Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1873-02-24

gift enterprise. The defendant appeared By
his attorney, MI Harrington, and entered up 9
Mr.. Cook then submitted an agreed statement
| Of facts; after which,
ant, asked the court to discharge the defend
ant, since the agreed statement OF facts, and
indeed the admissions of record, advised the
court that no offence had been committed. The
Defendant had, In accordance with the law, paid
into the District treasury the sum of 81 600. and
received therefor his license to carry on the
business OF gift enterprise. II there be any
court to bear in mind that the blame must at
taeh to the body which creates law and not to
the tribunals that construes. This defendant is
proper officers Of the District that upon q re-
payment Of pro rata amount for the unexpired
time Of the license he win surrender the same
and cease his business; but being notified by the
action OF the District authorities Of their pur-
pose both to keep his money and deprive him
OF his license rights, he is here submitting to the
court as propositions of Law the points.
First. That the act of Congress, 30 far as il
seeks to affect the defendant in his rights ac-
crued under contract, made prior to its pas
sage, Is unconstitutional.
terms, nor was IL intended by Congress, to affect
rights previously acquired.
Upon the first proposition the defendant sub
mitted that the license taken out by him con-
stitutes a contract between himself and the Dis
r1et o. Columbia, and upon the question of the
competency of the District, argued that the
tIesenl DstIiet government stands, as to mat
of its charter, in the place of Congress. That
these contracts were entered into by and with
the consent and knowledge of Congress, and
while the power rests with Congress to repeal a
law made by the District, it has no power to
make law SO retroactive in its effects as to de-
priye citizens OF rights acquired by its consent
certainly no one win argue that the repeal or
disapproyal by Congress Of the late act author
izing the 81 900 900 loan, would have the effect
70 nvahdate the bonds issued in pursuance
that by the 1es Is IS the P proposition made here
All contracts made under IL are null. Such a
theory mas no support in law or justiceit is alike
Iepughant 10 common sense and common honor.
80 1t was held that where law amounts to a
proposition and is accepted by individuals It is
binding contract. This license therefore being
a contract 1t is argued that there is no power in
government of the United States is one of emu
merated powers and can exercise only the DOW
ers granted 1t, or such as arise out of necessary
the power to impair the Obligation of q contract.
nor can II arise either from Implication or rea.
son. 1t will readily be seen that If this law Is
construed to affect this defendant Il will impair
the obngation. Further, this defendant has a
property in this license and while it is admitted
that Congress can take .sprivate property for
9.to!ie use upon giving just compensation it is
rat. use. or transfer it from A. to b. without con-
sent The eDjOymenI of private property ex-
cept as forfeited by the law Of the land. was
"a, and the same principles was after incorpor-
afed in the constitution, and this law of the land
or due process of law means that where rights
al arc acquired by the citizen under existing laws
there Is no power In any branch Of the govern
ment 70 take them away-it means a pre-exist-
ing rule Of conduct and Is restraint on the Iegis
iature as well as the executive and judicial
subsequent rule made to retrOact and diyest
previously acquired and enjoyed rights.
pom the second point it is submitted that the
N snraer ffs.oov MOI - IL
affect previously acquired rights. This act is
penal, and therefore to be construed strictly 1t
reads: "That 50 much OF. the act (meaning the
prises and licenses to be issued therefor is dis
and repealed, and hereafter it shall be
unlawful Tor any person or persons 10 engage in
said business" etc. Plainly the words "here-
otter 30 Engage" means those who shall commence
the business after the passage of the act. Web
ster defines "Engage-tO embark in any bust
ness; to enter upon an enterprise"
assuming the power of Congress to nullify an
answer to say that IL has not exercised that
power. The act Of Congress does not read
j. null and void, it simply repedls the assembly
that repe..i takes effect from the time of the |
approval OF the act, and can have no retroactive
effect upon rights exis., ng prior to the passage
Dftne repeating act, and it is orihcipie equally
well settled that the courts will rays c0nstrue
statute to be prospective.
This defendant is advised that the bill To pre-
vent the business of gift enterprise was drawn
by the attorney for District at the request of |
desire, it is submitted that by no legislation of
this kind can this defendant be defeated in the
enjoyment Of his rights He csnceives that the |
enjoyment OF his private property is secured to |
J I'M by the laws Of his country and that under |
wing the constitution are the great princi,,,,s,
which were secured at Runnymeeie when the /
DaIons ~rested from John what all ,ireemen /
,all the great charter. Though the king is dead
ihese things are ours, and we cannot CONCEIVE
loW congress. upon SO unimpOrtant ma tier
could have sought to strike down 80 great a |
pInneirle, AMI we cannot but regret that this |
plous frame OF mind that seems 80 suddenly TO
nave entered the breasts Of the authorities was
not with them when they Matched this law.
~. COOK argued that the defendant took the |
license VIII knowledge that Congress had re- |
erved to itse,s the power to dfsapproye or /
epeal any of the acts Of the legislature and |
hat the repeal of the act by Congress destroyed /
III the rights of the defendant TO enjoy the /
license; that it was the intention Of Congress to
leprive the defendant Of his license. aud that
epeal OF the legislative act was suficispt for /
his purpose. .F.r5
The court took the papers, and stated that i
lecision would be made on Wednesday next I
liter careful review OF the authorities cited.
AN OLD GENTLEMAN LOSES $3.50 BY THE
'ASEL GAME.-DurinS the past two weeks sew
raj complaints have been received at police
iiessuquarteIs by persons who haze been VIC
lmized by the panel-house game. Among tnsase
.as AN oid Gentleman, stranger in the city, I
laying at first class hotel, who's. "a. ''sa
tn, 80
!. 1eees'~ - menuon, who was beat out of Il
.snt 500 notes, four $40, and ten so notes on
asst Friday night, at q house on nth street, kept
by respectable lady, who has rooms tor rent Il
md Of course was unaware of the character Of i
The people occupying apartments in her house /
The loss was not discovered until an hour or
more afterwards, and when the old man re- l
turned to hunt for the thieves they had left for
parts unknown. The officers have been on the Il
alert, and the result has been that ON SATURDAY.
evening last Detectives McDeyitt, Miller and /
Coomes, with Sergeant johnson and Priyates /
Arnold and Milstead, made raid on house No. l
l4 AZ street; which was thought to be the head |
uarters 81 the gag, and arrested Chas. Clark,
samnei Car.sa, Anna Myers, Margaret Scott,
Ia Kebecta Cup, the last named being a col |
ored servant, and all strangers in this city. They
were escorted to police headquarters, and are |
held for a hearing. They are thought to be
New York people, who have come here to
operate during the Inauguration, hence the ar
rest. The reluctance of persons who have been
to come Forward and testify, how
ever, makes il very difficult to convict in cases
similar to that above mentioned.
INACGrEATIoN SoUvENIR.-Among the new
MI "a inau iS A Cor va,,ir