Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1889-10-03
A Dangerous Innovation.

The action of Judge Sawyer, of the
United States Circuit Court in Californ-
ia, in discb argipg Deputy United States
Marshal Nagle from arrest for the kill
ing of Terry in mn entirely novel asser-
tion o: Federal Jurisdiction i'm criminal
cases and one that rs fraught with the
gravest danger. Whether regarded as
an extension of the power of the United
States Circuit Court over the police
jurisdiction of the State or as an asser-
ton of the personal immunity of Fed
eral officers from such jurisdiction, it is
equally dangerous, for such a doctrine,
| if allowed, is capable of the gravest
abuses.
That Nagle was fully justified in
shooting Terry will hardly be disputed,
but that was clearly question to be
| determined by jury under the laws of
| California. The special pleading by
| which Judge Sawyer upholds his in
terference in the case is not even plaus-
ible. That a United States Marshal
would not have had the right in a
court room on State soil to protect from
assault the life of a judge" no one, as
he rightly says, would assert. But that
question was not presented. This af-
fair did not take place In court, but in
public railway station, and a Marshal
or Judge, or the Chief Justice him
SELF in travelling from place to place,s
as much aDswerable to the law as the
humblest citizen.
1t was long since clearly laid down
by the Supreme Court of the United
States that while certain implied pow
ers must necessarily result to the courts
Of justice from the nature of their in
stitution, jurisdiction of crimes against
the State il not one of them. The de-
cision in the Hudson and Goodwin case
applies to this. ITO fine for contempt.
to imprisGn for contumacy, to enforce
the observance of orders, are powers
necessary for the exercise of all other
powers, without the authority of u
statute. But to exercise criminal jur-
isdiction in common law cases was not
within their implied powers and it was
necessary for Congress to make the act
crime. to affix punishment to it
and to declare the court which should
have Jurisdiction"
This Is the doctrine of the Supreme
Court as recorded by Kent, who con-
tinues: "The mere circumstances that
the party injured by the offeuse under
prosecution was an officer of the gov
eminent of the United States does not
give jurisdiction; for neither the Con-
stitulion nor the judicial acts founded
upon it give the Federal courts gen.
eral jurisdiction in criminal cases af-
fectiag the officers of government, as
they have i'm cases affecting public
ministers and consuIs. Because an Of
ficer was appointed under the Consti-
tuition, that would not of itself render
all cases in which they were concerned
or might be affected cases arising un-
der the Constitution and laws and Cog
nizable by the judiciary. Such q Wide
construction s00uId be transferring teg-
isldtive pover to the judiciary and Ve Sc
1T aDith almost unlimited Jurisdiction;
for where is the act that might not, in
some distant manner, be connected
with the Constitution or laws of the
United States?"
This precisely describes the attitude
of Judge Sawyer, and its possibilities
for n lschief will be apparent to anyone
who will consider its application, for
example, in an attempt to extend the
Southern States. It would be possible
to surround every polling place with
Deputy Marshals who would be entire
ly beyond the control of law and who
might commit murder or any other
crimes with impunity, being answer
able only to machine-made Circuit
Judge.
Fortunately the Supreme Court has
yet to review Judge Sawyer, and it is
not likely that it will reverse its own
doctrine. 1t has al
ready set aside various attempts made
in a regular way, as in the civil rights
act, to extend the Federal Jurisdiction
beyond the limits of the constitution,
and it may be relied on to check this
attempt to "transfer legislative power
to the iudieiaryU None the less thjs
action in the Nagls case is signifi cant
of the growing contempt tor consttu-
tional restrictions that is just now one
of the gravest dangers to our political
system. and that should call forth the
most strenuous opposition.-Philadet-
phia Times.