Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1890-04-17
THURSDAY. .... APRIL IL, 1890
The Neagle Case.

station in that State 70 prevent him rom
killing Mr.. Justice FIELDS, Of the United
Btates Supreme Court. The name OF this
United States marshal is NKAciE, and the
NEAGLE case which was decided last Mon
day by the United States Supreme Court
grew out of the killing TO which We have
fust referred.
And a most remarkable case 1t is. 1t
seems TO be precedent which might be
followed to an alarming extent. MIR. JUS
tice FIELD was in restaurant at the time
when TERRY slapped his face. 1t seems.
however. that NEAoLr had had his eye upon
TERRY. and had written to the Attorney
General of the United States in regard to
his movements, and Ind been instructed
by the Attorney General TO protect Justice
FIELD. He understood that the Attorney
General had INSTRUCTED him to kill TERRY
IL necessary, and he acted upon those In
structions. He shot TERRY dead in
his tracks. And this despite the fact
that TrRnY had furnished the most
conclusive evidence that no had no
intention of taking Justice FIELDS life.
II he had purposed killing FIELD he would
not have slapped his face. The slapping
was notice to all the world that TERRY In
tended TO lot the matter rest after having
committed that indignity upon Justice
FIELD.
Why, then. did NEAoLE kill TERRY? He
did so upon the assumption that TERRY's
object was TO draw Justice FIELD into q
personal difficulty, and then kill him. He
assumed that FIELD would follow TERRYs
example and become law-breaker.
Last Monday. as we have stated, the Su-
preme Court of the United States decided
that Marshal NEAGLE performed only an
official duty when he killed TERRY under
the circumstances which we have detailed.
But, alas for the weakness of poor human
nature, the Justices of the Court divided
upon party lines. The Republican justices
agreed TO decide that Marshal NEAGLE
could not DO called to account in State
court for the killing of TERRY, whereas the
Democratic Justices dissented. holding
that the killing Of TERRY was an offence
against the laws of California; or rather
that il was for the California courts to de-
eide whether NEA0IE was punishable or
not for the killing of TERRY. Mr.. Justice
FIELD OF course did not sit in the case.
Chief-Justice FULLER and Justice LAMAR
were the only other Democrats on the
bench. They, we repeat, agreed upon the
dissenting opinion.
We are not disposed to oensure the Re-
publican Justices. No doubt they decided
as their consciences told them they ought
l. W taEa For
too, that they considered the consequences
which might follow the rendering of such
decision as theirs was in this case. If q
United States judge is entitled to q body
guard under such circumstances, and his
body-guard may slay anybody who slaps
his Jaws, is not a United States marshal or
a United States letter-carrier or any other
Federal official entitled to the same sort
of protectionS If. as the Supreme Court
says, there is "a peace of the United
States surely all Federal officers must
be considered as in the peace of the
United States, and any attack upon them
must be against the peace and dignity
of the United States" MIR. Justice La
MAR. in delivering the dissenting opinion.
touched this point. 1--WE agree" said
he, that assuming the facts of the case
TO be as they are shown by the record, the
personal protection of Judge FIELD, as
private citizen, even TO the death OF TERRY,
was not only the right, but was also Sthe
duty of NEAoLx and of any other bystand-
or. And we maintain that for the exercise
of that right or duty he is answerable to
the courts of the State of California, and
20 them alone" We quote Justice LAMAR
further as follows;
"But We deny that Neagle had any duty
imposed upon him by the laws OF the
United States growing out OF the othciai
character of Judge Field. In short. we
think that there was nothing whatever III
fact of an official character in the transac-
ton, and therefore we think that the
United States courts have in the present
gtate Of our legislation no jurisdiction
whatever in the premises.
thority of the United States, no matter by
whom done. and the only authority relied
ON for vindicatiop can be that OF the state,
and the slayer should DO remanded to the
State courts to be tried
I'VE are the less reluctant to come to
this conclusion because We cannot permit
ourselves To doubt that if the appellee had
Jury of his own country, God and his
country would have gwen him q good de-
liyerance."
On this point Mr.. Justice MILLER deliver
ing the opinion Of the Court said;
Travelling to perform his duty Justice
Field was as much in the dir charge OF a
duty imposed upon him by law as no was
while sitting IN court and trying causes.
Justice Field. when attacked. had actually
entered upon the duties of his circuit. We
have no doubt that Justice Field. when at
tackled by Terry, was engaged IN the dis
charge OF his duties as Circuit Justice, and
was entitled to ell the protection under
these circumstances which the law could
give him."
"The Court does not suppose that any
special act of Congress exists which In ex-
press terms authorizes marshals or deputy
marshais to act as q body-guard 10 the
Justices while on their circuits; but in its
view OF the Constitution any obligation
fairly and properly ipferable from that in
etrument.. or any duty OF the marshal to
Be derived from the general scope OF his
duties. comes within tho provisions OF the
Aobeas-coypus act directing the release OF
persons who are Ia custody for an act dons
an pursuance Of the laws Of the United
1T would, says the opinion. "be great
reproach 70 the system Of government OF
the United States, declared 70 bs within its
sphere sovereign and supreme, II there "a
70 be found within the domain of its
powers no means of protecting the judges
IN the discharge Of their duties FROM the
malice and hatred Of those upon whom III
Judgment may operate unfavorably.
IL person In the situation OF Justice
Field could have no other guardian Of BIZ
personal safety while engaged In the con
ecIeptiouD discharge of disagreeable duty
than the fact that IL he was murdered hi
murderer would be subject TO the laws 81
State. and BY these laws could DO pun
lsksd. the security would bs very lnsufii
olAnk, We do not believe that the Govern
Dent o. the United 6tstes il thus inef1
c1ent, and that is Constitution and laws
kAvs left The high oAleers Of the Govern
uont 20 defeneeloss and unprotected"
Our DIAL form Of Govesnmsst b always
fov6loping new psculisrities. The line be-
tweos ~ Federal governments powers
~ ~ Gtxfe goyernmonts' powers hes
q ~. A-e&,n aonofn and auAfo hl7f AVIAN no5y