South Branch intelligencer. [volume] (Romney, Va. [W. Va.]) 1830-1896, 1889-05-24
THE END OF THE TRES
PASS CASES.

A Washington Difpatch gives the history
OF the "Trespses' case Of Freslsnd W. Will
lie ms, decided in favcr OF The defendant las,
week by the U. 8. Supieme Court, briei
account OF which was published in our last
issue. The Dispatch 10 az follows:
preme Court Of The United States, at Wash
irgton City. has beepy which 70 OF the great
est interest TO hundreds Of West virginians,
and involves q sum Of money which certain
ly runs up TO q million dollars, and proba-
bly, greatly exceeds that amount. The title
OF the cause was that Of Freelapd VS.. Will
lisms, and the appeal Is from tie Supreme
Court OF West Virginia, where the cause WAS
taken after decision in the Circuit Court OF
Preston county.
The case belongs to what 10 known ss the
war tpspass casee, instituted by property
owners In this State against men connected
with the Confederate army. and the grisvan.
ces alleged were acts done by the defeu dants
during the progress OF the war, principally
in the way Of destroying property, carrying
on live stock for the use of the Confederate
army, etc. This particular case, which has
been made test. arose frem the taking OF q
lot OF cattle for the use Of The Southern
,roops. A Judgment was obtained Ia this
case rs in hundreds Of others all through the
central, eastern and southern counties in the
State. The case was carried to the Suprem g
Court which sustained the finding OF The
Court below, and decided that the persons
who acted under the orders OF their superior
officers in taking the property could not rely
upon bslligerent rights as matter OF de-.
feEce.
After the rendition OF that judgment the
present Constitution of this State went Into
tffect. This constitution contains q provi-
zion that judgments Of this class ehouid not
be enforced in the Courts Of this State.
In the cause under consideration. .c..
the Constitution WA adopted by the noonts
an execution was issued on tho iua gman,'
collection Of this judgment was enioinsd IN
IN. kfound that the defendant was nro,sc,.
ed By the provision Of the new State Uous,i.
tuition.
Th.s Supreme Court Of the State 90 staiu,d
this, iseuipg a decree perpetuatinp the in.
junction, and from the decision OF our su,
preme Court thus given an appeal was taken
about four years ago TO the Supreme Court
OF the United States. There the cause was
argued on the 10th OF April last. Hon. q. ]
for the defendant end l.. O. Cole, OF Wash
ipgton City, tor the other side.
II was sought TO reverse the decision OF the
Supreme Court of this State on two grounds
The first was that it was claimed that q
judgment could not be eued on ia en- actio q
TX oosrRACTU, and that. therefore, the pro
visions OF Section 80, Article g. Of The Con-
s!itution Of this State violated and were iu
conflict with that clause of the Constitution
OF the United States which provides that nc
State Shall pass q law impsiting the obi iga-
ton o. q contract. In the second insta nee
1t was claimed that a judgment rendered be.
came vested property in the plaintiff and
that our State Constitution violated tina
clause of The fourteenth amendment TO tn,
Constitution Of the United States which pro.
vides that the States sball pass no law TAXI
ing property without due process OF law.
The Supreme Court OF the United States
decided, Justice Harlan dissenting. that the
State Constitution was effective, and did no,
intefere with the provisions Of the Constitu
ton OF the United States. This uphods tn
action Of the West Yirginis Court and viii
be hailed with satisfaction by hundreds o
people throughout the State.