Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1882-12-19
THE CURTIS CASE.
The Decree of the Lower Court Con.
frmed By the United States Su-
preme Court, and the
General viii Either Have to Pay His
Fine or Remain in Jail-A Dis
senting Opinion.

WAsHISaroN, December ls-A decision
was rendered by The Supreme Court of the
United States to-day in the political assess
menls case of Newton Mar in Curtis, brought
here by petition for writ of hobeos corpus.
The opinion of the Court is as follows:
The Opinion.
The petitioner an employe. of the United
States, was indicted in the Circuit Court for
the Southern District of New York, and con-
victed under the sixth section OF The act OF
August Ii, 1876, prohibiting officers or en-
ployes of the United States not appointed by
the President, with The advice and consent of
the Senate, from requesting, giving 10, or re-
ceiving from any other officer or employe of
the government, any money, or properly, or
other thing of value, for political purposes.
Upon his conviction he was sentenced 10 pay
line and stand committed until the pay
menl was made. Under this sentence he was
taken into the custody of the marshal, and
on his application writ was issued BY one
Of the justices OF this eonrt 40 vacation, re-
fssE1Alie hsE< a present. fFftii, 70 inquire
into the validity of his detention. The i'm
important question presented in the
writ so Issued, is, whether the act
under which the conviction was
had is constitutional. The opinion of
this court was read bv Chief Justice Waite.
Ii holds that the act is not on. 10 prohibit
all contributions of money or property by
designsted officers and employees Of the
United States for political purposes; neither
does it prohibit hem altogether from receiv-
ing or soliciting money or property for such
purposes. 1t simply forbids their receiving
from or giving to each other. Beyond This
no restrictions are plsced upon any of their
political privileges. Tue evident purpose of
Congress in all this class of enactments has
been TO promote efficiency and integrity in
the discharge of official duties, aud lain
tain proper discipline in the public
service. Clearly such purpose is within
the just scope of legislative power,
and it is not easy TO zee why the act now
under consideration does not come within
the legitimste means to such an end. Man.
sgsrs of political campaigns not in the en-
ploy of the United States are Just as free
new to call on those in office for money TO be
used for political purposes as ever they were,
and those in Office can contribute as literally
as they please, provided their payments are
not made to any of the prohibited officers or
employees. A feeling of independence under
the law couduces to faithful public service,
and nothing tends more to take away this
feeling than dread OF dismissal. II contri-
buttons from those in public employment
may be solicited by others in official author
ity, it is easy 10 see that what begins as q
request may end as a dem aud, and that fail
uIe TO meet the demand may be treated by
those having the power of removal
as breach OF some supposed duty
growing out of the political relations
of the parties. Contributions secured
under such circumstances will quite as likely
be made to avoid the consequences Of the
personal displeasure of superior as TO pro-
mote The political views of the contributor,
to avoid discharge from the service more
than to exercise political privileges. Toe
law contempla;es no restrictions upon giving
or receiving, except so far as may be neees-
sary to protect in some degree those in the
public service against exaclions through fear
of personal loss. Ii there we're no other rea-
sons for legislation of this character than
such as relate to the protection of those in
the public service against unjust exactions,
its constitutionaliiy would, in our opinion,
be clear; but there are others to our minds
equally good. Ii persons in the public en-
pIoy may be called on by those
in authority 10 contribute from their
personal income TO the expenses OF
political campaigns, the refusal may lead
to putting good men out of service, and
liberal payments may be made the ground
for keeping poor ones I'M go, too, il part OF
ei.. ea.a. .vvvia-~i svI yuGiiv se-~iees
must be contributed for political purposes,
it il easy to see that an increase OF COM
pensstion may be required to provide means
to make contributions, and that in this way
the government itself may be made to fur
nish, indirectly, the money 10 defrsy the
expenses of keeping the political party in
power that happens u, for the lime being,
have control OF the public patronage. Poli,-
icsl parties must always necessarily exist
under a republican form of government,
and when public employment depends, to
any considerable extent, on party success,
those in Office will naturally be dssirous of
keeping the party 10 which they belong 10
power. Tue statute We are now considering
does not interfere with this The apparent
end of Congress will be accomplished if it
prevents those in power from requiring help
for such purposes as condition 10 continued
employment. In our opinion the statute
under which the petitioner was convicted is
constitutional. The other objections urged
10 detention cannot be considered in this
form of proceeding. Our inquiries in this
class of cases are limited TO such objections
as relate to the authority OF the Circuit
Court to render the judgment by which the
prisoner is held. We have no gene
raj power TO review the judgments
of inferior courts of the United States
in criminal cases by the use Of a
writ of habcas corpus or Otherwise. Our
jurisdiction is limited to the single question
of the power of the court 10 commit the
prisoner for the act OF which he has been
convicted. The commitment in this case
was lawful, and the petitioner ia consequent
ly remanded TO the custody of the marehal
for the Southern District of New York.
JUSTICE BRADLEY
read dissenting opinion, in which he took
the ground that Congress had no constitu-
tional power 10 enact a law forbiddipg an
smploye OF the government to associate
himself with others for the promotion of the
political opinions which he entertained, OF
TO make such disposition of his private means
"a he 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 to prevent such assess
ments had deprived the individual citizen Of
Que of his inalienable rights, and in so doing
had over-slePped the limits OF its constiIu
| uonal authority.
CLARA LOUISE KELLOGG is TO receive So,