Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1882-12-19
FROM WASHINGTON.
POLITICAL ASSESSMENTS.
An Opinion by the Supreme Court in the
Case of Gen. Curtis.
WASHINGTON. Dec. 18th.

WASHINGTON. Dec. 18th.
A decision was rendered by the Supreme
Court Of the United States in the political
| assessment case of Newton Martin Curtis.
brought by petition for a writ of habeas
| corpus. The petitioner was an employee
of the United States and was indicted in the
circuit Court for the souther district of New
York, and convicted under the act of Aug.
10Th, 1876, prohibiting officers or employees
of the United States, not appointed by the
President, nth advice and consent of the
Senate, from requesting, giving to or receiv-
ing from any other officer or employee of
the government any money or property, or
any other thing of value for political pur-
poses. Upon conviction he was sentenced to
pay fine and stand committed until pay
ment was made. He was taken into custody
of the marshal and on his application writ
was issued by one of the justices of this
court in vacation, returnable here at the
present term. to inquire into the validity of
his detention. The importan: question pre-
scented on the writ so issued, is whether the
act under which his conviction was had is
constitutional. The opinion which was read
by Chief Justice Waite says: If there were
| no other reasons for legislation of this char
| acter than such as relate to the protection of
these in public service against exactions. its
constiutionality would, in our opinion, be
good, but there are others to our mind
equally good, if persons in public employ
may be called upon by those in authority to
contribute from their personal income to the
| expenses of political campaign and refusal
mcy lead to putting away good men of serv.
ice liberal payments may be made the ground
| tor keeping the poor ones in. So, too, if part
| of the compensation received for public ser
vicQs no ri hin to1 for nii
poses it is easy to see that the increase of
| compensation may be required to provide
| means to make contributions and that in this
way the government itself may be made to
| furnish indirectly the money to defray the
expenses Of keeping political party in pow
er that happens to have for the time being the
control of public patronage. Political parties
must always necessarily exist under repub-
| lican form of government, and when public
employment depends to any considerable
extent on party success. those in Office will
naturally be DESTROYS of keeping the party to
which they belong in power.
The statute we are now considering does
not interfere with this apparent end Of Con-
gress and will be accomplished it it prevents
those in power from requiring help tor such
purposes as a condition to continued employ
ment. In our opinion the statute under
which the petitioner was convicted is constitu-
tional. Other objectionswh ich have been urged
to the 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 judgment by which the pris-
oner is held. We have no general power to
review judgments as inferior courts
of the United States in criminal cases by
use of writ of hobeas corpus or otherwise.
Our jurisdiction is limited to a single ques-
ton of the power of the court to commit a
prisoner for an act of which he has been
convicted. We think commitment in this
case was lawful, and the petitioner is conse-
quently remanded to the custody of the
marshal for the southern district of New
York. Justice Bradley gave dissentingly
his opinion upon which he took the ground that
Congress had no constitutional powers to en-
act law forbidding an employee of the gov
eminent to associate himself with others for
promotion of political opinions which he
entertained, or to make such disposition OF
his private means as he should see fit. Jus.
tice Bradley did not approve of enforced pc.
litical assessments, but, thought Congress in
enactng the present law to prevent such
assessments, had deprived an individual cti-
zen of one of his inalienable rights, and in so
doing had overstepped limits of its con
stitutional authority.