The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-04-14
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.
Gold Bond Case Reversed and Re-
manded-RiHhts OF Negroes.

WASHINGTON, April 13.--In the United
States Supreme Court to-day an opinion was
handed down in the case of Woodruff,
trustee vs. the State of Mississippi. appealed
from the Supreme Court Of that State. The
case involved the validity of bonds issued
by the Levee Board OF the State for the i'm
provement of the Mississippi river which
has been questioned because the bonds were
made payable in gold. The Supreme Court
Of the State had decided that the bonds
were void, because the law did not authorize
the payment of the bonds in any particular
kind Of money. The opinion of to-day was
delivered by Chief Justice Fuller. The opin-
ion of the court below was reversed and the
case remanded.
In this case the Supreme Court Of Miss.s-
sippi construed the bonds as obligations pay
able in gold coin and held that the power to
borrow money conferred on the Levee Board
did not authorize that corporation to bor-
row gold coin or issue bonds payable in that
currency. In rendering his opinion, the chief
justice said: 1T was only by deciding that
these bonds were payable in a particular
kind of money of the United States, and that
this kind, though money in law, had ceased,
the court assumed, to be money in fact;
that the State court was enabled TO hold
them void for want CT power. and If that
premise were incorrect the conclusion,
whether right or wrong, would not follow.
Now, these bonds were not expressly pay
able in gold coin, and as the coupons were
payable specifically in currency the argu-
ment is not unreasonable that the corpora
ton Intended the purchasers to expect pay
ment in the money in which the Indebtedness
was stated to have been contracted but the
agreement to pay the designated sums did not
specify any particular kind of money. and
the obligation was to pay. what the law rec
ognlzed as money when the payment was TO
be made The bonds were therefore legally
soivable in the money of the United States,
whatever its description, and not in any par
ticular kind of money. and 1t is impossible to
hold that they were void because of want of
power
Justice Harlan delivered the opinion of the
Charles Smith VS.. the State OF mississippi.
tried and found guilty of murder in the State
courts The plaintiffs in error in both cases
their cases transferred from the State courts
to the federal courts under Section 641 of the
denial OF justice because no men of their own
color had been summoned to sit on the jury.
The State courts had denied the petition for
a transfer. Justice Harlan sustained this de-
clsl0n, holding that, while the statutes and
Fourteenth amendment to the Constitution
had been intended to secure to the colored
race the same justice awarded to the white.
the law and the amendment were only ap-
plicable when 1t was made TO appear that
the constitutional enactments of the State
were of a character to deny the right to the
negroes. 1t did not appear that this was the
case in Mississippi, and the Supreme Court
could not interfere to regulate the method of
procedure in the State courts. The decision
OF the state supreme Court was therefore
affirmed.
Justice Harlan said the object of the fed
eral statute In question was to enforce the
fourteenth amendment which was directed
at securing to the negro race all the priv
ileges enjoyed by white people before the
law. It had been stated in Gibson's peti-
tion for removal that, Notwithstanding
there were 7.0C0 colored people and only I.5O0
whites In Washington county, where his
trial was held, no colored man had been
summoned to sit on the jury for years
Yet even If this were true. said the court,
the United States Supreme Court would
be transcending its jurisdiction to interfere
where the constitutional law of the State
was not in contravention of the Constitu-
tion Of the United States. He said the court
recognized that the safety of the colored
race would be imperiled il any discrinnina-
ton was permitted because of race but
that the record in these cases did not show
any. and that, therefore. the only course
Supreme Court. Justice Harlan also said.
in the course OF his opinion. that 1t was
comPesrent LOT the State OF mississippi 10
intelligence and morality
The court decided again to-day in the case
of T. NJ Montgomery, of Tennessee. a let
ter carrier. that 1t was no defense TO set
I'D that the letter from which he abstracted
money was a decoy letter: The same point
was covered heretofore in an opinion in
the case Of A. ID. Andrews, charged with
sending obscene matter through the mails
In response to decoy letters. 1t was also
decided in this case that the fact that the
| letters which were alleged to be obscene
| were In closed envelopes constituted no
| valid defense. In both cases the opinions
| Of the Circuit Court were affirmed
| In passing on the case of w. A Harwood
| VS.. A. Wentworth, appealed from the Su-
pr&me Court OF Arizona, involving the
validity OF a territorial statute bearing upon
| the possession Of the records of Cochose
county. the court. In one phase OF the case
presented. entered into a general discus
| ity OF any legislative enactment, Il Is com
| petent to go behind the enrtd.ed bin as
| signed by the presiding officer of the SEN
ate and House OF Representatives of q
legislative body. and he'd that IL was not
In the case OF the Northern Pacific Rail-
| road Company vs.. Samuel Peterson, opinion
by Justice Peckham, the court reversed the
| opinion OF the court below. The case was
one Of damages on account Of an accident.