The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-05-28
Power of the Government to
Protect Interstate Com
merCe Defined.
ALL THE JUSTICES CONCUR.
The Strike Leader and His Seven
Lieutenants Must Now Serve
Their Terms.

SAAeC0 OtdlCS Supreme GOuTI IO-udy QclllCd
the application of Eugene V. Debs, the
strike leader, for writ of habeas corpus.
This is victory for the Government. No
more important question, with the single
exception of the income tax, has come be-
fore the Supreme Court during the past
year than the attempt of Debs and other
officers of the American Railway Union to
secure a reversal of their sentences to jail
by Judge Woods for interfering with inter-
state commerce and running OF mails in
the great railway strike of last summer.
The decision of the court was read by
Justice Brewer and was unanimous, there
being no dissenting opinion. All conten-
tons of the Government were sustained.
The conclusions of the court were that
the Government of the United States
had jurisdiction over every foot of soil
and over every individual within the
boundaries of the United States, and that
while it was one of limited powers it had
sovereignty within those limitations. 1t
has power to invoke civil courts, remove
distractions to interstate commerce and
civil courts, and had right to enjoin those
who made distractions to such commerce.
The injunction was TO be bar to criminal
processes for acts done IN violation of the
injunction.
The Circuit Court having final iurisdic-
ton, its act is not renewable by the Su-
preme Court on the petition for writ of
habeas corpus, therefore the writ was de-
MED.
The case has Importance beyond the
question of Imprisonment of American
Railway Union officials as there is largely
involved the principle of the Judges hav-
ing jurisdiction of large interests by vir-
tues of receiverships created by them to
prevent.labor troubles through the instru-
mentality of injunctions. Nearly one-third
OF the railway property of the United States
being in the hands of receivers appointed
by the Federal courts the precedent to be
established has wide application.
Technically, the application for a writ of
habeas corpus and certiorari arises from
the case in equity of the Union Trust Com
pany against the Atchison, Topeka and
Santa lie road, since the receivership IN
der which the Circuit Court exercised juris-
diction over the Santa Fe and its allied
roads was created in the case.
On the I'd of July, 1894. when the great
railway strike was threatened, the receivers
applied TO Judge Woods of the Circuit
Court for the Northern District of Illinois
for an Injunction against the American
Railway Union to prevent it from melting
the employees to strike. Judge Woods
signed the paper presented, which was a
sweeping one, enioining the officers of the
union from interfering with the mails or
with interstate commerce, or from destroy
ing property or compelling or inducing the
employees of the road to strike, by violence
or intimidation, or from aiding or abetting
them to do any of these things.
The American Railway Union declared
strike on the Illinois Central Railroad, one
of those included in the injunction, and
the events of that strike are matters of
general knowledge. The officers of the
union were brought before Judge Woods
for contempt of court last December. E.
V. Debs, president, was sentenced to six
months in jail, and seven others, G. 81.
Howard, Sylvester Kelher, L. w. Rogers,
James Hogan, William E. Burns, Roy NJ.
Goodwin and Martin ]. Elliott, were SEN
fenced to three months. 1t appears that
the injunction had been personally served
on but the first four officers, but Judge
Woods held that its publication in the
newspapers was sufficient service in itself
for all of the defendants.
An application was made to the Supreme
Court for the release of the eight officers
of the union by a writ of habeas corpus,
and pending the decision of the Supreme
Court they have been given their freedom
under bail. Counsel for Debs and his asso-
ciates base their application on the grounds
that their sentence without indictment
and trial by jury was in pain of the con-
stitution, particularly its fifth and sixth
amendments; that the information on
which they were convicted did not show
any violation of the injunction; also that
the Injunction was void, because the bill
asking for it stated no case of which the
court could take cognizance, and was in
effect a bill by the Government of the
United States to maintain the pnblic peace
and enioin the violations of the Penal
Code.
The arguments before the Supreme Court
by c. S. barrow and Judge Trumbull for
the American Railway Union and Attor-
ney-General Olney and Assistant Attor-
ney -General Whitney attracted great at
tention.
The opinion of the court was in sub
stance as follows:
The case presented is this: The United States,
finding that the interstate transportation of
persons and property as well as the carriage OF
the mails, is forcibly obstructed and that
combination and conspiracy exists to subject
the control of such transportation to the will
of the conspirators, applied to one OF the courts
sitting as court of equity for an injunction to
re strain such obstruction and prevent the car
rying into effect Of such conspiracy. Two ques-
tons of Importance are presented:
First-Are the relations of the General Gov
eminent to interstate commerce and the trans
portation of the mails such as authorize
direct interference to prevent a forcible OBJ
struction thereof?
Second-H authority exists, as authority in
affairs implies both power and
duty, has court of equity jurisdiction to
issue an injunction in aid of the performance
of such duty?
First-What are the relations of the General
to interstate commerce and the
transportation of the mails? They are those of
direct supervision, control and management.
While under the dual system which prevails
with us, the powers OF government are dis
tributed between the State and the Nations and
while the latter is properly styled govern
ment of enumerated powers, yet within the
limits of such enumeration, it has all the at
tributes of sovereignty, and in the exercise of