Grand Rapids herald. [volume] (Grand Rapids, Mich.) 1892-1959, 1893-06-18
FAIR WILL Be OPEN
JUSTICE futlfa's DECISION


&Ht*@ @-f<fs bua9 At&uMt J02&tc0
Melville W Fuller lee niuu>rs after
~ O'Clock this unorning hsBds~i dowa
The uaznssaocs nnding oR the fsIeral
ccssrt of sppoz!s In shat - noe popu-
isriy known a. the Sunsi1y clessps cuse
The chief Justice himself had xritten
thr dsei>.on in lead psae1l on dozen
sberts ~ scratch paper. and A he read
u "a clear sosce snd sifh we'll cho>en
en'rhas's every word penetrated 10 the
remotsst eorners u the nv,m- and was
distinctly heard and understood By every
hofy la the biggest asr-,mb age that ever
crowded a eaest Foom IN Cook county.
In brisf. the siesa~ioo osesruies the con
tsntioD of the government eounsel that
the ease should have gone directly u
tho supreme court 20 the United States
and sboald he dismissed for lack os
Jurisdiction ia the court % appeals.
The tiil ~ fhe Unifc,i States il dis
nll-~ed for want * equity. All the con
ciu~sons aIsi fin<iings cf Judges Wc<~is
and Jsrkins In the district court are re-
s~rsed While the dissenting opinion of
Judge s;r~ecup is sustained in every
vital particular.
Fuii I~xt OF Dccision-
The full fext of the decision Wa as
fciloes DccnsnE IL desirable that this
matter should he disposed of at oars.
ve shall Announce the ressssit arrived at.
p<efyoning fsr want IL time the clsbora.
ton - tns We've expgess<si which will
hereafter be fled. Appeaslees have sub.
united a rfctIon IA dismiss this appeal
utsn the gFousssis that the jurisdicion
of the e,fsolf court Was in issue: that
the easss involved construction or ap
piscafsoa of the constitution Il the
tuitsd States. and that the constitution.
aiity - tho law 0; the United States xax
drawn snfe question therein: that there
fore the APPEAL from the final decree
would is~ Ia the supreme court of the
tnited states and pat to this court.
and henee that thb appeal. which Is
frcen an intsriocstory order, cannot bsr
maintained under the seventh section of
the Judiciary sct of March 3. 1891. We
do not understand that the power Of tine
circuit court to hear and determine the
ease Was denied. hut that the appellants
cDnteaded that the Unisei States had not
by their bill madr case property cogni
zant in court oe equity. IN. ob,e
ton Vas want a equity AMI not a
~""' -. f ioc j3fhst$t''n ~ ea''
circuit conu wss th"refnre not IN issue
WITHIN the meaning and intent of the
~" - taf az me constitution or the APP
plIcation 20 the constitution Of the
Uniscd States and the constitutional.ty
of the laws 20 the United STATES are
eoneerus<i We are ~ opinion that the
orsier We are called upon to review in
volved or sIrv~ into question neither the
Que nor the other in the eense that fhe
seton ~ the circuit court was invoked
he disposal of the proccedings or the
disposition of the contention rests upon
snr xffnnd as 3" whefher the decision
nso any references 70 the CONSTRUCTION or
hrrisralirn ~ the constitution or thu
Ntnnisy of acts ~ congress IN respect ~
tht in>s"isccs ana thf conclusions upon
winch the oeier wn- hasrd were in.
voSsn by considerations ~ that charac-
Ter. lie jurisdiction ~ this court To
review The order cannot be- dcfeated az
fse instance of the appeiies> because
The consfifufionaiisy "a the matter upon
which they rely may have been chal-
irugrtd The notion 10 dsfuiiss is over.
rulest
lhe quest,oo u he determined is
whether upon this record preliminary
Inlunction shouid have been granted.
he hiH AYERS mat the defendants arc
usorting gpo~efrsnseiving authority over
TIE espo~ifrpn an'i the grounds. and IN
virtue thereof ass nmes 10 op~n the ex.
PISTON on cundsy in confFavention os
The acts ~ congress notwithstanding
~ocn opening would 10 ~ great injury
and gr'evous prelutiice TO the common
rutaie good and to the SelfUe of the
pFopie - The tuited STATES. IL - not
fnf1f lat ts.t~ II