The Roanoke times. [volume] (Roanoke, Va.) 1890-1895, 1895-08-07
SoUTH CAROLINA REGISTRATION.
Judge GoH Refuses an Injunction Out OF
Difference to the Higher Court.

RICHMOND, Va, August 6.-In the
United States circuit court this morn
Ing, Judge Golf handed down q brief in
the South Carolina registration cases, ,
oismissing complainant's bill for an in
Jancslon. The opinion created some sur.
PRISE, as 1t was exactly opposite 10 the
opinion rendered by Judge Gofi in the
Mills case. involving the same questions.
Judge Goh makes IL clear. however, tha ~
ne mas not changed his opinion as to the
equity jurisdiction Of the federal courts
In such cases, but says his change of
position is directly due to o desire to
snow Difference to the circui. court OF
appeals by which he was reversed in
the Mills case.
only the attorneys in the case and q
rev others were present when the
opinion was delivered. The courts
opinion Is as follows: when the bill in
this case was presented for my consid-
GRAFTON. deemed it my duty to give the
cohpialnant an opportunity 20 demon
snaee mat he was entitled, as he
Claimed, to the relief OF the PRAYED for
and to the jurisdiction of tnis court In
order to secure Is. My views upon the
questions presented by this case were
iully expressed in the opinion 1 filed in
the case OF Mills VS.. Green.
nave given the opinion filed In said
case oy the circuit court OF appeals for
tnis circuit for the May term, 1895, and
all the cases cited therein, nv careful
consideration and thorough examins-
ton, and 1 must be permitted TO saw
with all due respect that am unable 10
una the reason or the authority for and
oy which the injunction granted In that
case was dissolved and the bill dis.
-! think that in the Mills csse, as
well as this, the rights claimed by the
Respective plaintiffs as citizens of the
Onl'ed States and Of the State OF South
carolina has property value OF tho
highest and amoss sacred charac.er ~
far greater value and Importance than
have commodities, the values of which
are measured by the number OF pounds
they weigh or the number OF goods they
contain. These rights, IL ia admitted.
said plaintiffs are deprived OF, but it Is
insisted that they have adequate RENE.
dies as law and that in equity, there
fore, l cannot entertain their com
plants.
" very much regret that the circuit
court OF appeals did not Indicate the
character OF the remedy at law, alluded
TO In It's said opinion. And also regret
that l am not able after thorough in
vestigasion to find It, will not con-
cede that Is Is proper to close the doors
OF the United States to their citizens
VINO are complaining that they are
deprived by the States rights of the
rights and privileges guaranteed to
them by the constitution of the United
States and to advise them shat thew
must seek the jurisdiction of the courts
OF the States for relief for the outraged
imposed by the unconstitutional enact
ments OF such States.
II am advised that the full and com.
plete opinion OF she circuit court of ap-
peals Is yet to be filed and indulge the
hope that upon this point IL will not
leave US in doubt. In my Judgment such
cases under the rules Distinguishing
equity and law cases. applicable 70 the
courts of the United States, should be
especially heard on the equity side Of
such courts, for the reason that said
courts are among other things estab-.
llsheu TO determine controversies in
volving conflicts between State and
Federal constitutions and enactments,
and for the further reason that in such
cases there is no full and adequate rem.
edy at law.
ut has been repeatedly held by the
courts Of the United States that equity
will interfere when the injury COM
planned OF Is such that 1t cannot be
fairly compensated for in damages, or
1t is continued or permanent in
character. Here the courts cites
various opinions to sustain this point
Inc fact that there Is remedy ct
law is not itself sufficient to sustain
equity OF Jurisdiction unless it also sp-
pears that the former is as complete
and effectusl as the latter. (Other
cases here cited) The fact that State
laws provide legal remedy for wrongs
committed does not deprive the federal
courts OF equity jurisdiction over the
same in proper course. Gases cited
Nevertheless. while l entertain
these views, my great respect for the
circuit court OF appeals, my desire to
properly regard the judicial proprie-
ties, and my duty to give due weight
and authority TO the decisions and
opinions OF the appellate courts OF the
United States compels me, finding, as
I do. that this case, in It's material
allegations. it's true scope and effect,
is, In fact, similar to the Mills case,
to which 1 have referred, to refuse the
Injunction asked for and to dismiss the
complainanrs bill, and such q decree
will now be entered"
This is, OF course. a complete victory
for the State OF South Carolina, but At
torney O'Beara, who represents the
plaintiff will take an appeal direct to
the United States Supreme Court and
thinks he can get an esrly hearing as o
privileged case. He left for Washington
day and the South Carolina ATTORNEYS
will return home this evening.
Attorney General Barber says that
the inference OF tho State that the con-
stitutional convention would be about
evenly divided between Tillmanites and