal far- which this devolves so duty us. No questions' so theii reaching consequences, profoundly pervading of this so interesting people country, important United-States, and in their relations bearing-upon to each and to the citizens the several States other court have been before and of the pf We life its members. the official of any present during bar; at the full have tearing every opportunity given it views our- have discussed we freely compared amoiij delibeiation, selves; we have taken time for careful ample we now to announce judgments propose w.e formed those so far as articles,, construction of have found them to the decision of the cases .we necessary before, we the inclination us, and have neither beyond nor go. added to the

Twelve articles were Federal amendment soon after Constitution original organization gov- Of these all but the last were ernment under in 1789. so afterwards statement that soon justify adopted with the contemporaneous practically adoption Twelfth, hundred adopted eighteen original; become, so as'to have like all and'three, was so nearly another But within the and of last others, historical age.- articles of amendment im- other of vast three eight years added have been the voice people portance venerable instrument. now at these articles discloses

The most unity cursory glance *26 in the when taken connection history of purpose, fail an times, cannot have important bearing doubt their true meaning. on any question coueeruing when be. doubts, exist, can such reasonably Nor safely for without a reference to solved history; and rationally and the for recurring in is found the occasion necessity in this country, people power great.source again of human for additional the rights; guarantees court.

Opinion of the additional Federal additional powers government.; those of the that his- restraints States. upon Fortunately all, is fresh within the of us and its tory memory leading as bear matter free from features, before us, they doubt. in about institution of African as it existed slavery, Union,

half the States of the and the contests pervading its mind those who desired between many years, public ánd desired curtailment and ultimate extinction those who its cul- additional security perpetuation, safeguards in on the of most in effort, minated -the of the States part existed, to from the Federal Which slavery govern- separate and to This constituted the war ment, resist its'authority. whatever causes have rebellion, auxiliary of the- war, about this the over- undoubtedly contributed bring cause was and efficient African slavery. shadowing as a social relation, slavery, per- In that legalized struggle n the bitterness and force necessity ished. perished freedom them- When armies of found the conflict. could soil do they nothing.less selves upon slavery victims whose enforced servitude was the free poor than when And hard pressed quarrel. foundation themselves men in that these men they proved (for contest offered services.and accepted by crisis) terrible the unlawful rebellion, aid suppressing thousands an end wherever Federal was at government slavery ' President proclamation that purpose. succeeded fact as to a an accomplished portion Lincoln expressed large when he districts, declared of the insurrectionary slavery war over, all. But the those them who being abolished succeeded in Federal had authority re-establishing were not content to act of permit great government results of rest on actual the contest or emancipation both Executive, might the proclamation times, in after been determined to questioned and most result this main valuable the Constitution place as one its restored Union fundamental articles. article of amendment the thirteenth of that iustru- Hence *27 Slaughter-House Dec. Cases. of the court.

Opinion con- to admit of hardly sections seem short ment. two Its and so appropriate is their struction, so expression vigorous have indicated. we purpose “ aas servitude, nor involuntary except 1. Neither slavery been shall have crime, whereof party for punishment the United States shall exist within convicted, duly their to subject jurisdiction. place enforce this article to by shall power 2. Congress appropriate legislation.” of this the mind the contemplation

To withdraw of all' declaration of the freedom personal yet simple grand of this within the human race jurisdiction government— mil- freedom of four to establish the a declaration designed to with a search endeavor of slaves—and lions microscopic have been to which servitudes, find reference an localities, effort, in certain requires attached property the least of it. to say the use servitude was meant

That a proved by personal human can the word “involuntary,” only of apply The of servitude exception punishment beings. idea of the servitude that is meant. crime class of gives-an is of than as the word servitude larger meaning slavery, and the ob latter is understood in this country, popularly was to shades and vious forbid all conditions purpose, understood that in the African well slavery. very as it had been terms, form apprenticeship, prac long India Islands, slavery in the West on abolition ticed the slaves to the by reducing English government, attached serfs condition plantation, purpose evaded, have been if word article only slavery might slave, case of the held under used. The apprentice had been on a Chase, liberated Chief Justice law of Maryland, article, under this illustrates of habeas- 'writ corpus all that we neces And it is deem course observation.* that article the statute on application say sary under now consideration. Louisiana, * Turner, Reports, 84. 1 Abbott Matter

Opinion of the court.' relations with pi’oeess restoring proper Federal and with the other States those government had sided with the undertaken rebellion, under the procla- mation President assem- 1865, Johnson before the the fact that, bling developed notwithstanding Congress, the formal those States of the abolition recognition the condition of the slave race fur- would, without slavery, *28 of the Federal be as bad ther almost protection government, first as it was before. acts of Among adopted legislation several of the in the bodies which States legislative by to in their with the Federal claimed normal relations the colored were laws which upon imposed government, their burdens, curtailed race onerous disabilities an to such life, in the property pursuit liberty, rights had value, freedom was of little while they that their extent received from their former which had they lost protection of interest and humanity. motives both owners n in the were in some forbidden appear They servants. in other character than They menial towns the soil without the to reside ou cultivate were required from, excluded it. were own purchase They right and were not permitted' give occupations gain, many a white man was case where in the courts' testimony lives were at It was said that their mercy a party. either because the laws for men, protection bacl or were not enforced. insufficient whatever falsehood circumstances,

These misconcep- with their have been forced tion may mingled presentation, the Federal the statesmen who had conducted govern- crisis, rebellion, who ment safety through the thirteenth article of amendment they supposed the result of their conviction that labors, had secured more was constitutional way something necessary race who had suffered so to the unfortunate much. protection the proposition They passed through Congress accordingly amendment, and declined to treat as for the fourteenth they restored to their full participation government had been in until insurrection, the States Union Dec. of the court.

Opinion vote of their that article formal ratified legislative bodies. examine we more

Before critically pro- proceed which the in error visions of this on amendment, plaintiffs aud dismiss the of the recent let us complete history rely, as that relates to the amendments, purpose history general satisfied them all. A few years’ experience pervades authors, men who had of the other been thoughtful 'the restraints of that, two amendments notwithstanding under those on the aud the laws articles passed these were additional inade- powers granted Congress, life, with- for the protection liberty, property, quate which freedom the slave was no boon. were in out They denied the The laws were all those States suffrage. right the white man alone. It was administered urged face of men marked as was distinctively negro, living neyer domiuant'race, the midst of another could be fully secured in their and their without the person property right of suffrage. amendment, Hence the fifteenth which declares that citizen United States to vote shall not be *29 State on of race, denied or account by any color, abridged condition of servitude.” The previous negro by having, been declared to a citizen amendment, fourteenth be of is thus made a voter in States, State of the the United Union. of this then,

We of repeat, light recapitulation recent to be called events, almost too but which history, all; to us and on the most casual exami- familiar are no amendments, nation of one can language be with the fail to one impressed found pervading purpose at the foundation of all, each, in them lying without them which none of would been even we suggested; the freedom of slave race, mean and firm security that freedom, and the establishment of che protection freeman aud citizen from the newly-made oppressions had exercised those who unlimited dominion formerly over that the fifteenth true him. only amendment, terms, Slaughter-IIouse 'Ct.

Opinion of the court. mentions his color his by negro speaking slavery. it is each But as true'that of the articles other was ad- just of that dressed to race, rem- grievances designed the. to. thém the fifteenth. edy ho one else

We do not but can share say negro . Both the in this of these protection. language spirit their fair and articles are to have just weight any question while Undoubtedly construction. alone was slavery negro in'the mind which the thirteenth Congress proposed other kind article,, now or it forbids any slavery, hereafter. or the Chinese Mexican coolie labor If shall system peonage Mexican or of the Chinese race within our develop-slavery amendment be trusted to may. make it territory, safely void.' so if other assailed rights And fall within the of these necessarily protection properly will articles, that inter- protection apply, though party African ested Hot be of But what we do say, descent. and what we wish tó be that in is, fair and 'understood any section or these amend- phrase just construction to look to th’d ments, it is which we have necessary purpose all, said-was'the. them the evil spirit pervading i’emedy, continued designed process until Constitution, addition purpose supposed as far as constitutional law can accomplished, accom it. plish

The fibst section article, which our .fourteenth attention is more invited, with a specially- opens definition of the United citizenship only citizenship States, but —not No such States. definition citizenship was previously Constitution, found nor had been attempt made to define it act of It had been the Congress. occasion of much in the courts, discussion the executive departments, and in the It had been public said journals. by. erhiuent that no was a citizen of man judges ex- as he was a citizen one of the States cept composing Union. who had Those, been born *30 therefore, and resided in the District Columbia or always Territories, within the States, United were not though citizens. "Whether Dec. Slaüghter-House

Opinion of tho court. was sound or not never proposition had been judicially decided. But it had held been this court, in the cele- brated ease, Dred a few before Scott the outbreak only years of the civil that war, a man of African whether a descent, slave not, was not and could not be a citizen aof State or of the This United States. while it decision, met the'con- demnation of some ablest statesmen and constitutional had never overruled; been and if it lawyers country, was to be as a constitutional accepted limitation of then all the race who citizenship, .had been negro recently made freemen, still, not not citizens, but were in- only so an capable becoming short of amendment anything to the Constitution.

To remove this and to establish a difficulty primarily, clear and definition comprehensive citizenship should declare what should constitute of the' citizenship States, and also United State, first clause citizenship first was section framed. “All born or naturalized in the persons United subject jurisdiction thereof, áre citizens of the and of the State United States wherein reside.” observation, The first we have to make on this clause is, at tliat.it rest both puts questions we stated been the of differences subject It opinion. declares be citizens of the United persons States without to their aof citizenship State, and it regard particular over- Dred turns the Scott decision making born within the States and United to its subject citi- jurisdiction zens of United States. That its main Was purpose establish can' citizenship,of admit of no negro doubt. to its “subject The phrase, jurisdiction” intended to from its exclude children operation of ministers, consuls, and citizens subjects born foreign within States. next observation is more view of important counsel present case. arguments is, 'between distinction citizenship United States and of a State is citizenship clearly recognized established. *31 Slaughter-House Cases.

- of the Opinion court. a be a citizen with- Not man of the only United may a an is State, out a citizen of but element important being the to convert former into the lie must latter. necessary make him a but it is reside the State to citizen of it, withiu that he should be naturalized born or only necessary a Union. United States be citizen of the that there clear, then, It is citizenship quite are dis- State, which States, citizenship United which other, and different depend upon tinct from each in the individual. circumstances characteristics and its distinction explicit recognition We think this in this because argument, this amendment weight great which section, same one this the next paragraph in error, relied on speaks only by plaintiffs mainly of the States, citizens United and immunities privileges of citizens the several of those States. and does speak in favor of the rests however, plaintiffs The argument, is the that same, assumption citizenship ou the wholly the clause and immunities by and the guaranteed privileges are same. shall make or enforce law is, “No State

The language or immunities of citizens shall which privileges abridge ' ais little if this remarkable, It clause States.” United the citizen of a as a intended protection against was State, of his own the word citizen power the legislative is so be left out when'it used, should the State carefully contradistinction, of the to citizens United States, used aud is too clear sentence it.. precedes the very un- change phraseology adopted argument with a purpose. der.standingly of the citizen of the

Of the privileges immunities and of the immunities of privileges what State, we are, will they respectively citizen we state consider; wish to here that it is but only" presently this clause under are placed pro- former and that the Constitution, latter, what- the Federal tection intended to have be,-are not additional they ever of the amendment. this paragraph protection (cid:127) Dec.

Opinion of the court. If, there then, is a difference between the immunities a citizen the United States as belonging such, and those to the citizen of the State as such belonging the latter must rest-for their where security protection they rested; heretofore embraced n.ot paragraph amendment. The first occurrence of the words and immu- ‘‘privileges nities” in our constitutional is to be found in the history, fourth of the articles of. old Confederation.

It declares “that the better to secure and perpetuate mutual friendship intercourse among people *32 States in different this Union, the free inhabitants of each of these States, and paupers, from vagabonds, fugitives jus- tice be entitled to all the and' im- excepted, shall privileges. munities States; of free citizens several and the people each State shall have free and to and ingress regress and shall State, other therein all the enjoy of' privileges, and commerce, trade to same subject duties, impositions:,, and restrictions the inhabitants thereof respectively/* . In the Constitution of which super- Confederation, the seded the Articles of corresponding pro- is found iu section two of the vision- fourth article, in the “ The citizens of each State shall words: be en- following all the and immunities titled to of citizens of the privileges several States.” can little There be but that the- of both question purpose

n these is the that the same, and im- provisions privileges are intended the same Iu the article munities each. we have some of these

Confederation specifically mentioned, som,e idea of the class perhaps enough give general meant civil rights by phrase. we are not without construction of Fortunately judicial, clause The first and this Constitution. leading is case on v. the-subject decided Coryell, Corfield iu the Mr. Justice Circuit Court for the District Washington iu 1828.*' Pennsylvania * Court", Washington’s Circuit 371.

Opinion the court. “ he what are the is, says, privileges inquiry,” ' feel no "We citizens of the several States ? immunities of those hesitation expressions privileges confining & which ar which and immunities fundamental; belong ha. e the citizens of all free right governments, several States at all times citizens of the been enjoyed Union; this from the time of compose becoming fundamental' What these free, independent, sovereign. than difficult would be more tedious are, principles all, however, enumerate. be comprehended They heads: protection by gov- following general under ernment, With the acquire possess property right and safety, kind, and obtain happiness pursue as the nevertheless, to such restraints subject, government of the whole.” may prescribe good general This definition and immunities citi court zens of the States in the main adopted * while it v. The Maryland, the recent case of Ward State of an definition beyond declines to undertake authoritative when what was to that decision. description, necessary which are of the named, but taken to include others civil character, same nearly every general embraces (cid:127)for the of which. establishment organized protection are, language government They .instituted. fundamental. those which are Judge Washington, rights his of as be Throughout opinion, rights spoken *33 are to the They individual as citizen of State. longing he was so of in the constitutional provision spoken be the class And have been held to construing. they always which the were created estab State rights governments and secure. lish court,

In the case of Paul v. expounding the Virginia,† that “the Constitution, this clause of the privileges says several immunities secured to citizens of each State States, the are those privileges provision question, in the latter the citizens immunities which common to * Wallace, 8 Id. 180. 430. † Dec.

Opinion of the court. States under their constitution laws virtue of their citizens.” being there alluded to provision constitutional did not create

those which it called rights, immunities of privileges citizens of the It threw States. around them in that clause no for the citizen of the security State which claimed or exercised. Nor did it to control the profess power the over the itsof own citizens. governments rights

Its sole was to declare to the several purpose States, that whatever as those or establish them to rights, you grant your own or citizens, as limit or you qualify, impose restric- tions on their exercise, same, neither more nor less, shall be the measure of the of citizens of other rights within your jurisdiction.-

It would be the vainest show of learning attempt that citations to the prove by authority, up adoption claim or amendments, the recent no pretence was set up on the that those Federal government depended rights their existence beyond few protection, /very express limitations which the Federal Constitution imposed upon such, for instance, prohibition ex against States— attainder, facto bills laws, laws post impairing , But with the of contracts. obligation exception the entire and a few other domain restrictions, of the privi- of citizens and immunities of the States, as above leges de- fined, the constitutional and within lay legislative power of and without that of the Federal government. fourteenth Was it purpose amendment, that no State should make of declaration enforce simple which shall law abridge immunities of States, to transfer the the United citizens security pro- all the civil we rights tection mentioned, the States Federal And government? where shall have is declared Congress power enforce it intended to within article, bring power of civil the entire domain of heretofore rights Congress belong- States? exclusively ing and more must if the follow,

All this proposition *34 Slaughter-House Cases.

Opinion court. in error be sound. For are these plaintiffs only rights to the control whenever in its discretion subject of Congress are State them supposed abridged by legislation, advance, but also laws in body may pass limiting the exercise States, restricting legislative power by their most as in its functions, and usual ordinary judgment further, think on all such And subjects. still may proper such the reversal of followed construction judg- cases, Court of Louisiana in these ments of the Supreme censor constitute this court would perpetual legis- citizens, on the civil of their own rights lation. witji such as it did not con- authority nullify approve existed at the time of the sistent with those as,they rights, we this amendment. The admit adoption argument which is drawn from the the most conclusive not always aof adoption particular consequences urged against when, as in the an instrument. But case construction of serious, are so so these us, consequences before far-reaching from the structure and so great departure and pervading, institutions; when the effect to fetter and our spirit them to the- the State by subjecting governments degrade the exercise of heretofore powers' coutrol Congress, and fun- most conceded to them the ordinary universally character; when in fact it radically changes damental Federal of the State and of the relations whole gov- theory these to each other of both ernments governments force that is irresistible, has a argument people; such a too expresses purpose absence language to admit doubt. clearly intended no such results were convinced that

We amendments, nor by the Congress proposed which ratified them. legislatures that the and immunities relied shown Having privileges are those which to citizens of on in the belong argument and that are left to the such, States as gov- article and not for security protection, ernments under the care Federal special government, placed hold ourselves excused defining we Dec. of the court.

^Jpinion which no citizens of the United States and immunities of *35 case those can until.some privileges involving abridge, do make it so. may necessary said that no such im- lest it should

But privileges been are found if those considering munities to be we.have which owe we some excluded, are venture suggest character, its National the Federal -existence to government^ its Constitution, its iaws. v. of well in the case Crandall these is described One of * citizen of this of the

Nevada is said to be-the right It. its Con of implied great country, protected by guarantees to assert stitution, “to come to the seat of any government he have that to transact claim may any government, it, he' have with to seek its to share business may protection, its He offices, its functions. has engage administering free access to its seaports, right through .all conducted, commerce are to the sub- foreign operations offices, land courts treasuries, several justice And from the States.” of Chief Justice quoting language ease, it is said in another that all the pur Taney great for which the Federal poses established, we government one are with common one weare all citizens people, country, States;” is, as snch that citizens, théir United .it in this court Crandall v. are. rights supported Nevada. of a

Another citizen of the United States is to privilege care and demand the Federal protection government life, over his when on the seas or liberty, property high of a within the jurisdiction Of this foreign government. no nor that doubt., can be there his right depends upon as a citizen United States. The character tile. right assemble- redress of petition peaceably grievances, writ of of the habeas are corpus, of the privilege rights the Federal Constitution. by citizen guaranteed waters of the United States,'however use the navigable of the several territory States, they may-penetrate citizens secured to.our treaties by nations,' foreigu rights

* Wallace, 36. Slaughteii-IIouse ['Sup. Opinion of court. of the United and not States, dependent upon citizenship Of these of State. One is conferred citizenship privileges ' article under consideration. that a citizen by very States.can, volition, his own the United become citi- State of the Union residence zen bond by fide same other citizens therein, with State. rights secured these be added the thirteenth rights To the other amendment, and fifteenth articles clause next to be considered. fourteenth, it is useless branch of the But since to'pursue inquiry, claimed we are of plaintiff's opinion tights existence, are not drror, if within citizens the United States the mean- immunities amendment clause of the fourteenth under con- ing sideration. or naturalized

“All born *36 are citizens thereof, of the the-United to jurisdiction subject wherein reside. No the State and of State shall States shall law which the enforce make or any abridge States; citizens Uuited nor shall of immunities or of or life, liberty, any person State deprive property any nor of law, to within deny any person due process without of its laws.” thé equal protection itá jurisdiction been much not these cases pressed has The argument the of charter their deprives plaintiffs the defendant’s that it of that denies law, due without process property the law. The first of of 'these equal protection them the the Constitution since adoption has .been paragraphs a restraint the amendment, as Federal upon of the fifth in some of form to be found expression is also power. a restraint nearly in the constitutions'of law. has then, practi- This States. the power upon the existence of it'now same as during been cally amendment far as so present except government, in this over the matter in power restraining place Federal government. hands therefore, both interpretation, without judicial are not We And of this clause. National, meaning State Dec.

Opinion the court. construction that pro- sufficient that under no tó say we admis- deem ever seen, vision that we have any Louisiana the State of can restraint sible, imposed by butchers of New trade the- the exercise of their by within a be held property Orleans deprivation of that provision. meaning within its juris-

“Nor sliall State person deny any any of the laws.” diction the equal protection and the amendments, In history light we have dis- 'them, already purpose pervading this clause. it is not difficult to cussed, meaning give eman- where the of laws the States newly existence in- which discriminated resided, gross cipated negroes was the evil to them as class, and hardship against justice it such laws are for- clause, this by remedied be' by bidden. laws to its did not conform their the States however,

If, section of the article of fifth then by requirements, enforce it suita- authorized to amendment Congress action much whether doubt We very ble legislation. discrimination directed not against way a State ever’ be will class, race, or on as a account negroes It is within the come purview provision. held that race and tha.t emergency, provision so clearly for its would be application case necessary a'strong be dealt with, it is a that is to But as State other. that matter we leave laws, itsof may safely the validity

alone or some case exercised its shall power, until Congress courts, in its denial of equal justice oppression, at our hands. We find no a decision have claimed shall *37 not deem it do us, iu the one before necessary ease such have relation to may over again, .to argument go of the amendment. clause this particular of the organization govern- In early history divided on the line which have seem to its statesmen ment, of the National government should powers separate this has line though of the State those governments, VOL. XVI.

Opinion the court. a never well defined in such di- beeu' opinion, very public has continued from that to this. vision day of the first eleven amendments to the Con- The adoption so soon after the stitution instrument original accepted, a sense of at time from the shows prevailing danger .that And it Federal cannot be denied' that such power. jeal- continued to exist with until the men many ousy patriotic of the late civil It was then war. discovered out breaking to the true of the was in that -the Union danger perpetuity to combine and con- capacity organizations centrate all the of the State, powers contiguous determined- resistance to the General States, Govern- ment.' has this force to

Unquestionably given great argu- arid added who believe ment, number of those largely National necessity strong government. But, however and however it sentiment, pervading have contributed to the of the amendments may adoption we have been we do not see in those amend- considering, ments the main features of the afiy purpose destroy gen-' eral Undertbe all the pressure of excited feeling system.- out "our statesmen war, have growing still believed existence of the States with for domestic powers and'local of civil government, including regulation and of person essential rights rights property —the —was of our form of perfect working complex government, have additional though proper limi- thought impose on the tations and to confer additional On that power Nation. But. fluctuations whatever be seen in'the may history on this public opinion subject during, period our' na- existence, tional we think it will be that this fouud court, so far as its functions has required, held always with a steady and an even hand the balance between State and Féderal and we trust that such power, continue to be the his- of its relation to that tory so subject as it shall long duties to perform demand of ait construction of the or of Constitution, of its parts. *38 Slaughter-House

Dec. Oases.

Dissenting opinions. Opinion Field, J. The of the Court of Louisiana judgments Supreme these cases a~e

Affirmed. Mr. Justice FIFLD, dissenting:

I am unable’ to with the of the court agree majority and will dis- cases, to state the proceed my reasons sent from tlieir judgment.

The cases out of the act of the grow legislature act Louisiana, entitled An to health pi’otect and Orleans, of New to locate the stock-landings city ‘ and Crescent City slaughter-houses, incorporate ” Company,’ Live-Stock and Landing Slaughter-House and March, 1869, which was on the approved eighth went on the of June into first following. operation title, mentioned in its act the corporation creates name, and of seventeen designated composed with the' and-their successors invests them- powers usually in addition to their and special corporations conferred upon first declares that it not be It exclusive shall privileges. “land, June, 1889, first or lawful, keep, after day swine, or other beeves, calves, cattle, sheep, any slaughter establish have, or animals, keep, any or stock-landing, within the .or abattoirs New city slaughter-houses, yards, and Orleans, Jefferson, St. Ber- the parishes or Orleans act; and in the imposes as provided penalty nard,” except violation of each and its pro- two hundred fifty dollars mentioned authorizes corporation then' visions. of Bernard and within the St. erect parish and establish Orleans, below the United New limits corporate or-at side of the east Mississippi, point barracks, on (cid:127) on the west side of the railroad depot designated below and stables, neces- wharves, sheds, buildings, rivei’, yards, shelter, all kinds stable, preserve land', protect, sary animals,” and other cattle, provides mules, horses, destined for sale or animals, 'other slaughter cattle its environs, shall Orleans landed New city be there company, at the landings yards Field, Dissenting opinions. Opinion— that the if sheltered, yarded, necessary; protected, fees for shall be to certain entitled prescribed company au- animal and be wharves, landed, use of its and for each if animals until the fees are thorized to detain the paid, take for their within fifteen paid days proceedings of these sale. provisions, Every person violating- *39 animals elsewhere, or subjected yarding, keeping landing, and to a fine two hundred dollars. fifty of then erect a The act the corporation grand requires all of dimensions to accommodate sufficient slaughter-house animals butchers, a.nd which slaugh- five.hundred number and with a sufficient of stables tered sheds day, of the received at the at Orleans, for the stock New port the erect other same time company landing- authorizing at and other consistent any points places slaughter-houses act. with the provisions the and that when act then provides slaughter-houses and have been thrown completed open

.accessory buildings shall be for notice thereof use, for given thirty days, public “ within that time all other and and stock-landings slaugh- within of and Orleans, Jefferson, ter-houses St. parishes no shall be and shall be lawful to closed, Bernard longer the meat cattle, calves, of sheep, goats, hogs, slaughter for sale within the which is determined parishes [destined] one hundred dollars for each aforesaid, under penalty offence.” and every shall receive act then that the for provides company in its certain animal buildings prescribed slaughtered and entrails of all animals the head, feet, besides

.fees, gore, of swine. except act require inspection provisions

Other the construc- before are allow animals they slaughtered, to facilitate communication with the build- tion railways and the New city company Orleans. ings con- it is and exclusive But only special privileges cases the act that this court-has consider ferred by These it.. period before granted privileges Their exclusive character not only fol- years. twenty-five Dec. Field,

Dissenting opinions. Opinion it is declared cited, have but I from the lows provisions In the third section language terms in the act. express 'priv- soleand exclusive shall have the the'corporation tl.iat the live-stock, on landing, oí carrying ilege conducting within the limits business and slaughter-house in the fourth And act.” provisions grauted' 1869, June,. that after the first of is, section language “ the of having shall have exclusive privilege company for sale intended at their all animals landing-places landed Jefferson,” Orleans slaughter parishes in its “the exclusive slaughtered” privilege having is intended meat of animals, slaughter-houses sale in these parishes. the real character of special In order to understand know the extent of country it.is necessary privileges, con- affect. The Orleans of population they parish miles; tains an area of of 150 parish country square Bernard, miles; and the of St. Jefferson, parish 384 square an three contain miles. The parishes together 620 square miles, area of population 1154 square two three hundred between thousand people. *40 in in

The error the of the act validity ques- plaintiffs deny so far it confers the and tion, exclusive special The us was an mentioned. first case before brought by the cor- association of butchers in the three parishes against to the assertion and enforcement of these prevent poration, case w-asinstituted the The second by attorney- privileges. in the name of the to State, State, protect general and of these enjoyment privileges, pre- corporation and an association of stock-dealers butchers from ac- vent in with the a tract of land the same district corpora- quiring to erect suitable for which tion, buildings receiving, and animal food cattle, aud preparing slaughtering keeping, third case was.commenced corpora- for market. on a to restrain defendants itself, tion carrying exclu- its in of its own, business similar to violation alleged sive privileges. error substance of the averments plaintiffs in. [Sap.

Dissenting Field, opinions. Opinion the act in is this: That they prior passage question in lawful and business of were engaged necessary pro- Jefferson, and of Orleans, curing parishes bringing in suitable for Bernard, food, St. animals human market; such food that in the for prosecution preparing this business had 'suitable they provided parishes establishments for landing, sheltering, keeping, slaugh- of meat; cattle and the sale that with their associa- tering hundred tion about four connected, and that persons named about a thousand parishes were thus persons animal procuring, food. engaged preparing, iu. selling And that the business of they complain landing, yarding, within the named, cattle intended parishes for keeping, sale'or which was lawful them to before slaughter, pursue June, 1869, first made that act day unlawful for named; one and that the except corporation business cattle and animal food for market, slaughtering preparing it was lawful for them which in these be- pursue parishes is made fore that that act unlawful for them day, to pur- afterwards, sue except buildings company, prescribed fees, certain and surrender upon payment of each valuable animal portion And slaughtered. they that the lawful business of contend shel- landing, yarding, cattle intended for sale or keeping tering, slaughter, in common with individual they the com- the three had a munity parishes right follow, cannot taken from them thus given-over a period of to the sole and exclusive twenty-five years enjoyment of a of seventeen corporation anybody else. And contend that lawful and they-also necessary business'of cattle and animal preparing food slaughtering for market, and all other individuals had follow, be thus restricted within cannot territory 1154 square of this miles to buildings corporation; or be subjected to the emolument of tribute for that body. *41 will one abstract

No deny justice which lies in the error; plaintiffs I position shall endeavor to ' Dee. . Field,

Dissenting opinions. Opinion that the has some show fundamental position support law of the country.

It is contended in for the act in justification question iu the interest of the its adopted promote city, cleanliness and its and was the health, protect legitimate exercise of what is termed the State. police power That extends to all power undoubtedly regulations' affecting order, the health, morals, good peace, safety society, and is exercised on a and in almost great variety subjects, numberless All sorts of restrictions and burdens are ways.. under and when it, these are not in conflict imposed constitutional or fundamental prohibitions, principles, cannot be assailed they successfully judicial tribunal. With this of the State and its power exercise I legitimate thq shall not differ from the court. But under majority pretence police prescribing regulation cannot be to encroach permitted upon any just rights of the citizen, which the Constitution intended to secure against abridgment.

In the law in there are question two only provisions can properly called one’ police regulations—-the requires of animals below the landing slaughtering of New Orleans, and the city other which the in- requires of the animals spection before are When slaughtered. requirements with, .these complied sanitary purposes of the act are Iu all other accomplished. the act particulars ais mere ato grant created corporation it of special exclusive which the privileges by health of the is in no city It is that if way promoted. plain with- can, corporation out the health of the on the busi- endangering public, carry ness of cattle withiii a lauding, keeping, slaughtering district below the an area of over a city thousand embracing miles, it would square health if public endanger other also oil the same permitted carry business within the same district similar under conditions as to the inspection animals. The health city the removal froifi might require its limits and suburbs buildings keeping but no such cattle, slaughtering *42 Slaughter-House Ot. Cases. Field, opinions —Opinion of J.

Dissenting such build- could justify removing possibly legislation object a for the benefit of a single part ings large for the The sanitary pretence regulations corporation. is a one, exclusive shallow of the privileges grant notice. this merits only passing the same to the act on

It is also justify question sought ferries, for turn- that exclusive grants bridges, principle no it can fiud there. are sanctioned. But support pikes a character are of franchises of Those public apper- grants Their use usually to the requires taining government. eminent It is domain. for exercise of sovereign right when one of shall to determine be them government which it shall be and the conditions upon enjoyed. granted, of the to suitable roads, government provide It is duty the convenience ferries for public, bridges, this to extent, to 'devolve if it chooses duty individuals or particular corporations, upon may locality, for such exclusive connected course stipulate privileges as it deem without encroach- may the franchise proper, with freedom or of others. The just rights upon ing- a exclusive thus with privileges, right appertaining grant, is a different from a very thing government, grant, of a exclusive one of the right pursue privileges, a which is life, trades or right ordinary callings apper- individual. solely taining this act of is there between

Nor Louisiana any analogy which confers inventor aof new and the legislation an-exclusive to make and and useful sell improvement right his invention. others government way only the inventor temporary secures to of that enjoyment without, him, would not which, existed. thus only a in the inventor iu the temporary property recognizes prod- own brain. uct his the naked act of Louisiana case, uhaccom- presents where considerations, a public by any pursue

panied and necessary a lawful calling, previously enjoyed by every with which and in connection a thousand citizen, is taken and vested employed, away were daily exclusively Dec.

Dissenting Held, opinions. Opinion of for for an extensive district and a twenty-five years, large in or its exercise for population, single corporation, restricted establishments of the period corporation, allowed onerous conditions. only upon there If exclusive of this character be can granted corporation seventeen in the discre- persous, they may, tion be ato indi- legislature, equally granted single If vidual. be for they may granted twenty-five years they be in' may equally century, granted perpetuity. If be ani- granted landing keeping mals for sale intended slaughter they may equally *43 n granted the for and and other landing grain storing prod- ucts the for earth, or article commerce. If they be for in structures which animal is food may granted pre- for market be for pared structures they equally may grantéd in is which farinaceous or food prepared. vegetable They the human may granted pursuits industry, even in its most and common forms. simple Indeed, upon the on the which exclusive theory the granted by in act is sustained,.there are no in question the monopoly, most odious form, which not be upheld. is, therefore, one question of-the presented gravest not to the but

importance, merely parties here, to the whole is than It less the country. whether nothing question the recent amendments Federal Constitution protect citizens of the United States against deprivation common In rights by my legislation. judgment fourteenth amendment does afford sufih protection, was1 i so intended which framed and Congress n which it. adopted

The counsel for in error have plaintiffs contended, in force, that the is act great question inhibited also the thirteenth amendment.

That amendment prohibits slavery servi- involuntary tude, as a crime, Ibut have not except punishment sup- it was of a construction which posed would susceptible cover in enactment I been so accustomed question. to it as intended to meet form which regard that slavery had. Cases, [Sap. Ct SIíAUGbter-Hoüse Field,

Dissenting opinions. Opinion in this and to which the recent country, previously prevailed existence, that 1 was nor civil war its not owed prepared, am I to the extent force ascribed to yet, give amend- is evident that the counsel. Still it language sense. It is not confined is used in restrictive ment in universal its African alone. to slavery general as well as of black men of white men Slavery application. not, in strict sense merely slavery prohibited, form. servitude every but term, involuntary have not been servitude” The words “involuntary I am judicial exposition, of any legislative subject is found aware in this of, except country, It is, be hereafter noticed. will Act, Civil Eights more however, include than clear that something they term; include also sense in the strict slavery other forms and,all peonage, vaásalage, villenage, serfage, the mere benefit of1 pleasure service'for of compulsory is1 the full terms. abo- import, others. Nor was intended servitude to involuntary lition of slavery freeman, and as such one this country make born to avocatious ordinary to him pursue .give affects all than such as others, other testraint of life without his with them the fruits of labor. A equally enjoy him certain open others pursue callings, prohibition reside condition, or to sex, places the same age, would so far live, deprive others permitted where *44 him, a and freeman, would as place him rights (cid:127) A in a of servitude. others, condition person respects trade and in one one or only only allowed to pursue calling, in be, would not the strict sense of the country, locality but in a condition of none would slavery, probabty term; He be in a condition of cer- that he would servitude. deny not the liberties nor would possess enjoy privileges tainly. him which wmuld force a freeman. to .The compulsion or direction, even for his own benefit in one in labor only as would be almost as and nearly one place, oppressive great' would, of his as the which an invasion compulsion liberty the benefit or of another, to labor for pleasure forcé him Dec. Field,

Dissenting opinions. Opinion servitude; element of constitute an .and would equally in error contend therefore counsel plaintiffs “ a Slates, a law the United State, wherever a law of or a classes of makes discrimination between persons, or one eiass of their freedom their property, or. deprives them to subserve which makes the power, pride, caste avarice, others,” there vanity, vengeance involuntary within servitude exists thirteenth amend- meaning of ment.

It is not necessary, my judgment, disposition for in favor of error, to accept present plaintiffs case as this conclusion of counsel. It, however, entirely correct in the finds act of known as the Civil support Rights Congress ajid was framed Act, adopted upon construction of the thirteenth amendment, its similar giving language breadth. That was amendment ratified on 'the eighteenth †and 1865,* Detíepaber, April year following section, was Civil Its first passed.† Act declares that Rights iu the born United States, not persoiis subject “ power,, citi foreign excluding taxed, Indians States,” zens United atid that such citizens, of every £t,nd race color, without condition of regard any previous servitude, slavery, as a involuntary except punishment whereof the crime, shall have been party convicted, duly shall have the same Territory United to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be par ties, evidence, inherit, and give purchase, lease, sell, hold, real and personal convey full property, equal benefit of all laws and proceedings security person white property, enjoyed by citizens.”

This legislation supported citi- theory was. zens of the States as such were entitled to the rights enumerated, and that to privileges' deny such citizen in these equality rights others, to the extent of was, denial, him to an invol- subjecting * i¡ts proclamation ratification made on that day (13 Stat. at Large, 774). 14 Id. 27.

†

Slaughter-House Cases. Field, J. opinions. Opinion Dissenting — who drew the act and Trumbull, servitude. Senator notary Senate, stated, on in the advocate open who was its earuest that the measure it in that the discussion body, upon ing declaration amend intended to eflect give .was and to secure to ment, prac S.tates to several statutes in tical freedom. After passed referring States; between the some of Southern discriminating after citizens, and white definition freedmeu citing Blackstone, the Senator civil said: “I liberty given which aud all, take it that statute which equal civil secured to citizen of deprives any rights, his is an encroachment citizens, other unjust upon liberty; a is in the Constitu fact badge servitude tion is prohibited.”* within the three Louisiana, named, the act of parishes

By thousand one hundred a one territory square exceeding over two hundred thousand miles, people, embracing animal man who the business of pursues preparing fop his animals to the market must take food buildings his work in and must them, perform company, favored the use must pay prescribed buildings leave with it valuable tribute portion company, n ofeach animal man in these parishes Every slaughtered. sale, animal for must him who has or other carry a.horse and for their use and stables of this company, pay yards in is not allowed to his work his own a like tribute. He do to take his animals his own stables or keep buildings, own even should erected them his yards, though district as the stables, in the same buildings, yards district embraces over eleven hun- and that company,' miles. dred act prohibitions imposed by square .The and dealers cattle in these butchers parishes, upon conferred the favored corpora- the special privileges and as odious character as are similar principle tion, last the restrictions century upon peas- imposed in.the in áome of France, where, French parts says antry * 1, Glotie, Session, Congress, part page 1st 39tli Congressional ' -Dec. Field,

Dissenting opinions. Opinion writer, hunt on peasant prohilffed own lands, his *46 waters, to fish in his own to at his own to grind mill, cook at his oven, his own clothes on his own dry machines, to whet his at instruments his own to make grindstone, his wine, oil, own his and his cider his at own . . or press,'. to sell his at the commodities market.” public exclu- sive to all these was vested in'the lords privileges mpst “The of the vicinage. history execrable tyranny “ times,” of ancient writer, same offers says nothing like This this. cannot be category oppressions applied a free man, or to the of his peasant, violation except rights.”

, ifBut the exclusive conferred the Loui- privileges upon siana can sustained, it corporation perceived why exclusive construction privileges keejúng machines, ovens, and for all the grindstones, wine-presses, numerous trades and for the of which pursuits prosecution are not be buildiugs required, may equally bestowed upon other or individuals, corporations private periods indefinite duration.

It is not however, I have said, rest necessary, my to. the' act in tne objections terms and mean- question upon of'the thirteenth amendment. The of the ing provisions fourteenth which is amendment, properly supplement the thirteenth, cover, case before my judgment, us, and inhibit which confers any legislation and exclu- special sive like these under privileges consideration. The amend- ment was to obviate adopted objections had been raised and force to the of the Civil pressed great validity Act, common of American place Eights rights citizens under National protection government. “ It first declares that or born naturalized States, United thereof, are subject jurisdiction citizens United and of the State wherein they “ then reside.” déclares no State shall make or en- force law which shall any immuni- abridge ties of citizens of the United nor shall life, person of without deprive any liberty, due property, 'Slaughterhouse Field, Dissenting opinions' Opinion of nor within its of law, jurisdiction deny any person process the laws.” protection equal clause of this amendment determines The first who how their State's, citizenship citizens its Before enactment there much created. diversity and statesmen whether there was any opinion among jurists and, State, of that of the if such citizenship independent With existed, as to the manner which originated. there -was no number opinion prevailed great State. of.the such-citizenship citizenship independent of Mr. Calhoun and the class was the opinion repre Such In his c'elebrated in 'the Senate speech sented by him. in'1838, to the reliance Bill, expressed the Force referring the fact that we are citizens of the United a senator upon means If citizen of the he he United States States;- said: *47 extends to one whose the entire at citizenship a citizen' large, a local the without limits of country having geographical a sort of citizen of in some State Territory, citizenship a be a that citizen would all have to such world, I say the individual of this de that not nondescript; single perfect mass the entire of our can found-in population. scription of on the display pomp eloquence Notwithstanding is a citizen of some State or Ter occasion, citizen the of an the Con such, under and as express provision ritory, .of citi to all and immunities is entitled stitution; privileges States; in this and other no the several zens in is. are citizens of the United States.”* we that sense of of case the this subject In the Dred Scott citizenship discussed. ex- was and elaborately fully United States been Mr. Curtis has in the of Justice gener- opinion position the the of'the one country profession ally accepted l$,w. views of constitutional And soundest containing Constitution, United that, under citizenship held he citizen-, was natives upon reference to dependent in under their constitutions and States, several ship laws.

* Works, 2, p. 242. vol. Calhoun’s Dec. '187*2.] SlAUGHTER-IIüUSE CASES. Field,

Dissenting cf .opinions. Opinion— Justice, case, The Chief that and a of court majority him, with held the words that the United States” “people ” terms; citizens were that the synonymous people were the respective parties Constitution; .States that consisted of the free inhabitants thooe people States; had their provided Constitution they ; uniform rule of naturalization adoption descendants their naturalized persons only be citizens of the who could United States, and that 'it State to invest power any other any he so that could person citizenship enjoy under,the a citizen Constitution, and that .of therefore the descendants this persons brought country sold as slaves were could not be not, citizens within the mean- Constitution. ing first clause fourteenth amendment changes whole and removes subject, of dis- region .it aud

cussion doubt. recognizes express terms, if it create, does not citizens United States, and it makes their citizenship dependent upon place birth, the fact of their and not adoption, constitution or-' laws State or the condition of their apcestry. A of a is now citizen citizen of the only United States in that State. The fundamental residing rights, privileges, and immunities which to him as a free belong man and a free- now to him' aas citizen citizen, belong and are not his dependent upon citizenship of these State. The exercise rights and the privileges, received from such exercise, degree enjoyment are always *48 or more less affected the condition and the by local institu- or or State, tions town where he city, resides. .They in a are thus -affected State wisdom of by its laws, officers, of its of its ability efficiency magistrates, education and'morals of its and people, by other many con- This is siderations. result which follows from the consti- tution of and can never be society, avoided, but in no other be affected caii by action of the way they State, or by. - the residence of the citizen therein. do not .They derive [Snp. Field.

Dissenting opinions. Opinion from its cannot be destroyed their existence legislation, its by power. new confer

The amendment does not to attempt to or or enumerate citizens, immunities or privileges there It assumes that those define already existing. to which and immunities such belong right privileges as and ordains that be such, they citizens abridged shall to If this inhibition has reference no by State legislation. refers, character, of this and immunities but only privileges court in their such to opinion, held majority as were its immunities before adoption spe- privileges or iu the Constitution necessarily7implied cially designated States,dt to citizens of was a vain as belonging most enactmeut, and idle accomplished nothing, excited and'the on its people unnecessarily Congress pas- and immunities thus "With designated sage. privileges laws, ever have interfered no State could its implied and no new constitutional was to inhibit provision required interference. The the Constitution and such supremacy controlled laws of United States State always of that character. But if the amendment refers legislation natural and inalienable to all to the belong rights the inhibition has con- citizens, profound significance sequence. are the immunities which are

What, then, ? legislation secured against abridgment Act the Civil has Rights In first section Congress terms, at least has stated its interpretation given in its these terms in- which, judgment, some of rights include there declared clude; it has contracts, sue, and enforce evi- make parties give sell, hold, and real inherit, lease, dence, purchase, convey and to full and benefit equal and personal property, for the security person .prop- laws proceedings ' was act, true, it is before the fourteenth That passed erty.” the amendment as I have but amendment, adopted, or, act, obviate said, objections speaking already to obviate I should objections accurately, say, more legis- *49 Dec. Slaughter-House 97 Cases.

.Dissenting opinions. Opinion Field, J. — lation of a character, similar extending protection the National over common government all citi rights zens of the United States. after its ratifica Accordingly, tion, re-enacted the act under the Congress belief what ever doubts have existed may of its previously validity, they were removed amendment.* terms, in privileges immunities, are not new amendment;

the' they Constitution before the amendment adopted. found in They the second of the fourth article, section which declares that “the citi zeus each State shall be entitled to all privileges immunities citizens the several States,” been subject consideration frequent de judicial In cisions. v. Mr. Coryell,† Justice said Washington Corfield “ no he had hesitation in to those confining expressions and immunities which were, fun privileges nature, damental; which to citizens of belong right all free gov ernments, and which have at all times been enjoyed by several citizens States which the Union, compose time of their from the free, becoming independent, and, in what sovereign;” those' considering fundamental he said were, privileges would be perhaps mor< tedious than difficult to enumerate but them, that they might be “all under the comprehended following general heads: protection government; of life and enjoyment .the liberty, acquire right possess property and to kind, obtain pursue happiness safety, nevertheless, to such restraints as the subject, government justly pre,scribe general good whole.” me to be a sound This appears construction of the clause and immunities question. designated are lohich those citizens belong right governments. free these- must be Clearly placed among pursue a lawful in a lawful manner, employment without other re than such as straint affects all equally In persons. the discus- * 31st, 1870; May 16 Large, Stat. at 144. 4 Washington’s Court, Circuit 380.

† VOL. XVI. .Ct. Field,

Dissenting opinions.- -Opinion of of theCivil iu sions Act passage Congress Rights reference, was made of Mr. -Justice language repeated- was cited Senator Trumbull with Washington. that it enumerated observation the-very rights belonging set forth in the a citizen of first section *50 the statement that all act, of the born in persons declared the act United citizens of by being thenceforth be States,-would entitled to the rights these were citizens, that fundamental rights great were act; and that set forth “as set forth in the they apper- freeman.” taining and immunities the second designated'in privileges article of the Constitution áre,

section of fourth then, cited, the decision those which of right belong according en- all free can be to the citizens of they governments, the citizens of State in the clause under that by each joyed as the same terms conditions several States upon of the latter States. citizens No dis- by enjoyed one State the citizens can be made by crimination against can nor in their im- any greater of other enjoyment, .States as is laid its own such levied than citizens-. position iu the insures these equality enjoyment It is clause several States whilst in between citizens of rights same State. case of Paul is there opinion

Nor anything as views, all militates which at against v. Virginia,* The act the court. Virginia, by majority supposed in that case, under consideration which was pro 1866, under incorporated that no insurance company, vided within, on its State, business laws of the should carry a license for without that obtaining the State previously not receive such license until and that it should purpose; it with the treasurer bonds a had deposited tq to an amount character, varying thirty fifty specified No was dollars. such insur deposit required thousand on State,"for incorporated carrying ance companies * Wallace, 168. Dec. Field,

Dissenting opinions. Opinion of State; their business within the cited the. and in the case statute of validity provisions discriminating between her own and the Virginia corporations corporations that the other was was- ..States, assailed. contended with, statute in this that clause of was in conflict particular eac-h the Constitution which the citizens of declares that State shall be and immunities entitled to answered, citizens the several But the court States.” not citizens within the corporations meaning clause; that the term as used citizens there applied only alle- to natural members of the persons, politic owing body artificial the. State, not to created giance the attributes which the legislature only possessing had had been held legislature prescribed; though en- that where contracts or were to be property rights forced the courts the United corporation, against pf for the would, jurisdiction, purpose maintaining consider the citizens of the corporation representing created, under the laws and to this State, of which it *51 extent the would-treat a a citizen within pro- corporation ns of the vision the Constitution judicial power extending States to controversies between citizens of different it States, had never been in case which held had come under its in observation, either the State.or Federal courts, that a was a citizen within the of corporation the meaning clause in the citizens each of State to the question, entitling and immunities citizens in of the several States. privileges And the court observed, that the and immunities privileges secured that were those provision and immu- by privileges were nities which common to the in the latter States, citizens laws, constitution aud virtue of their by under.their being citizens; that citizens in their special enjoyed by privileges own States were not secured in other States the by provision; that it was not intended it to to the laws of one State by give in States; other that could have no such any operation they the of operation except by permission, expressed implied, States; and the those that con- special privileges ferred at must, therefore, home the assent unless be-enjoyed Field, of

Dissenting opinions. Opinion— therein to their enjoyment given. other States And a a spe- court held, corporation, being grant the so existence had no be- the corporators, legal cial privileges where and that created, limits of sovereignty yond en- States, existence other its by recognition tKe made therein, its contracts depended purely forcement States, which could be assent of those granted upon those conditions'as States terms and think such might upon to impose. proper was, the decision citizens of

The whole purport them iuto other States do not carry State one '.wdth conferred law's immunities, privileges special or other character. That corporate their own involved this questions has no decision pertinency and immunities which of common privileges case.' stand on a citizens, different very footing. belong of each State do with them' into citizens carry These the clause in and are secured by question, other terms of with'citizens of the equality their enjoyment in one This enforced particular equality latter'States. case recent of Ward v. The State Mary- court Wallace. A statute the 12th of of that State land, reported aof sum from a non-resident paymeut larger required enable him to sell his a license to merchandise in trader did a resident State, trader,.and than court in thus that the the nou- held-, discriminating against statute contravened clause' trader to the- resident citi- securing tli.e each immunities of privileges zens citizens several States. of his privilege disposing urns an essential incident to his ownership, property, non-resideut, wras the statute subjected by possessed burden than was Maryland greater imposed upon her own of- citizens. The like privilege *52 this particular non-resident abridged by legis- lation. did clause for the

What the of the question protection hostile and citizens one State of against discriminating legis- the fourteenth States, of'other amendment does for lation Dec. Slaughter-IIouse 101- Field, of

Dissenting opinions. Opinion— States citizen of the United against of protection him in favor hostile and against discriminating legislation same or in different reside in the others, whether of of the Constitution fourth article If under States. between immunities secured of equality privileges fourteenth amendment under the States, citizens of different citizens of the United is secured between same equality States. the fourth article of under not be

It will pretended create monopoly any the Constitution State could any her own citizens, in favor of known trade or manufacture would exclude an of equal par- or them, any portion citi- in the trade or manufacture monopolized by ticipation confer, example, She could zens of other States. shoes, manufacture her citizens the sole right upon any articles in the sell those silk, or the sole boots, or or from citizens nou-resideut engaging so as to exclude State citizens sale. The nou-resideut in a similar manufacture under the provisions claim could privilege equality exercising with the citizens fourth article them, as thus, other’s, respects well as with as monopoly it would be were not so cease. If would the monopoly time the citizens at exclude any the State to power branches of in particular from participation of other time to the exclusion and extend trade, commerce traffic them. any prevent time so effectually for the does protection clause in Now, what question creation monopolies one State against citizens amend- fourteenth other States, citizens in favor citizen of United of every for the does protection ment whatever. creation of monopoly any States against of citizens and .immunities in any secured them, abridgment against one of every them amendment places fourteenth State. form by All mo- authority. the National under guardianship an invasion manufacture trade or known nopolies the liberty encroach upon for they privileges, and were happiness, pursue property citizens acquire *53 Slaughter-House Cases. Field, of Dissenting opinions. Opinion J. — in at. common law the void Case held great Monopolies, of Queen the of Elizabeth. decided during reign an is defined to be institution or A allowance monopoly of the State commis- from sovereign power grant, to or for the sole sion, otherwise, or person corporation, any or selling, making, working, using anything,, buying, or bodies or any person persons, politic corporate, whereby freedom or restrained liberty any they sought or hindered in their lawful All before, trade.” such had or known trade manufacture relating grants havp whenever held been they judges England, consideration, to law de- come for be void at common as up trade, freedom- of labor and in- stroying discouraging livelihood, an honest restraining getting dustry, it into the to enhance the grantees power putting embraces, definition The it will be of commodities. price sole observed, sell- merely privilege .buying articles, manufacture, particular engaging ing also the sole others' but privilege using anything be restrained of the freedom or liberty they previously lawful hindered in trade, such It thus had trade. suitable, and use of covers-in every particular possession aud stables, and yards, buildings keeping protecting es- cattle and other for their Such animals, slaughter. and successful are essential to the free tablishments prosecu- trade animal tion butcher of the lawful by any preparing for market. The exclusive such food privilege supplying and other conveniences for'the prosecution buildings, yards, business in a district of of this country, granted by large- seventeen is as much a mo- act of Louisiana to persons, had as the act granted company nopoly though aud the animals them- exclusive privilege buying selling restrains the butchers the freedom selves. equally and hihders them in their had, lawful liberty previously trade. for the Case Monopo- reasons judgment given In that case force to the case at bar. a

lies equal apply him the sole had been plaintiff giving granted patent Dee. of Dield,

Dissenting opinions. Opinion in them, and' entire traffic to import playing-cards, right make such cards realm. sole within the right sold defendant, made and patent, disregard and was ac others, such cards and some imported gross exclusive sued infringing cordingly sold As of the cards made and portion plaintiff. in- he he was a haberdasher realm, within pleaded free and as such had citizen of that city, London and sell them. The court held the make plea good divers void, common law and the against *54 grant “ weli said “as trades,” Parliament. All the court, acts of of idleness baue .others, mechanical as prevent (the men in labor exercise and the youth and commonwealth) and families, maintenance of themselves and their the for when of their to serve the substance, the increase queen for for commonwealth, shall occasion profitable require, sole to the to have the and therefore plaintiff grant and and of them the commonlaw against making benefit and Hufdis case of Davenant The liberty subject.”* a com In that case in of this was cited support position. London, char merchant tailors in by having power pany the better rule ter make ordinances for government .to were law so cousonant to that company, society made an ordinance brother reason, cloth-worker, uot cloth dressed aby should who of his should one-half the society, put brother being exercised the same who brother of the cloth to some society ten cloth-worlcer, pain forfeiting shillings, art of a it had that the ordinance, although “and it was adjudged law, was common charter, against countenance everysubject, the liberty subject; it toas against because for to be dressed his cloth put has law, liberty by freedom n and cannotberestrained certain cloth-workerhe pleases, what therefore, and, in would monopoly, persons,for effect charter charter or of a .by color ordinance, any grant such n void.” would be effect, such * part 11,-page Eeports, 86. Coke’s "Slaughter-House Dissénting opinions. Opinion Field, in its refers court, to the increase Although"fho opinion, deterioration of commodities which prices quality result from the the main necessarily grant monopolies, was their interference with the lib- decision ground"of po of the his maintenance and that erty pui-sue subject of his lawful trade or This family any employment. liberty is assumed to be the-natural every Englishman. people struggle English against monopolies forms one of the most and'instructive interesting chapters ended in the of the history. finally passage I, of 21st which it James declared that all statute and" all commissions, monopolies licenses, charters, grants, or any person bodies letters-patent, persons, politic whatsoever, of or for the sole corporate, buying, selling, realm, within the rriáking, working, using of'anything” or the dominion of Wales altogether contrary pf void, laws realm and with the utterly exception for new inventions limited for a patents period, then printing, belong supposed prerogative .for and manufacture of preparation king, certairi intended for the articles ordnance war. prosecution of common law of as is thus seen, condemned England, known trade or manufacture, all monopolies and de- any- void all clared special others grants privileges whereby *55 be of could deprived they had, liberty previously hindered in their be lawful trade. The statute of I, James have referred, which I embodied the law as it had only been declared courts by previously England, although of that frequently disregarded sovereigns country. common law of is the of the basis England jurispru- of the United States. It was to this dence brought country with the colonists, statutes, and was English together far as so it was to their applicable established h.ere condition. law and-the benefit such of That statutes as the-English their colonization, at the time of and which existed found to be- to their applicable circum- experience had by were claimed of the stances, Colo- Congress “ indubitable as part liber- nies 1774 rights ' Slaughter-House Dec.

Dissenting, opinions. Opinion Field, ties.”* Of the .statutes, the benefits of which was thus claimed, the statute of James I was one against monopolies of the most And when the important. Colonies separated from the rnoth’er no vías more country privilege fully recog nized or more into the completely incorporated fundamental law of the than that free country in the British every subject was entitled to empire his pursue happiness by following of the known established trades and occupations to such subject restraints as country, only equally affected all others. The immortal document which proclaimed declared independence as self-evident country truths that the Creator had endowed meu all inalien certain able and that rights, life, among and the liberty, and that pursuit to secure these happiness; rights govern ments are instituted men.” among

If it said that civil law and not the common law is the basis of the of Louisiana, I jurisprudence answer that XVI, decree in 1776, of Louis abolished all monopolies trades special privileges corporations, guilds, companies, trading to ex- every person authorized or, .efcisfe,without his' restraint, art, trade, profession, au.d .has law béeirthe of France and of her §úch colonies' ever law .since’,' that Louisiana at prevailed the time of her flip United then, cession States. .to Since notwithstanding ,in tile 'existence that State the civil'law as the basis her qf freedom of deuce, j'urispTU pursuit has been always recog- as the nized common of her’citizens. But were this otherwise, secures the ahlendment like pro- fourteenth do all in that tection citizens State against any abridgment of their common other Tights, States. That amend- was intended ment effect to the practical give declaration of inalienable which are rights,'rights gift which the' law does not Creator, confer, but only recognizes. Lopdon trader in If thfe could awas free' plead he city citizen enforcement his against injury monopolies, amendment surely‘tmder fourteenth * Congress, i, pp. Journals vol. 28-30. *56 Slaughter-House

106 Cases. Field, Dissenting of J. opinions. Opinion— States be able to his citi- of United should citizeu plead as a similar of the republic protection against zenship áuy and immunities. invasion his. privileges has this citizen to be So fundamental every privilege enactments, free from pur unequal disparaging life, been suit of the avocations ordinary regarded, so arisen where the been instances have has few principle, courts. to call for the far violated as interposition has with the occurred, whenever this But exception which are the barefaced Louisiana, cases from most present all, the enactfnent with the privi interfering flagrant has been of the citizen void. pronounced illegal lege law, under under same When case which the present arisen, came before Circuit Court of’ cases Louisiana, in the District of there was no of the court in the law, hesitation on part declaring to be features, an invasion of one of exclusive the funda its †The citizen.* mental privileges justice, presiding court, observed that it opinion .delivering might enumerate or define what were the essential difficult be citizen of the United of a which a State privileges laws but that so far as invade, not its could question was consideration concerned, said might safely under “ it is American citizen one privileges such industrial and follow .lawful pursuit, to adopt inju as he see fit, without unrea community, rious molestation, re sonable without-being regulation those and odious unjust, oppressive, stricted by any or exclusive which have been con monopolies free And There demned is' governments.’* : again than the more sacred citizenship no right right pursue lawful in a lawful employment unmolested manner. It is. nor Jess than the sacred more of labor.” nothing v. City In Chicago before the Rumpff† Illinois, we have a Court of case similar in all its Supreme * Live-Stock, &c., Association v. City, &c., The Crescent Company (1 Reports, United States 398). Abbott’s Illinois, 90. † Dec.

Dissenting opinions. Opinion Field, *57 features to the one at bar. That authorized city being by its charter to license the of ani- regulate slaughtering mals within the limits, corporate, its common council passed what was an termed ordinance in reference thereto, whereby a was for the particular building designated of slaughtering all animal's intended for sale or in.the the consumption city, of which owners the granted exclusive for a to have all such animals period specified at their slaughtered t, establish to be a sum paid specific men for the privi- tnere all slaughtering by lege it. The exercising this'action validity authorities .the'corporate was as-’ sailed on the ground exclusive grant privileges, and the court “The charter said:. authorizes the au- city license or thorities to such regulate establishments. Where made has the that body necessary regulations, required or the the health comfort of inhabitants, persous all inclined an such should '-to an occupation pursue opportunity to such otherwise conforming the regulations, ordinance n be would tend to unreasonable oppression. Or, if they it for the should interest the regard that such city estab- should licensed, be the lishments ordinance should be so all framed it persous desiring obtáin might licenses by to the terms prescribed conforming for the regulations' such We business.- it neither regard governmeut'of a anor license of the business to'confine it one- regulation or.to to one individual. Such an ¿ive building is action and creates a that never oppressive, monopoly could have the General by contemplated been It Assembly. impairs of all óther persons,' the' cuts them rights oft' from a a but in not a only share business. legal, necessary Whether this as an or a contract, consider ordinance we it is equally ¿s' unauthorized, the'rules being opposed governing n municipal by-laws. adoption principle equality violated corporators this rights If is. contract. common council may require animals for the of,the consumption city a slaughtered build- single lot, on a or the owner particular a ing, be-paid specific what sum for would privilege, prevent a making Field,

Dissenting opinions. Opinion .that all of the other vege- similar contract with some person flour, tables, fruits, dry goods, groceries, he receive on his lot and other commodities should be sold can see no difference ? We compensation privilege in principle.” court,in of a was true speák-ing opinion an and not of act of ordinance

municipal legislature observed But, counsel, as it legislative State. justly entitled to is no more rights destroy equality body of a than' a nor to fetter citizens, industry city, municipal These from invasion protected government. rights law. the'fundamental the case of Norwich v. Nor Company In Gaslight * which before City Company,

wich Gas Supreme *58 Connecticut, that the Court of it common council appeared had resolution of the a to passed Norwich city purporting his heirs and the to one assigns, period Treadway, grant to streets of fifteen the lay years, right gas-pipes that no other or that person city, corporation declaring the common council, the consent of should, by lay gas-pipes, time; The in the streets that plaintiffs having pur during an assert exclusive undertook to chased Treadway, as the for their another com use streets purposes, against to’ the was streets for same the purposes. using pany consideration “As, then, whatever, the court no And said: was reserved for character, or either of private public aud and as the business manufacturing grant; selling gas like the manufacture of business, an or léather, is ordinary of trade in other article respect government we that as no think so far tlie re has exclusive prerogative, than the striction of other from plaintiffs using means of str’eetsfor the purpose distributing pipes, gas intended as a restriction operate can viewed fairly aud its free manufácture within sale, comes-directly upon aud of a the definition monopoly; description although we have no constitutional provision direct monop- against * Connecticut, 19. Cases, Dec.

Dissenting Field, opinions. Opinion of the whole of a free (cid:127)oly, yet theory opposed government to such and it does not even aid which grants, require be derived from the Bill of the first section of Bights, £ which declares that man no or set of men are entitled exclusive emoluments or public from the commu- render them void.” nity,’

In the Mayor City Hudson v. an Thorne,* applica tion made to the chancellor of New York to dissolve an injunction defendants from restraining erecting in Hudson a vacant lot owned city building them, intended to be used as a The common hay-press. council of the had an ordinance no city passed directing erect, should person construct, or cause to be erected or wooden constructed, or frame barn, stable, or hay-press of certain dimensions, within certain limits specified without its city, permission. appeared, however,, there such buildings already existence, only but within compact parts also city, prohibited limits, the of which for the occupation storing pressing the common council did hay not intend to And restrain. “If chancellor-said: the manufacture of pressed hay within the compact parts city dangerous causing fires, common promoting council ex power their charter pressly given by prevent on of carrying manufacture; such hutas all must by-laws be reasonable, the common council cannot make a which shall by-law per mit one on the person carry business and dangerous pro hibit another has who an equal right pursuing *59 same business.”

In all these cases there is a of the of recognition equality citizens in the of the right among pursuit avoca- ordinary life, of and a tions declaration that all of exclusive grants in contravention of this privileges, equality, com- against mon and void. right,

This of equality from all right, exemption dispar- enactments, partial lawful aging of pursuits life,

* Paige, 261. Sr„vu.;HTER-IIou?E Field, of Dissenting opinions. Opinion is the the-whole country, distinguishing privi throughout States. them, of of the United To everywhere, citizens lege without all avocations are all open nil pursuits, professions, all than such as are restrictions imposed equally upon other of the same condition. The State sex, others age, of such pursuit calling regulations every proscribe secure order life as will promotedhe public-health, good when but of society, and advance prosperity general once must be free to be prescribed, pursuit Calling followed within the citizen by every who conditions-desig nated, and will-conform to-the This is the fun regulations. idea rest; damental our institutions and unless to in adhered our legislation country government abe in name. The only will fourteenth amend .republic makes it ment,in essential to the of my judgment, validity this State that should every equality (cid:127)the legislatibo light How has been widely’this be equality departed respected. how the act from, .entirely rejected trampled upon by have: shown. And .is me I it .Louisiana, already its that matter profound regret validity by recognized a, court, labor, it'the of free one majority is viol man, most sacred imprescriptible rights of Connecticut, Court As Supreme ated.* stated * labor,” says man-has in his own Adam property -which “The Smith, other'property, so is the is the original,foundation as it poor man lies in the patrimony inviolable. most sacred'and ; employ- his and to hinder him from dexterity of own hands strength and he. thinks dexterity proper, in what'manner strength without ing this property. this most sacred plain'violation is a neighbor, his injury to liberty just both of the upon the workman is a manifest encroachment him. As it hinders the employ might disposed one.from who thóso employing so it hinders theothers proper, he thinks what working at 10, Nations; 1,b, eh'. part 2.) Wealth proper.” think (Smith’s whom XVI, 1776, pro- freedom to trades and giving edict In Louis minister, he recites contributions Turgot, by his fessions,'prepared says: “It-'was companies, trade guilds and made been had undoubtedly the illusion prolonged advantages fiscal of these allurement industry and their infraction injury they did to immense and concealed persons as- so far .that some had extended illusion natural-right. This might king which the royal privilege was a right'to work that the serted *60 Dec. Ill Cases. Dissenting opinions. Opinion of Bradley, J. —

the cáse cited, of exclusive made grants such as is privileges, tbe aet in by question, to the whole opposed theory free and it no government, aid bill of requires from any to render them void. rights That is.a free only govern ment, the American sense of the term, under which the inalienable citizen to his is right pursue happiness * unrestrained, and except by just, equal, laws.* impartial

I am authorized the CHIEF JUSTICE, Mr. Justice and SWAYNE, Mr. Justice BRADLEY, to state that they concur with me in this dissenting opinion.

Mr. Justice BRADLEY, also dissenting: I concur in the which has opinion been read Mr. just Field; but Justice desire to a add few observations for the of more purpose fully views on my illustrating impor- tant decided in question, and the cases, special grounds on -which rest.

The fourteenth amendment to the Constitution of the section 1, declares that no State shall make or enforce law which shall abridge immunities of citizens of the.United States. legislature under Louisiana, pretence

.The making for the police regulation promotion public health, an act passed conferring upon created corporation, the exclusive act, for right, to have twenty-five years, maintain slaughter-houses, for cattle, landings for yards sell, subjects his and that purchase were bound to from him. We hasten to correct this error and tho repel conclusion. God in giving to man wants rendering desires labor necessary satisfaction, conferred tbe men, right upon to labor all first, this property sacred, most He, imprescriptible therefore, all.” . . . regards it as tbe first duty of benevolence, justice, his the worthiest act of to free his subjects from restriction inalienable of humanity.” “* liberty, great Civil society end of all human and government, that state each individual has power pursue his happi- own according interest, to his ness own views of his and the dictates of his con- science, unrestrained, except by equal, just, impartial laws.” Shars- (1 Blackstone, 127, wood’s note 8.) Slauuhter-IIoüse Bradley,

Dissenting opinions. Opinion within the intended for cattle parishes slaughter, confining contain- Jefferson, Bernard, and St. of Orleans, territory miles, twelve hundred city square including nearly ing Orleans; aud other persons New prohibiting landings having slaughter-houses, building, keeping, *61 cattle intended for and for cattle, slaughter confining yards and that all cattle limits; said and within the requiring food in that district should to be for animals other slaughtered the favored aud works of to the be brought slaughter-houses aud a of a to the fee to be payment slaughtered, compauy for such act. company the that this privi-

It is contended prohibition abridges citizens of United espe- immunities leges affected who error, particularly plaintiffs cially is does so or not and whether it simple ques- thereby; solution of this in this case. And the tion question depends of two other to solution wit: questions, it one aud of a citizen of Is First. rights privileges he to such civil as States pursue United employment to such choose to reasonable adopt, subject regulations law? as may be^prescribed a to one Is exclusive monopoly, given

Secondly. right, all others, exclusion of to keep slaughter- person miles, twelve in a district 'honses, square hundred nearly a for a of meat city, large 'regula- supply reasonable has a tb that legislature employment right tion ?- impose is one of vast importance, first of questions

The our foundations government. at the ques- lies very itself, the fourteenth settled amendment is now tion o.f, is the the United States primary citizenship citizenship State citizenship country; secondary in this of the United States derivative, upon citizenship depending of residence. States have citizen’s place to restrict had, ever their citizen- now, any power if A citizen classes or to United any persons. ship to a constitutional to and has reside perfect go States he claim and to chooses, therein, State citizenship in any Dec. ,J. Bradley,

Dissenting opinions. Opinion— citizen; and the other with every and an equality rights him in that sustain nation pledged'to whole power superior, pray any bound cringe He is not right. all the a means rights as enjoying act of grace, when citizens. And other enjoyed privileges sectional hate can be violence, mob lawlessness, spirit effect to full practical give so repressed completely and a more nation, prosperous shall be happier we right, United Citizenship we now are. than one Constitution, sure is, and, be, according ought title to equal rights and undoubted as the such h> legislature regulations this Union, subject full be denied If equality man prescribe.

may rightfully the essential one of rights is' denied law, he before of the United States. aas citizen citizenship a citizen of the United primarily citizen, then, being Every he re- a citizen of the State States, and, secondarily, where andimmunites of are the what, sides, general, Is the or' States? libei-ty, right, a citizen *62 one lawful of them? employment of any choosing privilege should a law pass prohibiting a State legislature If or from county, a township, city, of particular inhabitants would such a law violate shoes, or leather making tanning as of those inhabitants immunities citizens or any privileges or and' immuni- States, privileges only United if ? Or that State State citizens of ties as particular legis- caste, a law of trades and should making lature pass trades and enumerated or certain professions, professions, follow no one could such trades or so that any hereditary, was his father, which that pursued by except professions violate the immunities of a law would such privileges States', as citizens United State the people Would have no redress of the State? as citizens only of that State ? the courts particular but to appeal the essential me to be before us question seems to This And,’in my judgment, right for consideration. he lawful chooses to whatever employment

citizen to follow -lawful to all one of himself regulations) (submitting adopt XVI. VOL. Bradley, opinions. Opinion

Dissenting — which the of. and one his most valuable legislature rights, invade, its own constitu- whether restrained State cannot tion or not. of its citizens the conduct of a State to right regulate one, and not to and extensive broad undoubtedly very certain fundamental But there are restricted. lightly It cannot which-this infringe.

rights regulation cannot exercise, but it the manner of their may prescribe now of the subvert the I themselves. speak rights rights for the citizens of free present Granting government. that the d’annotclaim the privi- citizens of one government of citizens in another prior leges government; one the citizens union of our American States North in another could not claim the citizens privileges citizens of wTasformed the State; or, that after the uniou claim the such, United could not privileges State; the citizens of each of citizens yet any particular the States and States would be the citizens citizens, entitled to certain and immunities as at privileges the hands their own immu- government privileges which, would be nities their own respectively governments free and maintain. In this bound' respect country, certain inherited traditionary people rights means ancestors, from their citizenship something. privileges attached to it has certain and immunities It privileges whether restricted or implied bj' express government, tem- cannot do so limitations, take away impair. it cannot do so And force, but right. porarily attach as well to and immunities citizenship of the States. as to the United States citizenship with them to its shores of this people country brought which had been wrested Englishmen; rights rights at various of the nation’s periods English sovereigns these fundamental One of history. rights expressed *63 freeman shall words, found in Oharta: “No Magua taken, of his or or be disseized freehold or imprisoned, or exiled, or be outlawed or customs, or free liberties him nor will we or condemn otherwise pass upon destroyed; Dec. 1872.]

Dissenting opinions. Opinion Bradley, J. him but lawful of his the law of by judgment peers by the land.” constitutional writers this English expound as life, inviolable, ex- rendering liberty, article property due of law. This is the cept process by very right claim in this error case. of these Another 'plaintiffs habeas corpus, that of rights right having any ,at invasion of examined personal liberty into, judicially once, Blackstone clas- by competent judicial magistrate. these fundamental under heads, sifies three as the rights of individuals, absolute wit: rights personal right and the personal security, liberty, right pri- vate And of the last he The third abso- property. says: inherent in lute right, Englishman, property, which consists in thé free use, enjoyment, disposal all his without control or diminution save acquisitions, the laws the land.” only by and immunities of were estab- privileges Englishmen

lished and secured various acts.of long usage it Parliament. But be said that of' Parliament has unlimited the laws England authority, might repeal which have from time to time been enacted. Theoretically this is so, but it is not. has practically no written England true; it is but constitution, it has an unwritten one, resting acknowledged, frequently declared, and the to violate Parliament which in people, any'material would a revolution in an produce A respect hour. violation of one of the fundamental of that constitution principles Colonies, namely, principle recognizes prop- as their own, and erty people which, therefore, re- all taxes for the. as support government gards gifts people representatives, through regards taxation without as subversive of representation free government, of our own was the revolution. origin This, was the true, violation of a political right; were deemed but personal sacred, and rights equally claimed first very Congress Colonies, assem- 1774, the undoubted bled inheritance of the people and the Declaration of country; Independence, which *64 116 CASES. SCAUGHTER-IÍOUSE Dissenting Bradley, opinions. Opinion J.

was the first act of the American in their political people our foundation of independent capacity, lays sovereign “ existence this That all National broad : upon proposition men are aré created that endowed their equal; by- with certain Creator iualienable that these rights; among are and the Here life, liberty, pursuit happiness.” again we threefold of the of free- division great rights life, asserted as the men, of man. to rights liberty, Rights and the are to the pursuit happiness equivalent rights and life, These are the liberty, fundamental property. which can be taken due rights only away by process and which can law, 'be interfered or the with, only enjoy- ment modified, of which can lawful only regulations all; for. the mutual and these necessary proper good I to the contend, citizens of free fights, belong gov- ernment. the.

For and exercise, of these preservation, enjoyment as a citizen, individual must be left free rights necessity, such or trade as seem to adopt calling, profession, him most conducive that end. Without this he right cannot be This to choose -freeman. one’s is calling an essential that it is the part liberty object and a when is a protect; chosen, government calling, man’s are property Liberty not right. property where these assailed. arbitrarily protected rights show, I think sufficient has been said to that citizenship in name, not an but this at that, least, it has empty country with it certain incidental connected rights, privileges, And immunities greatest importance. say and immunities attach to State rights only citizenship, not to United States, to me citizenship appears to evince narrow insufficient estimate of consti- a*very and the men, tutional history rights say rights the American people. of Mr. On Justice often-quoted point language v. instructive. Coryell,* very Washington, Being Corfield

* Washington, 380. Dec. Bradley,.

Dissenting opinions. Opinion— fourth article of clause in the called expound “ citizens of which declares that each Constitution, entitled to all the shall be immunities privileges States,” is, citizens the several he of, inquiry says: citizens in the what are the immunities of privileges several We feel no these ex- States ? hesitation confining to those which are, immunities pressions nature, fundamental; right, belong, all free citizens of and which have at all times governments, the citizens been of the several States which enjoyed *65 this Union from the time their of compose becoming.free, and What fundamental independent, sovereign. privi- are' it would be more tedious than difficult leges perhaps however, to enumerate. be all They may, comprehended under heads: Protection general following gov- ernment; life and with the of enjoyment liberty, right kind, to of to possess pursue acquire property every nevertheless, and obtain to happiness subject', safety, such restraints as the for’ may justly prescribe government whole; of a citizen of one general good in, State or to reside other State for pass any through, of trade, or other- purposes professional pursuits, agriculture, wise; to claim the writ of hateas benefit of the corpus; institute and maintain in actions of kind the courts of any State; take, hold, real either dispose property, and an from taxes or personal; exemption impo- higher sitions than are State, the other citizens of the paid by as be mentioned some and im- particular privileges munities of citizens which are embraced clearly gen- eral deemed to be description fundamental.” privileges

-It is to observe that both the clause pertinent of the Con- to, referred in stitution Justice his Washington comment it, and immunities of on citizens in speak privileges State;- not of citizens It is the . State. privileges as such, immunities of of citizens that are citizens, is, to be accorded to citizens of other when are they State; as or, Justice found any says, “privi- Washington immunities which funda-men- are, nature, leges

Dissenting opinions. Opinion Bradley, tal; free citizens of belong, right, gov- ernments.”

It is the clause re- true courts have usually regarded ferred as an ouly securing equality privileges with the citizens of the in which the are found. párties the law before one of Equality undoubtedly privileges and immunities of I citizen. am aware that case has arisen which it became to vindicate necessary other fundamental privilege citizenship; although have been claimed funda- not deemed rights mental, been as not within the rejected protection of this clause. Be this; however, may, language clause is as I have stated it, and seems sus- fairly a broader than which makes ceptible interpretation it a of mere with other guarantee equality privileges citizens.

But arewe not bound resort or to the implication, constitutional to find an authoritative history England, of some declaration of the most and im- important privileges munities of citizens States. It is Consti- The Constitution, tution itself.- it is itas stood true, prior to the recent amendments, few of specifies, terms, only and immunities of but personal citizens, in their character. The States were very comprehensive bills of ex merely prohibited attainder, post passing *66 laws laws, contracts, the impairing obligation facto one or two more. But others of the conse- perhaps greatest enumerated, were quence secured, although they ouly terms, from invasion Federal express government; such as the of habeas trial corpus, right right by jury, of free exercise of of free religious worship, speech right and a free press, to assemble for the dis- right peaceably cussion of public measures, to be secure un- right against reasonable searches and seizures, all, and above and includ- all the almost of not rest, ing deprived right life, being or without liberty, due property, process These, law. and still others are or in specified Constitution, original amendments of as it, and im* early among privileges Dec.

Dissenting opinions. Opinion of Bradley, J. munities of citizens of the States, or, United what is still the force of the of all stronger argument, rights per- whether citizens or not. sons, silent,

But even if the Constitution were the fundamental immunities of as would no citizens, such, privileges-and less real and no less inviolable thau now It was are. they not words that the citizens of the necessary say States should have exercise all the citizens; privileges privilege buying, selling, property; and’enjoying lawful for a live- privilege engaging any employment ; lihood the laws for redress of privilege resorting and the Their injuries, like. conferred very citizenship if did these them And they possess before. privileges, would whether were citi- they privileges enjoy zens of State or not. Inhabitants of Federal territories new citizens, made such annexation of territory naturalization, without status as citizens of a though could, as State, nevertheless, of the United States, citizens claim to one of the lay and immunities which have been enumerated; and' these none among tis more essential and fundamental than the to follow right such as profession each one employment choose, sub- to uniform ject only regulations all. equally applicable II. to be determined in next-question this case Is is: or exclusive to one monopoly or cor- right, given person, to the exclusion- of all poration, others, keep slaughter- in a houses district of twelve hundred nearly square miles, meat for a a reasonable supply great city, regula- of that tion has a employment legislature ? impose of a of, and keeping slaughter-house part incidental

‘to, the trade of a butcher —one of the- ordinary occupations of human life. To á butcher, or rather' compel all the butchers of a and an extensive large city district, to slaugh- ter'their cattle in another person’s slaughter-house pay him a therefor, toll is such a restriction the trade to interfere with its It is materially prosecution. onerous, unreasonable, It has arbitrary, unjust. none of the *67 Slaughter-House Cases. Dissenting opinions. Opinion Bradley, J. — of a If it were qualities police regulation. police really it would within be undoubtedly regulation, power . of the act which all portion legislature. requires, That be located below the be sub- and to slaughter-houses city, &e., That ject inspection, clearly police regulation. which allows no one but the favored portion corppany n build,own, or have police slaughter-houses regula- tion., and is one has not faintest semblance of It one. made in of a those and. laws the interest arbitrary unjust few which some of the Southern individuals, by scheming have, within the few been so past years, deplorably that It seems to me oppressed impoverished. strange can viewed other light. in- exclusive monopolies, granting privileges is an dividuals invasion of the or-corporations, others choose a lawful and an calling, personal infringement It felt nation as far back as was-so liberty. by tbe'English A and James. fierce for Elizabeth thp reigns struggle of such and for suppression monopolies, abolishing them, was made was successful. prerogative creating James, of 21st The statute was one abolishing monopolies, constitutional of those landmarks of English liberty nation so and so highly prize English jealously preserve. awas of that inheritance which our part It fathers brought statute This them. abolished monopolies except a term to the inventors of new manufac- years grants This is the tures. for new exception . groundwork'of patents inventions and of. books. These have copyrights always as been sustained beneficial:to the But all other mo- state.'. abolished, to' the nopolies tending impoverishment with their.free pursuits. people to-interference since, And nó ever that struggle people English-speaking such an have ever endured odious badge tyranny.- this was It has been a mere suggested act, legislative the British as well Parliament, as our own legisla- it-, tures, have exclusive frequently disregarded by granting ferries, markets, railroads, other érecting establishments Of a kind. but-a public requires slight Dee.

Dissenting opinions. Opinion Bradley, *68 acquaintance know that this legal history grants of kind are of franchises different the totally monopolies from of of. commodities of These or ordinary callings .pursuits. franchises can public be exercised only under from authority n the the" and government, government them on may grant such conditions as.it sees But til. these'exclusive eveu. more and more privileges odious, and are. becoming and be more more getting regarded principle, wrong as inimical to the and the of just rights greatest good to cite them as the people. of of But proof power legisla- tures to mere create as no en- such free and monopolies, endures, any me, lightened community longer appears least, the say very strange illogical. Federal Can the courts administer relief citi-

Lastly: States zens of United whose and immunities privileges have been Of State? this I by entertain no abridged Prior to the fourteenth doubt. amendment this eould not in a few done, instances, for be the want of except the requi- site authority. mass citizens of

As the great United States of individual States, $lso of their many citizens general and immunities would be the one same privileges as in the other. this double capacity Having citizenship, laws intended for the great body municipal pro- tection State, laws person property being made, no no provision being machinery provided Constitution, in a cases, for except specified any few. interference the General Government between a State citizens,-the its citizen protection in.the enjoy- ment of his fundamental and immunities privileges (except where a one went citizen of State iuto-another State) courts, left to State laws where will and State largely they still left continue unless invaded the un- actually .to or constitutional acts the State delinquency governments themselves. that were not therefore, States formerly

Admitting, fundamental prohibited any infringing privi- citizens, and immunities the United States, leges except Bradley,

Dissenting opinions. Opinion of cases, now, few that cannot be said since in a specified the fourteenth amendment. In my judgment, adoption intention of the it was the people country adopting National viola- amendment to that provide security against the States of fundamental the citizen. tion by rights amendment, of this after The first section declaring born or naturalized United are citizens of the United its subject jurisdiction, reside, wherein to declare proceeds aud of the shall make or enforce law which no State further, immunities citizens of the shall abridge States; nor shall State deprive any person due of law, without nor process j life liberty, property,, its within pro- person equal to any jurisdiction deny shall laws;” and that Congress power tection of *69 of this legislation provisions to enforce by appropriate article. is a clear on the States here

Now, against prohibition law which shall abridge privi- or any enforcing making of the United States. of citizens or immunities leges are to what views correet'with If are regard privi- my citizens, it follows immunities that and conclusively leges a 'sheer law which .establishes a monopoly, any. depriving a class of citizens privilege lawful pursuing large of those citizens. does employment, abridge (cid:127) also State from prohibits The amendment depriving or life, or (citizen liberty, person otherwise) property, due law. process without view, class

In a law which of citizens prohibits my large a lawful employment, from adopting following does lawful employment previously adopted, deprive them as well as without due of law. liberty property, process of. choice ais ofdheir portion their Their right liberty; is a law Such also those deprives occupation property. citizens of laws, equal protection contrary last clause of the section. is in constitutional raised question distinctly constitutional

cases; claimed; is it was expressly Dee.

Dissenting Bradley, opinions. Opinion law, violated which was sustained the State court, and we are called in a and legitimate proper to afford and redress. Our .our way jurisdiction duty and imperative. plain futile to but African that none argue

race are intended to be benefited this amendment. They amendment, have been the cause but its primary and .I think citizens, language general, embracing so purposely expressed. The mischief remedied was not merely slavery incidents and its but of insubordi- consequences; spirit nation and to the National had disloyalty government troubled for so country some of the many States, years and that intolerance free and free speech discussion which life rendered often insecure, led to property much The amendment was an unequal legislation. attempt voice to the National for that time strong give yearning that condition of American things, which citizenship should be sure guaranty safety, citizen of the United States stand erect on might every por- tion of its soil, full enjoyment every right to a without freeman, fear of privilege belonging violence or molestatiou.

But fears are expressed great construction of the amendment will lead to enactments by Congress interfering internal affairs of the establishing therein civil criminal codes lawof for the government citizens, and thus the State abolishing governments name; but else, everything that it lead will the Federal *70 draw eoui’ts to to their the of State cognizance supervision tribunals on subject of every judicial on the inquiry, plea the whether ascertaining immunities privileges of citi- have not been zens abridged.

In no such my judgment practical inconveniences would little, arise. if on the Very any, legislation' part Congress be would the required amendment carry into effect. Like the a prohibition law against passing the impairing obliga- of a tion would execute contract, itself. The point would of Swayne, J.

Dissenting opinions. Opinion ref- a suit aud settled raised,, law, in at final by be regularly court. As the and immu- Federal erence the be- ones which those fundamental nities protected only so far soon defined citizen, would become long in the Fed- accumulation of business as to cause but slight the law existence eral Besides, courts. recognized even the busi- would its But if violation. prevent frequent increased, ness courts be National should Congress their number could supply remedy increasing easily by con- is, aud The is'the true What question efficiency. great we that, the amendment we find struction of When once ? find The shall the means of it effect. argument giving influeiiee inconvenience not to have a very controlling ought will and National of this sort. The in questions National are of far interest importance. greater Court of In my Supreme opinion judgment to be reversed. Louisiana ought SWAYNE, Justice dissenting:

Miv (cid:127) in in the dissent these cases and in views concur ex- I brethren, Mr. Justice Field and Mr. Justice my pressed desire, however, to a few I submit additional re- Bradley.' marks. eleven amendments to the were first Constitution in

The and limitations checks to be government tended instrument called into had existence. They on the States, in spirit jealousy part-of their origin when the Constitution was existed adopted. The the first at ten were its proposed Congress first after the The session organization government. first 1794, twelfth 1803. proposed eleventh mentioned mode of last regulates one electing aud Vice-President. neither increased nor di .President of the General Government, aud power minished No further respect neutral occupy ground. said 1865, made until of -morethan period amendrpents thirteenth amendment was proposed .years. sixty 1st of fourteenth oil February, 1865, on Congress *71 Dec. 125 Slaughter-House . Swayne,

Dissenting opinions. Opinion — the on the 1866, the-fifteenth of' June, 16th 27th amendments are new These February, departure, 1869. a. and mark an constitutional epoch important history trench country. directly power They States, affect those bodies. are,'in this They deeply at from the first respect, eleven.* opposite pole construed these rise amendments Fairly said The of new Charta. thirteenth blotted dignity Magna forever its out forbade restoration. struck slavery millions .fetters from four- human and raised beings once to the of freemen. This at was an act them sphere the Nation. Before war justice grace performed have been done the States where the only it could insti- existed, tution from acting each severally separately ' then The rested with them. In wholly other. power such a result could never have occurred. way, apparently, did not extend to the subject, The power Congress except in the Territories. consists of five

The fourteenth amendment sections. The “All born or is as follows: naturalized within first States, subject United' jurisdiction thereof, the United citizens the State wherein No sliall make reside. State law which shall they, or immunities of citizens of the United abridge shall nor auy deprive life; any person liberty, n orproperty, without due nor process law, deny to any its within jurisdiction equal protection of the person laws.” section declares-that fifth shall Congress have power of this the provisions enforce amendment by appropriate

legislation. declares fifteenth amendment that the vote be denied abridged by

shall United States, or by State, race, on account color, previous condition Until this servitude. amendment was adopted sub- * Peters, 243; Baltimore, Livingston 7 Moore, v. 551; Ib. Barron v. Pox Ohio, Howard, 429; v. 5 Smith Maryland, v. 71; Id. 18 Pervear v. Common wealth, Wallace, 476; Twitchell v Commonwealth, 7 Id. 321. 'Cases. of Swayne, J.

Dissenting.opinions Opinion within the it relates wholly jurisdiction to which ject was excluded The General Government of the States. participation. amendment is in- of the-fourteenth

The first section alone *72 No of these cases. in the consideration volved searching Its lan- eliminate its to is necessary meaning. analysis can be more trans- direct. Nothing and is guage intelligible an established word has significa-' employed parent. .Every There no construction.1 is is room for nothing tion. There make obscure, but cannot may to construe. Elaboration to be carried intent and out. clearer, the sought purpose are and of the United States of the Citizens States (1.) defined. no shall, law, is It declared State by abridge (2.) States,

n of the United or immunities of citizens a whether citi- person, shall That no State deprive (3.)’ without due not, or life, process property, zen liberty, within its to law, jurisdiction nor deny person of the laws. protection equal a citizen óf the United ipsa citizen of State A fado without also can be the former one No being

States. in latter, his' residence one latter; State but the by losing he another, in continues to be without although acquiring “ to be the The the time former. privi- ceases for latter, ” of the United citizen States'in- and-immunities leges life, fundamental clude, other rights things, among which also the to and rights pertain liberty, property, ' of his Nation. citi- membership him reason fundamental as a citizen has the same zen of a State rights others, certain local States, also of the United State, his relation to character, arising to the citizen of the United which addition, those belong There thus he in that relation also. be may being some peculiar each itself. rights citizenship, having double the citizen over those belong only here throws the question that the category States United All to the citi- those its belong shield protection. ex of attainder, post as bills a State, zen of except fado (cid:127) Dec.

Dissenting opinions. Opinion of Swayne, J. †are and laws laws, of contracts,* impairing obligation left to constitutions, bills of guardianship rights, laws the Statés Those respectively. may fights State the citizens of other enjoyed every virtue of 2, 4, clause 1, section article of the Constitution of the United as sec it was This originally framed. tion does not in them; affect such was not its anywise pur pose.

In the next ex category, industriñ, obviously prevent, far as be, either as possibility misinterpretation, things, phrases “citizens States” and and immunities” are ‘and “privileges dropped, more terms simple comprehensive substituted. substitutes are aud “any persou,” “life,” aud “liberty,” “ “ property,” the-equal protection laws.” Life, “ are forbidden liberty, to be property taken without due law,”- process equal protection of laws” is to all. Life is the and the guaranteed G-od, gift *73 it is the most-sacred of preserve the of rights man. Liberty is freedom all restraints from- but such as are justly imposed law. line lies the domain of Beyond usurpation is which has tyranny. Property an ex everything value, and the of the changeable includes right property of it the power will of the dispose owner. according is Labor such as merits The protection. property, make it available is next in to the importance of rights life and lies to extent at the foundation liberty.. large of most other of forms of all solid property, individual and national “Due law” of. prosperity. the process ap of the law as it exists in the fair and plication course regular “ of administrative The procedure! equal of tile protection laws” of places upon footing legal equality gives the to all for the same protection life, preservation liberty, and the property, pursuit happiness.† * States, I, Constitution the United Article Section 10. Coryell, 380; v. Washington, 4 Corfield Lemmon v. The People, 26 † Barbour, 274, Elliott, York, 626; Howard, and 20 New v. 593; Conner 18 McCarty, Mumford, v. Murray 399; Campbell Morris, v. 3 Harris & [Snp. S. Swayne,

Dissenting opinions. Opinion— are citizens of in error that the It is admitted plaintiffs within jurisdiction United persons two but therefore, us, present The cases before Louisiana. questions. the monopoly Does the act of creating legislature

(1.) and immunities of in question abridge States? error as citizens plaintiffs without them property Does-it liberty'or deprive (2.) them law, equal protection due deny process its juris- laws of the State, being within ?” diction as for their answer to the I

Both remit inquiries brethren, Field and Mr. Justice my facts opinions full are and conclusive upon They Mr. Justice Bradley. and indefensible invasion of more A flagrant subject. a few has not occurred the benefit of of many the rights The response country. in the history legislative In in the affirmative. should be my opinion both inquiries within the record, case.s, clearly presented of both letter and negative categories'of meaning before us should, therefore, The sixth section. judgments reversed. be of the late civil are all

These amendments consequences as to the central The war. apprehension prejudices when the Constitution which prevailed government experience. light adopted dispelled that there was less mind became satisfied danger public head than of tyranny anarchy tyranny this section are all members. The eminently provisions are a bulwark of de- in their character. They conservative an never be made and can fence, engine oppression. in its There is no scope. unqualified employed

language can terms, and there in its none properly *74 exception “ citizens of the United By language application. citizens; such meant all was by any person” States” 554; Case, Leigh, 748; Medbury, 5 State v. 3 McHenry, Towles’s Rhode Cooley’s Blackstone, 145; Blackstone, 125, 1 Island, 142; 1 Tucker’s 128. Dec.

Dissenting opinions. Opinion of Swayne, J. was meant all within the jurisdiction of the State. No distinction is intimated on account of race or color. This court has no authority interpolate limitation that is neither nor expressed Our is to duty execute the implied. law, not to make it. The protection provided was not in- tended to be confined to those of any particular race or class, but to embrace all races, classes, equally and condi- tions of men. It is objected the power conferred is novel The answer is large. that the was known novelty and the measure deliberately adopted. power be- neficent.in its nature, and cannot be abused. It is such as should exist in well-ordered every system Where polity. could it be more than in appropriately lodged hands to which it is confided ? It is to enable the necessary govern- ment of the nation to secure to one within its juris- diction the rights privileges enumerated, which, accord- to'the considerations ing plainest of reason and justice and the fundamental of the principles social all are compact, entitled to Without enjoy. such authority any government to be national claiming defective. glaringly The con- struction adopted by majority brethren my is, my too narrow. judgment,mauch defeats, by limitation the intent of those anticipated, whom the by instrument was,framed and of those whom it by was To the adopted. extent of that limitation it turns, as it were, what was meant for bread into a stone. theBy Constitution, as it stood be- war, fore the was ample protection given against oppression but little was Union, given against wrong op- States. That.want was pression by the intended to be sup- this amendment former plied Against this court more than has called once been interpose. Au- same thority amplitude intended to be conferred the latter. But arm of our as to this jurisdiction is, in these stricken down cases, judgment just given. Nowhere, than the will court, ought nation, thus ex- to be more construed or more pressed, liberally cordially executed. determination of the This seems to raaj'ority me- to lie far in the other direction. XVI.

VOL. *75 The State.' Bradwell v. of the case. Statement (cid:127) follow that may consequences I hope earnestly the, fear than minority serious far-reaching less prove will be.

Bradwell The State. v. having grant of Illinois refused to to a.woman a Court Supreme l..The State, ground courts of that on the law in the practice license to Held, State; of that such a under the laws eligible females of the J’ederal Constitution. provision violates no decision article is because the inapplicable, plain- of the fourth second-section 2. The action she and that complains, of the State whose a citizen tiff was and immunities to citizens of other only guarantees section State. States, in that a immu- privilege law the State courts practice is the Nor 8. States, meaning within the of the first a citizen nity of of amendment of the fourteenth article Constitution section-of States.- the United qualifications for admission prescribe power of State 4. amendment, is unaffected the fourteenth courts of its own bar inquire propriety into reasonableness or court cannot this prescribe. rulés it to the Court of State Illinois. In error Supreme In the Bradwell, State made Illinois, Mrs. Myra residing Court of that Supreme State judges application She her a license to law. practice accompanied petition certificate an inferior court the usual of her good and that on du'e examination she had been character, found requisite qualifications. to possess Pending appli- an affidavit, filed effect that she she also cation Vermont; that she was in the State born (had been) State; that she is now a of that citizen of citizen the United been for and has resident States, many years past (he Illinois.” And with this city Chicago, -a she also filed that, affidavit under the paper fore- asserting facts, she was the license entitled going prayed virtue of the second section of the fourth article of the Con- stitution of the United of the fourteenth article of that instrument. of .amendment