The Highland weekly news. [volume] (Hillsborough [Hillsboro], Highland County, Ohio) 1853-1886, 1882-12-27
POLITlNAL AAnEanMnNre.


Decision by the United states Supreme
Court In the Case OF N. VI. Curtis-Thr
Law Declared to be constitutional, nnd
writ Of Hnboas Corpus Dcnicd-Dis-
senting Opinion of Justice Bradley.
wAsHINGroy, Dccomborls.
A decision was rendered boy the supreme
Court of the United States to-day iu the poNt @.
Hl-asscssmcut case Of Newton Martin Curtis,
brought here by petition for awrit OF hancas
corpus Curtis the petitioner, an employe of
the United States, was indicted in IN Circuit
Court for the Southern District Of Ncw Nort
and convicted under the sixth section of the
act of August 10, 1876, prohibiting officers or
employees of the United States not uppontcd
by the President with the advice and consent
of the Senate from requesting, giving TO-, or
receiving from any other officer or employc of
the Government any money, or properly, or
other thing of value for political purp Uses
Upon his conviction he was sentenced TO payu
fine and stand committed until paym mt was
made. Under this sentence he was taNCn into
the custody Of the Marshal and ON his appIca-
ton a writ was issued by one of the Justice
of this court i'm vacation, returnuDlC hero at
the present terra to inquire into the validity
Of his detention.
The important question presented On the
writ so issued is whether the act under which
the conviction was had is constitutional.
The opinion of the court was reld
by Caief-lustlce Waite. 1t holds The
act is not one TO prohibit all coz
trihutions Of money or property by de-
sIgnated officers and employees of the United
States for political purposes. Ne.thc does IL
prohibit them altogether from receiving or
soliciting money or property for such pur-
poses II simply furbids their receiving from
or giving TO each other. Beyond this no re-
strictiOns are placed ON any Of their political
privileges. The evident purpose Of Congress
I'm all this class of enactments has been to pro
mote efficiency and integrity iu IN discharge
of official duties and to maintain proper dis
cplinc ln the public service. Clearly such pur-
pose is within the just scope of the legislative
power, and it is not easy TO SEE why the net
now under consideration does not come fairly
within the legitimate means to such end.
Managers Of political campaigns not i'm the
employ Of the United States are just as free
now TO call on those I'm Office for money to be
used for political purposes as ever they were,
and those in office can contribute as liberally
as they please, provided their payments are
not made TO any of the prohibited officers or
employees.
A feeling of independence under law CON
duces to faithful public service, and nothing
tends more to take away this feeling than
dread of dismissal. If contributions from
those i'm public employment may be solicited
by oths in official authority it is easy to sec
| that what begins as a request may end as a de
| mRud, and that Il failure to meet such demand
may be treated by those having the power
! of removal as a breach of some supposed
! duty growing out Of the political relations Of
! parties. Contributions secured under such
! circumstances Will quite as likely be made to
| avoid consequences Of personal displeasure
/ OF a superior rs to promote the political views
/ of a COutributOr-to avoid discharge from
| service more than TO exercise political prlvi-
/ leges. The law clntemplates no restrictions
| upon either giving or receiving, except so far
| as it may be necessary to protect in some de-
gree those in the public service against cN-
actions through fear Of personal loss.
If there were no other reasons for legisa-
ton Of this character than such as relate to
the protection Of those in the public service
against unjust eXactons its constitutionaIity
would in our opinion be cleared, but there
are others to our minds equally good. If
| persons in the public employ may be called
on by those in authority to contribute from
their personal income TO the expenses of po-
! tical campaigns, and refusal may lead to
| putting good men out of office, liberal pay
ments may be made the ground for keeping
poor ones in So, toe, If part Of the compen-
sation received for public services must be
!
! TO see that an increase of compensation may
be required toprovide the means to make CON
tributlOns, and that in this way the Govern
ment itself may be made to furnish Indirect
ly the money to detray the expenses Of keep
ing the political party in power that happens
TO have for the time being control of the pub
lie patronage.
Political parties must always necessarily ex-
istuuier republican form of government,
and when public employment depends TO any
considerable extent on party success those in
Office will naturally be desirous of keeping the
party to which they belong in power. The
statute we are now considering does not inter-
fere with this The apparent end of Congress
will be accomplished If it prevents those in
power from requiring help for such purposes
as a condition to continued employment in
our opinion the statute under which the peti.
toner was convicted is constitutional. The
other objections urged to the detention cannot
be considered in this form Of proceeding. Our
inquiries i'm this class Of cases are limited Ia
such objections rs relate to the authority of
the Circuit Court TO render judgment by which
the prisoner is held. We have no general
power to review judgments of inferior courts
of the United States in criminal cases by the
use Of the writ of habeas corpus or otherwise
Our jurisdiction is limited to the single ques.
ton of the power of the court to commit the
prisoner for the act of which he has been con.
victed. We think commitment in this case
was lawful and the petitioner is consequently
romanded to the custody Of the Marshal for
the Southern District of New York.
Justice Bradley read a dissenting opinion, in
which he took the ground that Congress had
no constitutional power to enact law forbid.
ding an employe of the Government to associ
ate himself with others for the promotion OF
the political opinions which he entertained, OF
to make such disposition of his private means
as ne should think fit. Justice Bradley said
he did not approve Of enforced political as
sessments, but he thought Congress in enact
ing the present law 10 prevent such assess
ments had deprived the individual citizen OF
one Of his inalienable rights, and in so doing
had overstcpped the limits of its constitution
al authority.
A Man Sells His Wife for $500.