Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1889-02-27
HABEAS CORPUS.
The johnson and Gortner Case Be-
fore the District Court
To-day.
The Prisoners Relaased-FuIl Text of
Judge Reeves Deci
SIGN.

The haDeaS corpus case growing out OF
the arrest OF Col. Il. NJ. Johnson and w.
L. Gortner, ex-clerk and stenographer of
the 4th district court, for their refusal to
testify before the King senatorial inves-
tigating committee, was concluded before
Judge Reeves to-day. Before announcing
his decision the court said: "Under differ
ent circumstances, and with more time at
my disposal, | might feel inclined to
elaborate the questions in this case, which
are Of Importance, but in view of the
shortness of the time and the nearness of
the adjournment Of the court and CT the
council, it is clearly desirable that there
should he no unnecessary delay in dis
posing OF the ease. have, however,
reduced to writing the views which en-
tertain Of this case without going fully in
to dctais.' Judge Reeves then proceed
ed to read at length his opinion, which
was heard with great deal of interest by
the large number Of attorneys and others
present. Counsel in the case were
Messrs. Clancy and Bartlett for Sergeant
alarms Cans, and Messrs. Fiske and
Childers for the prisoners. Appended is
the courts decision:
First. Is a joint resolution such an act
as must be submitted to the governor for
his action?
In Cushings Law and Practice OF Legis-
lative Assemblies, section 2403, it is said,
that this form of legislation is put upon
the same footing and made subject to the
same regulations with bills properly so
called. In congress, a joint resolution,
which is a name given in that body to
| this kind OF legislation, is there regarded
as bill.
The legislature of New Mexico seems
/ to have so regarded joint resolutions in
some cases, in that they appear to have
/ been approved as passed by the legislative
assembly in the session acts of 1887.
Without expressing any conclusive opinion
on this point, it is sufficient to say that
/ the subject OF the resolutions must be
within the power OF the legislative assem-
| bly, and OF the governor also (if he signs
/ it, to give it the force OF law. Organic
act Of September 9, 1880, Comp. Laws
/ n. NJ, p. So section 1916.
1t is Contended for the respondents that
/ in Il proper case the power OF the legisla-
/ ture to compel the attendance OF witnesses
must be conceded, and as Il necessary in
cident to that power the further power to
punish witnesses for contempt. Conced-
| ing this to be true, does the legislative
power OF the territory extend to the reso-
tons OF the legislative assembly and the
proceedings thereon as rightlul subjects
Of legislation as provided by the organic
acts OF the territory? Com. Laws n. M
Sec. 1851, p. 50.
In support OF the affirmation of the
proposition, the counsel for the respond.
cnts cite Cooley on Constitutional Limit.
alons on the legislative power of state
to the effect that each house has also the
power to punish members for disorderly
behavior and other contempts of its all.
thority, as well as to expel member foi
any cause which seems to the body tc
render it unfit that he continue to occupy
one OF its seats. Section 1888. "And the
courts can not inquire into the justness o1
the decision or even so much as examine
the proceedings to see whether opportun'
ity for defense was furnished or not.
Section 1874. each house may also
punish contempts of its authority by Other
persons without express authority from
the constitution therefor"
Section 1874, referring to Anderson vs.
Dunn, 9th Wheaton 204, 81 N. H., 453
and other cases. The State VS.. Mathews
81 n. II. 453, was suit for divorce ir
one of the courts of New Hampshire, anC
the question as q contemptin violating al
injunction of the court. If the case of tht
People ex. rel. Mcdonald VS.. Keller, 8!
n. y, 4G3, the resolution of the senate O
the s. ate charged fraud against the com
missioner of the department of public
works in the city of New York. Th,
resolution authorized the committee t.
investigate the department and report tn,
result Of the investigation and its recon-
mendations. The resolution contemplated
legislative action to guard against fraud il
the department. The investigation wa
made by standing committee on the al
fairs OF cities. The Imprisonment of tn
party was by virtue of a pre-exsting law
The other cases cited for the responder
! will not require separate consideration
Counsel for the plaintiffs or petitioner
cite, among others, the case OF Kilburn vs.
Thompson, 1903, U. S. 160.
This was suit brought by Kilbur
against Thompson, as sergeant at arms {
| the house of representatives. Of the Unite