Evening star., 1895-07-29
POLES
Arguing the Habeas Corpus Case Be-
fore Judge Cole.
Il E RESERVES HIS DECISION
Mr.. Thomas Replies to the Roads
Attorney.
THE JUDGES COMMENTS


,,,. 1o,.;d.r.a n.
uuee w ' n...s.. c,hoonf ~
appiea'.on VI e,N,,:.-s, - po;,,,..,,
the Ecklngton anu ooiuieis i'oiie
Company for release, py WIFI oA hdpeaS
corpus, from the judgment of the Police
Court imnosed upon the petitioner last
49,. <. eoo,,,,,;,er ,,uh,ic snoca for nri-
wen Aot 49, co,,rt Az
Vate purpose. III the 1o'ice Sooi' "
Schoepf was charged with occupying New
York avenue for the purpose of running
tha o.rs of tho rood bv the ,,se of the over
~ " 80 .ha.o,rhf.r.
hedo tfohey po'es oii 'io' .noi
Being convicted under the ordinance OF the
late corporation of Washington which pro-
b;bi+s the use or occunancv of public spaces
80 .,,,s-.os nv, Sohoans nos enad
iol pii'a'e purposes NA. r. -
SZo FOR the purpose Oh testihs the ia"' he
refused to pay the fine whereupon he was
sentenced to the workhouse Thereupon
h ,a+;t;oraa for bic ra1easa bv writ of
nc peioeu ~ 60 -. 49,, .ha
haoeas corpus. Juose cose, ~ HiE S;naotnS tn
petitioh ioF uae wFie was pIesJn'Su - u -;
that tne witt issue, returnap,e oeiois snni Inn
To-Day, MI. ocnoepL meahlihe oeihs ieieose"
cn.,o,
NJ 1o,, p;ao,+ o,res.n+ed Mr. scboenf
- ofta. oair, tho ,,ot,t,on which
t,. S.ar ..;rtaa ~ rhe St.r be fret con-
.sss 80 49, t;.,o - ~ stroa+s .nd
s.I ~ l., 49,. I,n;.ad St,,.s
- y. - 49,. IT, - o,.o,a
~ .ss -. .,,.ho,,t a,,
.,., : .,,...,on
no h ~ PASS lass the ht if ,aar congross baG
anu ne asseileu ma. - eea S,s sss .aa. aa
pdsseu the oiolhanee ~ wouiu na ,1
voId' LOT the reason 'nat IL Mouiu hase r
oeen vioia.ioii u .ne iL.. sn .t u .ne
Sons'ieueioa, "nHn pioi,ioi,s .iie .oHihs ~ VI
one one properly without que process OF law.
me use u me streets anu a'enues VI .ie
e..y Is, ueeidtea MI. nioou', consti'u
ttoi'ai tn rignt, ana z htera! construction OF
.ne oroihallce s "ouio4 ne thoueht' prexent
PEI IsoiIS Iioih even uIiVihs or "aihIns
Inrougn the streets ana avenues OF the
The ordinance said Mr. Ridout he he
heved to be unreasonable, and II 1t were
ba s,,stoinaI ~, tno,,h1s ,;th anu - oouiu s nue
of the ordinances he thonght vas that
they went too far in their anxiety to pre-
vent wrong. and to strictly apply it
~oaid oe 70 preVeht any use Whatever OF
nance he oIsa contsndsd .,as ,.,;d Co. VI rn-
Certainty. the court being given Iatitude
as to the amount of the fine and extent of
the Imprisonment.
Judge Coles Comment
"1f +,.+ b. +.,,o - -u,. ,s co,o
w "e' aiAeo 'uuse Soie'
tnen most OF our statutes imposing pen
alties are void, for most of them give the
court the right to exercise discretion in the
;.a.;.:o. e >, " ~
,.o n.a " sen.es'
MI niooul explained that the statutes re-
ferred to by Judge Cole were United States
statutes, while the law in question was
merely an ordinance of an inferior body.
Judge Cole, however, remarked that he saw
nothing to prevent Congress from author
izng an inferior legislative body from CIV
ing a court discretion as to the extent of a
penalty. But Mr.. Ridout explained that at
the time of the passage of the ordinance
the mayor of the city, and not a police
court was to enforce it, and hence the law
is to be judged by what it was at the time
of it's passage If it was then void because
of such uncertainty or for any other reason
1t could not now be held valid and legal.
cnxo-,m.r,,. R.u,
Mr.. Ridout was replied to by Mr.. S. T.
Thomas, the attorney for the District, who
stated that Mr. Ridout was unnecess.r;,v
sIas , ~ at.e -. r..s
aiaeH.u III 'he matter Wheh ne coh'ehoeo
Ftaat an enforcement OF the ordnance would
prevent private persons from even walk
ing or driving upon the streets and avenues.
of tho c;ty Notb,n, of the Lird ,,.s in
+srsad hS Tho ordin,nea ara na.h;aa nf
.ehueo ny me oioiiiahee' anu hotMhs Oh
,he kind would result from its enforcement.
The ordinance prohibited the occupancy of