The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1895-12-07
INNEC ESS.f AIRY APPEALS.
Attorney General Harmon Recommends


WASHINGTON. -. c.. Dec. G.-The
maiden report Of Judson Harmon as At
torncv~sencrsJ. containing review 81
The ol crations of the Department OF Jus
ticc for the last fiscal year, was iaiu
before Congress to-day
IL treats at length OF the business OF
the prcme Court of the United states:
and recommends that except In capital
cases. appeals In criminal matters should
not he taken TO the Supreme. Court. To
accomplish this result. he recommends
an amendment Of the iaw 20 as 20 ex,
from the cases subject TO appeal TO the
highest tribunal. and to remit minor
cases TO the courts OF appeal
lie points out that the words Infamous
crimes" have been given very broad
The definition. he says, includes all Of.
lenses which may be punished py I'M
than one year without hard labor,
whether they are actually so punished
OF not II such punishment might nave
been inflicted the case may De tabeh
10 the Supreme Court. even n the cui-
prlt has escaped with a mere hne.
That high tribunal Of nine judges Is
frequently required 10 revie" coaVicu ,,o ~,
of such offences as passing MY dollars
of counterfeit money, charging over
twenty-five dollars for legal assistance
TO a pensioner. and unlawfuiiy cutting
timber. 49,.
ney-C;encral called out by recent diia-
tory proceedings in the case Of Or. Bu,
chanan. the New York wife-poisoner, ana
in a number OF Other notdDie ihui~ei
cases. is as follows: ,.
"A growing abuse of the writ OF hape%s
corpus should be corrected, whlcn -
wasting the time OF the supreme Coule
and bringing discredit on the aominlstIa-
lion OF Justice. Proceedings IN Sta'e
courts are absolutely stayed Dy sece .yI.
166. Revised Statutes. pending aVpv az
10 the Supreme Court from acuon OF w
circuit courts on writs Of hapeas corpus
which may be taken out as OF right ood
by suing out successive WIZ su,rc re
prosecuting Appeals ny,c,e9 in state courts
have succeeded I'm securing repeated oe-
lays Of execution. 81 ...o.oss On
There Is no limit 10 .nis plniov conn
sci respectfully suggest. as a cure ioi
this evil. that the allowance OF q s.ayf
by the Supreme Court or Juube 80,
be required, at least on all Appears '''N'
rhe Attorney-Goueral adds: ,,.,
ar tho Supreme Court were reheNeu
rs above suggested, i's J"r rsvenue laws
might and should be restored. me t"' ~,
states has now no right 10 Ie. I,t,,,o
that court. any declsloh aaishos,gh
fariff or internal revenue law. al'n2"kn
millions Of dollars may be directly or IN
directly involved. - t,s of
error from the circuit eou ,,,, % contfaineI
e. section ,07 of the Revised Statutes
Win respect 10 appeals from the touIt
Of Claims. would be highly behehciai u
w RcfcJring 10 the Greer county, Texas,
boundary case. now in the supreme
Court Mir. Harmon states; ne 'vi
troVesv depends on the meaning OF nv
treaty Of 1919 between spain ana lne
Tinted states, the boundary line petWe,,.
the two countries. which treaty WaS VA. "a
turn adopted 10y treaties OF me Dh lrSn
treaty describes the line as running up
Red river TO the one-hundredth merl-
dian. -. .ho forle ~
Tho river are reached the line should fol-
low the north branch -. p.o..,dor,
Arthur. I'm June, 1881. and by fresiuen.
cleveland in December, 1871. Texas nus
,ncorraced settlements in this territory
md " the decision shall be IN favor OF tnc
limited States the question VIII aIl so
whether Congress should Whoily "S In
gard the claims Of settlers, as il wiz
have an undoubted right TO do, or pro-
vide legislation by which they may DC
protected upon making reasonable pay
ment for the land occupied.
Tho Attornev-Ceneral asks Congress TO
direct him what to do in the Bell tele-
The expense OF this case. he SAYS. is
very heavy. II will take SIX months 10
prepare rehuttal testimony.
lie favors continuing the case 10
final decision provided the expenses can
he met. and says ,, -,
their natural rights by the improper IS
sue OF a patent. as the Government AYERS.
II would not be "A proper course on us
part. to discontinue litigation. when hts
nrohahly been purposey protracted until
The patents have expired. but such itiga-
tion should be persisted IN 10 estaplsn
finally. for the sake of future acton on
its part. It's right to sue 10 annui pat