Sacramento daily record-union., 1890-03-06
THE NEAGLE CASE.
Great Constitutional Question Attracting
Leading Lawyers.

Great Constitutional Question Attracting
Leading Lawyers.
WASHINGTON March 5tn.-There was fully as
large attendance of prominent lawyers of
the country at to-day's session of the Supreme
Court of the United States in the Neagle trial ss
upon yesterday, attracted by desire TO hear
the reply of Attorney. General johnson of Cal
ifornia, to the argument made by United States
Attorney-General Miller yesterday il defense OF
Neagle.
The audience to-day was augmented by the
presence of a large number of Senators and a
group of leading New York lawyers who came
over to hear the arguments in this important
constitutional question.
When the Court sat at high noon with the
usual preliminary ceremonies, several attorneys
were admitted to the bar and Chief Justice
Fuller announced the Neagle case was on for
hearing.
MR.. cHoATE CONTINUES.
Mr. Choate of New York took up the thread
of his argument which was interrupted by
the adjournment of Court yesterday afternoon.
He referred to the threats frequently made by
Terry TO take vengeance upon Field. and to the
letter of Attorney General Miller to Marshal
Franks, calling his attention to these threats
and the necessity of protecting Judge Field.
This letter had been submitted to the United
States district Attorney OF California, and he
had indorsed his belief that Judge Field was in
danger and needed protection. Choate then re-
viewed the details of the tragedy at LEthTop, of
the arrest of Neagle and Field and their subse-
proceeded to discuss two principal questions
which he said dominate the decision in this
case, which were: First, the question of the al
legged invasion of the criminal jurisdiction of
California, and second, whether Neagle had
Federal authority to protect Field.
Cho2te made a lengthy discussion on the
tenor and construction of the habeaS corpus
law and the rights embodied therein. He
summed up his remarks in this line with the
statement of his unqualified belief that this Act
gives power TO a United States Circuit Judge to
grant a Federal prisoner immunity nom Juris-
diction of State Court. He then proceeded to
demonstrate that Neagle was discharging a
duty imposed upon him by the Constitution
through his immediate superiors and that the
performance of such duty placed him under
the jurisdiction of Section 75S of the Revised
Statutes.
ATTORNEY GENERAL .JoHNsoN's ARGUMENT.
When MIR. Choate had finished his argument
Attorney. General Johnson addressed the Court
He proceeded first to review the argument OF
day and to review the opinion of the lower
Court in this case. He then outlined the drift
which his argument would pursue, and that
was to demonstrate that the executive power of
this country can act only in obedience to an
Act of Congress, and therefore servant of the
United States can only be given the advantage
of the Habeas Corpus Act when he is following
such explicit command, and Neag was not
acting in accordance with an Act of Congress.
Johnson assumed confidently that "the laws of
the United States'-the words which occur in
the statute comforting the power to issue writ
of habeas corpus-meau positively Acts OF Con-
eress. He said to affirm the opinion of the
lower Court in this case would be TO act in direct
opposition to the terms and meaning of the
Constitution. The executive of this country
has no inherent powers save those conferred by
special Acts of Congress, he exclaimed, in clos
ing this branch of his argument.
He then passed to the question upon which
he will rest his abiest endeayorS of argument,
the police powers of the State of California,
conferred upon the State by the Constitution.
he paused in this line of argument 20 sssail a
claim, set up by the opposing counsel, that the
President had unlimited powers 10 enforce the
| laws. ''In the case before us, he said ''the
| Executive will be placed in the predicament of
retarding the laws by preventing the enforce
ment of the laws of California relating to the
trials for murder" Johnson then assailed the
authority of the Attorney General of the United
States TO instruct Marshals to enlarge their
duties or to perform new duties, claiming that
the Attorney-General had no power to confer
upon Marshals any extraordinary duties. He
| read Millers letters of warning in the instruc-
| tions to Marshal Frank. "These letters" he
said Hare written in clear, terSe English, which
| every one can understand, and in my opinion,
refer only to possible disturbances in open
! Court There was no authorization in these
letters for anyone to act as a bodyguard TO Jus
| tice Field outside of his Court"
Justice Harlan interrupted Johnton at this
point to ask him Suppose Mr.. Attorney-Gen-
eral this tragedy had occurred in the Court
| room; that man had come in ior the purpose
of killing the Judge, what them?
"Oh, think the officer would undoubtedly
have authority to protect his Judge" said John
son.
Tense of this act p queried Justice Harlan.
'Itwould be no statute, replied Johnson. 'but
simply the inherent powers of the Court 10
maintain the protection of itself in the Court.
room, but outside the Court-roonthe case would
assume different aspect"
"Then you hold that Justice Field and Mar
shal Neagle, while in the station at LathIop,
were simply in the capacity OF private individ-
ais ~ asked Harlan.
"tndoubtediy. YES - replied Johnson.
Johnson then attacked the position of the op-
posing counsel, who maintained that Terry and
his wife had entered into conspiracy 10 violate
the laws of the United States. and that Neagle,
in preventing the copsunmation of conspiracy
against the United States law, he's placed him
self under the jurisdiction of Section 153, Re-
vised Statutes, ploviding for writ OF hsbeas
corpus This argument Johnson met with sill
gle reference to the law of California, which
says there can be no conspiracy between man
and wife, they being as one.
Referring to the question OF the police power
of California Johnson said this was cause in
volviug an alleged violation of the police laws
Of the State. He proceeded in an exhaustive
review to show the means by which q state
acquires the peculiar police powers. He quoted
from the Constitution, where it says powers not
delegated to the United States are reserved to
the state. The tenth Ar iele of the amendment
must govern in matters OF police power, until
Congress passes law giving to the Federal au-
tbGrity peculiar police powers.
Referring to the statement made yesterday by
United States Attorney General Miller that OF
ficers of the Government must have protection
in the discharge OF their duties Johnson said:
Then we are to understand that an officer of
the United States, performing service iu the
State must have unlimited protection. Then,
in case deputy, or pose, cannot protect him
he is to be surrounded with a Gordon of glitter
ing bsyonets. This idea, advanced by the
Honorable Attorney-General of the United
states is the imperial idea. The idea our an
cest0rs fought against and endesvored to elm
mate from the Constitution the imperial idea
which prevailed in Europe to-day and many is
the poor sufferer who feels its iron hand in the
wastes of Siberia" This doctrine" he said in
solemn tone. "wi1 lead but TO anarchy and
desp0tism.
Johnson then referred to the opinion of the
late Chief Justice Marshall. that an officer of
the United States in performing his duty does it
at his own peril and if be proceeds in such per-
formsnees otherwise than is warranted by the
specific law he is liable for damages A case
was cited of United States vessel seized in ac-
cordance with the command OF the President-a
vessel froxn k-ench port. There was no law
providing for such seizure, and the Pre-. .ident
had no authority to order it. johnson, there
fore, maintained that Attorney General Miller
mad no authority TO orderNeagle to perform the
duty that performed. as there was no spe-
lcific law uneer which Miller could command
Nesgle.
johnson quoted the opinions of number of
legal authorities in support of this argument.
.z'he conclusion embodied in the opinion of the
lower Court IN the cas- at bar, said johnson,
"ioially ignoics the question Of Federal in
iripgenent upon the police laws of California,
which has such an impoftant bearing upon this
case.
the simple fact that Federal ofiicerls acting
in the line OF his duty is not guarantee that
he should come under the jurisdiction of the
Federal Court, unless his lire of duty is war
ranted sad explicitly outlined by Federal
law. In the sbseEce Of such law the officer
comes under the jurisdiction of police powers
possessed and exercised by the State We are
told thai no such law was needed. The Marshal
possesses inherent powers equivalent TO a war
rant of law. | say there eSn be no inherent
powe.s vested in 3 Marshal WEOEe powers are
named and limited By law.
Johnson then elaborated bis aTgunent upon
the line of the poEers OF the police law pos
sessed bv Stste. and 10 which ne claimed
Neagle was clearly SInenGbie when he broke
the peace by killing ferry.
Here johnson l. ste1 and closed his szRiInent,
and the case goes to the Court.