Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-05-28
DEBs nABEAs coRpus CASE.
Petition for Writ to Federal SUI
irene Court Denied.

WASHINGTON, ID. c.. May ~
The habeas corpus case OF Eugene V.
Debs ct al, growing out Of the great rail-
road strike at Chicago last summer, was
decided in the United States Supreme
Court to-day. its unanimous opinion be-
ing read by Justice Brewer. The opinion
embodies an exhaustive discussion of the
contentious on behalf Of Debs, ct al,
closing as follows
I'VE have given TO this case the most
anxious and careful attention, for we
realize that 1t touches closely questions
OF supreme Importance 10 the people Of
this country. Summing up our conclu-
slons, We hold that the Government of
the United States is one having jurisdlc-
ticn over every foot OF soil within its
territory, and acting directly upon each
citizen: that, while IL is a government
of enumerated powers. It has within the
limits OF those powers all the attributes
Of sovereignty; that to II is committed
power over interstate commerce and
the transmission Of the mails; that the
powers thus conferred upon the National
Government are not dormant, but have
been assumed and put into exercise by
the legislation of Congress; that. In the
exercise OF those powers, II IL competent
for the nation TO remove all distractions
the passage Of interstate commerce or
the carrying Of the mails: that while II
may be competent for the government,
through the executive branch. and In
the use Of the executive power OF the ma
ton, to forcibly remove all such obstruc-
tions, It is equally within its power 10
appeal to the civil courts for an Inquiry
and determination as TO the exercise and
character of any alleged obstruction, and,
oh rfrtn tan IN
occur, TO invoke the powers Of those
courts to remove or restrain such obstruc-
tons; that the jurisdiction Of courts 10
interfere In such matters by injunc-
ton is one recognized from ancient times
and by indubitable authority: that such
Jurisdiction Is not ousted by the fact that
the distractions are accompanied by or
consist Of acts In themselves violations
Of the criminal law; that the proceeding
by injunction Is Of a civil character and
may be enforced by proceedings in con-
tempt; that the penalty for a violation OF
such injunction is no subject for and no
defence TO a prosecution for criminal Of
fences committed In the course OF SUCH
violation; that the complaint filed In
this cass clearly showed an existing OBJ
struction OF artificial highways for the
passage of Interstate commerce and the
transmission OF the mails-an obstruction
lipl bHiy temporarily tAiHliiEf bAN AAittsA-
enlng TO continue; that, under such COM
plant, the Circuit Court had power TO
issue Its process Of Injunction: that this
having been issued and served on these
defendants tie Circuit Court had au-
thority 10 inquire whether its orders hal
been disobeyed, and. when 1t found that
they had been, to proceed, under section
725. Revised Statutes and enter the order
Of punishment complained Of; and, finally.
that the court, having full jurisdiction in
| the premises, its finding OF the fact OF
disobedience is not open to review on ha-
beas corpus In this or any other circuit
I'VE enter into explanation Of the act
OF July 20. 1890. (26 State. 29. upon which
| the Circuit Court relied mainly to sus-
| tain its jurisdiction. but it must not be
understood from this that we dissent from
| the conclusions Of that court in refer
| ence TO the scope of the act. but simply
| that we prefer TO rest our judgment on
the broader ground which has been dis
cussed in this opinion, believing 1t Of i'm
portance that the principles underlying
it should be fully stated and fully al
flrmed.
THE petition for a writ of habeas cor
10 gIa nt.Hf