The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1890-03-05
4 GREAT QUESTION.
The Arguments in the Celebrated
Nagle Case
BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT
Of the United States = The Powers of the
Government to Protect its
Officers Discussed.

WASHINGTON, March 4.-The supreme court
shamber was filed to-day with audience
which listened attentiyely 10 the argument in
The Maggie case arising out of the shooting of
David Terry last summer when in the act of
committing an assault upon Judge Field, of the
supreme court. All the justices were present
except Justice Field. The argument was
opened by Zach Montgomery in behalf of the
appellant, Sheriff Cunningham, from whose
jurisdiction Maggie was discharged on writ of
habeas corpus issued by the United States
court on the ground that he was an officer of the
United States, being a deputy marshal
engaged in the performance of his duty
of protecting a justice of the United
States supreme court and could not be
imprisoned by the state authorities. Mont
gomery said IL was the contention of the state
authorities that the sole question to be brought
before the court was lurlSdlctlonal, and there
lore all question OF Nagles guilt or innocence
was irreleyent He reviewed the leading points
In the evidence. The chief feature of the review
was Montgomery charged, that it was not in
the purpose OF Nagle's appointment TO have him
use his Official authority TO prevent a breach of
the peace but TO have him resent forciblv any
affr0nt put upon Justice Field. MONTGOMERY
maintained that unless there were speci-
&c statutory authority for the instruction gwen
Maggie to accompany Justice Field, there was
40 authority Tor his release by The United States
circuit court. he maintained this upon the au-
shority OF section 555, revised statutes, that
writ OF habeaS corpus should not extend TO a
prisoner, unless IN custody for an act done in
pursuance of law OF the United States. Ii it
we're true that the act was justidable homicide
md necessary for the protection of Justice
Field, then there need not be any fear that the
tate would not acQUit him. But this was for
he state to decide on this point.
Attorney General Miller, who followed on be-
half OF the United States, sad he would base
ais arguments on two propositions:
"l-IhaJ Ii is but act of the executive de-
govern
nent;
THAT under the constitution, the judiciary
being in allegiance to the executive, It'll the duty
If the judiciary department TO sit in judgment
lpon the acts of its officials in performing their
lutieS in accordance with the constitution
He quoted from the words of Secretary Bay
ira that the inherent right of the government TO
lnact and enforce laws gives il power
o protect Its servants IN their action.
The attorney general argues his case
upon this line. The proposition advanced
On the part of the state was a hereSy as old as
she government, which had been refuted times
without number IN Congress and upon the bat
executive mad no power except such
rs was specifically granted by the
legislative department, had been used before
the civil war TO deny the power OF the govern
ment 10 coerce the seeding states.
Justice Bradley interrupted the attorney
general in the course Of his remarks with the
question: With what force shall the President
execute this power OF protection of which YOU
force for the purposes"
The Attorney General-With posse in the
first instance ana if that is not sufficient, with
the army and navy.
Justice Bradley-Then he has a right to aid all
citizens of the United States IN maintaining the
Jaws and protecting the institutions Of the gov
eminent?
Joseph Choate of New York, who followed At
torney-Teneral Miller as one of the counsel for
the government, opened his argument with the
statement that ever since the beginning of the
government The people OF the United States had
rested on the conviction that they constituted a
nation; that within its limits the government
was sovereign, and supreme, and that il had
within itself all the powers and facilities TO full
I'll its own functions and accomplish its
OWN purposes. In doing this the government
was not subject to hindrance or interference by
any power or powers whatever The govern
ment had the power, as 1t had duty. to secure
The performance OF governmental operations and
protect its servants and agents in doing the
duties entrusted to them. For the first time in
one hundred years the people were now met
with the startling contention that a justice OF
Of the highest court of the land was not entitled
TO the protection of the government in going
from one place TO another on his circuit Choate
had not concluded his argument when the court
adjourned.