The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1890-02-27
TUTTY BOBS Up AGAIN.
MANDAMUs PROCEEDINGS BEGUN
IN THE 0. 6 SUPREME COURT.

A Suit to Compel the Judges OF the
Fifth Circuit Court to Try the Cases
Against Tutty and his Wife Re-
manded by Judge 5peer to the
Liberty superior Court-The Grounds
OF the Petition.
Rosa Ward Tutty and Chas. Tutty, have
each, through their counsel, taken man
damus proceedings in the supreme court Of
the United States to compel the judges of
the fifth circuit court of the United States
for the eastern division of the southern dis
trict of Georgia to proceed to try the case
of Georgia VS.. Rosa Ward, and against
Chas. Tutty, remanded to the Liberty
county superior court by Judge Emory
Speer. Feb. 4.
The papers in the mandamus cases are
alike, except in the names of the petitioners.
They review the various proceedings before
Judge Falligant in the Liberty superior
court and before Judge Speer in the United
States circuit court, and conclude with
declaration of Judge Speer's refusal to hear
the cases and the petition direct to rein
state them.
The papers in the Rosa Tutty mandamus
case say:
THAT on Feb. 4, A. D. 1890, the district
judge, Hon. Emory Speer, who presided
alone and heard the argument on said mo
ton to remand the case. rendered in open
court his decision against your petitioner,
and granted an order remapding said prose-
cution to the superior court of the county
of Liberty and state Of Georgia, and re-
curing your petitioner to pay all costs OF
demanding said case. The opinion Of his
honor Judge Speer propounds, and it seems
to be confined TO answering negatively this
one question:
"Does the law of the state, which prohibits
and makes void a marriage between individuals
of the Caucasian and of the African races, de-
prive the parties in this case Of their rights,
guaranteed to them by the constitution and
laws of the United Statesi Or does this statute
of the state have the effect to violate the obi
CATION OF marriage contract in the sense In
which the constitution OF the United States in
hibits state action which violates the obligation
of a contract?
$50, said circuit court of the United.
States refused ia proceed TO try said crimi-
nal prosecution at the petition of your
petitioner, upon the ground that it has no
jurisdiction of the case for the want of a
federal question therein. Your petitioner
is advised that her intermarriage with
Charles Tutty constitutes valid contract,
emitting her under and by the constitution
and laws of the United States (already
cited above) to the right to live with him
In the marriage relation, and TO immunity
from prosecution and punishment, under
the laws of Georgia, for SO living; and that
she is entitled to the removal of said prose-
cution into said United States circuit court,
and to be there tried.
Wherefore, inasmuch as the said circuit
court has refused to proceed with the trial
of said prosecution, and as the law pro-
vides no other adequate remedy in the
premises whereby your petitioner can Sc
cure her rights from attempted invasion,
your petitioner prays that the writ of man
damus may be issued and directed to the
judges Of said circuit court, commanding
and enjoining them to reinstate and pro-
coed to try and adjudge according to the
law and right Of the case, the prosecution
lately pending in their said court in the
case of the State of Georgia VS.. Rosa Ward,
charged by the grand jury of the county of
Liberty and state of Georgia with the
crime of fornication with Charles Tutty."
Rosa Ward is still in Washington, and
Charles Tutty lives near this city. By some
1t is doubted if Rosa will ever return to
Georgia, but await the final adjudication of
the case in the supreme court.